Good News for Windows XP Users...

On 14-05-07 11:13 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 09:13 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 10:55 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 01:28 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 06:28 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2014 05:12:18 -0500, BillW50 wrote:

So I've never found one killer app for Linux in all of these
years.

Shotwell? Nothing better on Windows or Linux (don't know about
Apple).


The problem with GNU/Linux killer apps is that they're not exclusive in
any way. Shotwell is nice, so is Handbrake and LibreOffice. They're all
free but they're also available for other operating systems. For
something to be a killer app, it has to be exclusive and in this case,
no GNU/Linux software is.



That doesn't mean that Windows is better.
None of the "Killer" apps in Windows is free or multi platform. So Linux
supplies good software for everybody. Windows doesn't. Not all Linux
software is multi platform. So some GNU/Linux software is.

Oh, clearly Windows isn't better. I'll just give you an example of how
it might be worse. This laptop I'm posting on was bought in 2010. It was
retired earlier this year in favour of a Windows 8 laptop which I
quickly put aside because of its slow performance and lack of ports. I
therefore revived it and installed a new WD Black 7200RPM HD to replace
the dead Seagate it came with.

The new HD, for whatever reason, prevented the system's recovery discs
from installing the OS. Installed Windows 7 on its own using the product
key underneath the laptop worked but obviously was lacking some bundled
software I liked. After two days though, Windows was popping up a
message telling me that the battery on the laptop, which has never been
disconnected since 2010, was incompatible with the device or badly
connected.

Meanwhile, Ubuntu works beautifully. I'm actually a Windows advocate in
most cases, but what happened to me with this laptop and Windows 7 is so
insulting that I'm considering moving to Ubuntu on all of my machines
and never looking back.


Use what works. I am a full time Linux user. but I do have to maintain
some Windows machines. Only reason I'm here. Retired also.

I don't find either operating system to be perfect but I can't help but
notice that I "enjoy" using Ubuntu a lot more than Windows and I think
that a lot of that has to do with the excellent upgrading process as
well as the Unity interface. A lot of people dislike Unity but I find it
to be near perfect.

Either way, my last adventure with Windows reinstallation soured me on
the operating system quite a bit. Like I said, I'm generally a Windows
advocate but I really came out of the last one feeling absolutely
insulted by Microsoft. My battery is incompatible? Really? You can't
restore a system because the new hard drive is faster than the previous
one? Really?

I'm thinking of finishing off the games I bought in Steam that are
Windows only and then migrating to Ubuntu on all of my computers.

--
Silver Slimer
Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter

On 05/07/2014 12:18 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 11:35 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 03:08 PM, BillW50 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 11:32 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 12:07 PM, BillW50 wrote:
"Caver1" wrote in message
...
On 05/06/2014 06:12 AM, BillW50 wrote:

Sure, it is the OS that is crazier than a three-ring circus with 306
distros and counting. The Linux community doesn't believe in
standardization either. Because there wouldn't be 300+ distros if
they did. And it is very tough to write applications that would run
on 300+ distros. So you end up with many lame basic applications
like
Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, VLC, etc. Hell Android, iOS,
Windows RT, Palm OS, etc can do that stuff too. So I've never found
one killer app for Linux in all of these years.

Wow! I had to dig up my old post because whatever you used to quote it
sure screwed it up. Compare the above to your quoted version. Big
difference.

You're fooling only yourself. I didn't quote anything. That was a
direct
follow up to the newsgroup. Go back and look at it again there is no
difference. If there is prove it.

Yeah well you are going to have to wait. As Thunderbird under Windows
and Linux isn't showing your original post at all.

That's funny I can see it in Thunderbird in Linux. Your's also. Anyways
the point was to prove what you said not me.
Still can't can you?



You only have to write for a Linux desktop environment such as KDE,
Gnome. Then a distribution that uses that desktop environment can use
it. There is no reason to try to think you have to write for a
specific distribution. The Linux kernel Is written so that a user can
customize it easily for his/her needs or wants. Such as Cern, Pixar,
Nasa, me, just to name a few.

Naw it is a huge mess. Touch screens for example is now the new fade
(maybe one that will last for generations to come). Virtually all OS
support it right out of the box. But not Linux! Linux is that OS that
always lags behind everything else. Try to get Linux to learn a new
trick is like a pulling a lazy donkey while it kicks and screams.

Like I said You haven't really used Linux especially recently.

Look at your comment below. " Even this distro is outdated..."
If you keep current with Windows and use Linux why don't you keep
current with Linux?
Really? This looks like Linux. It works like Linux. Go figure.

Works pretty good doesn't it?
If you regularly use Linux why are you so down on it. And since you are
so down on Linux why don't you stay with Windows? How do I know you're
not using an user agent spoofer?

And it remains very stable. Unlike MS which will not let you see
their
code, and is not as stable.

My Windows machines are all stable. Although I am not into beta
testing
the latest and greatest Windows versions. I wait until they have been
proven stable.

It is not as stable as Linux and you run into many more problems with
windows- bloatware, viruses, update problems, errors that can't be
figured out by anyone so the suggestion is to reload windows and start
over. I can go on from there.

Really? I usually install Windows once and that is it and I am done. Not
so with Linux. Even this distro is outdated and I need to wipe it out
and to start all over again. Although I get really tired of this crap
from Linux. It is like driving on the same road that is always under
construction.


I have been using Linux for years and never reinstalled an OS. Just do a
search and see how many times a Windows user has had to reinstall. I
also do maintenance on Windows machines. I'm not ignorant of that OS.
Why haven't you kept it updated? If you stay with the same root OS
(Debian,Redhat, etc.) All you have to do is keep your /Home partition
and load the new distro and you're fine. Unless you are trying to keep
your /Home from a 15 year old system. Things have progressed. Crap? How
about Windows? How many versions have they had? And how many times has
their software been updated and not compatible with the previous
version? Needed a Patch to fix the problem, several times. Office
software in the free software can usually import/export in many formats.
Such as Corel file types,Linux file tyoes, all of the different Windows
file types. Windows can't.
As far as I know you like the outdated stuff. WordStar, Palm. What else?

You're right about the /home directory. People will point to the fact
that it is recommended that you completely reinstall the OS at every new
version (generally every six months) but I believe the upgrade process
has become seamless in the past few years and the recommendation no
longer applies. Besides, even if you DID have to reinstall every six
months, making sure that the /home remains untouched will prevent you
from losing any kind of data. However, this six-month reinstall process
is actually something I like because it ensures that a rather recent
version of the operating system is always available. Unlike installing
Windows 7 or 8 and then going through hours of updating (it literally
takes me a day with Windows 7), if you install a recent version of a
distribution in say 20 minutes, you already have much of the most recent
software and even if you don't, the update process is done ONCE and
everything is updated in that one cycle. This is a gigantic advantage.


Agreed. Some don't like the 6 month cycle so they should stay with the
LTS versions. They are every 2 years.

--
Caver1

On 05/07/2014 12:27 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-07 11:13 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 09:13 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 10:55 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 01:28 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 06:28 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2014 05:12:18 -0500, BillW50 wrote:

So I've never found one killer app for Linux in all of these
years.

Shotwell? Nothing better on Windows or Linux (don't know about
Apple).


The problem with GNU/Linux killer apps is that they're not
exclusive in
any way. Shotwell is nice, so is Handbrake and LibreOffice. They're
all
free but they're also available for other operating systems. For
something to be a killer app, it has to be exclusive and in this case,
no GNU/Linux software is.



That doesn't mean that Windows is better.
None of the "Killer" apps in Windows is free or multi platform. So
Linux
supplies good software for everybody. Windows doesn't. Not all Linux
software is multi platform. So some GNU/Linux software is.

Oh, clearly Windows isn't better. I'll just give you an example of how
it might be worse. This laptop I'm posting on was bought in 2010. It was
retired earlier this year in favour of a Windows 8 laptop which I
quickly put aside because of its slow performance and lack of ports. I
therefore revived it and installed a new WD Black 7200RPM HD to replace
the dead Seagate it came with.

The new HD, for whatever reason, prevented the system's recovery discs
from installing the OS. Installed Windows 7 on its own using the product
key underneath the laptop worked but obviously was lacking some bundled
software I liked. After two days though, Windows was popping up a
message telling me that the battery on the laptop, which has never been
disconnected since 2010, was incompatible with the device or badly
connected.

Meanwhile, Ubuntu works beautifully. I'm actually a Windows advocate in
most cases, but what happened to me with this laptop and Windows 7 is so
insulting that I'm considering moving to Ubuntu on all of my machines
and never looking back.


Use what works. I am a full time Linux user. but I do have to maintain
some Windows machines. Only reason I'm here. Retired also.

I don't find either operating system to be perfect but I can't help but
notice that I "enjoy" using Ubuntu a lot more than Windows and I think
that a lot of that has to do with the excellent upgrading process as
well as the Unity interface. A lot of people dislike Unity but I find it
to be near perfect.

Either way, my last adventure with Windows reinstallation soured me on
the operating system quite a bit. Like I said, I'm generally a Windows
advocate but I really came out of the last one feeling absolutely
insulted by Microsoft. My battery is incompatible? Really? You can't
restore a system because the new hard drive is faster than the previous
one? Really?

I'm thinking of finishing off the games I bought in Steam that are
Windows only and then migrating to Ubuntu on all of my computers.



There is a Steam version for Linux now. Not as many games as for Windows
yet but they are adding all the time.

--
Caver1

On 14-05-07 12:53 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 12:18 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 11:35 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 03:08 PM, BillW50 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 11:32 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 12:07 PM, BillW50 wrote:
"Caver1" wrote in message
...
On 05/06/2014 06:12 AM, BillW50 wrote:

Sure, it is the OS that is crazier than a three-ring circus with
306
distros and counting. The Linux community doesn't believe in
standardization either. Because there wouldn't be 300+ distros if
they did. And it is very tough to write applications that would run
on 300+ distros. So you end up with many lame basic applications
like
Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, VLC, etc. Hell Android, iOS,
Windows RT, Palm OS, etc can do that stuff too. So I've never found
one killer app for Linux in all of these years.

Wow! I had to dig up my old post because whatever you used to
quote it
sure screwed it up. Compare the above to your quoted version. Big
difference.

You're fooling only yourself. I didn't quote anything. That was a
direct
follow up to the newsgroup. Go back and look at it again there is no
difference. If there is prove it.

Yeah well you are going to have to wait. As Thunderbird under Windows
and Linux isn't showing your original post at all.

That's funny I can see it in Thunderbird in Linux. Your's also. Anyways
the point was to prove what you said not me.
Still can't can you?



You only have to write for a Linux desktop environment such as KDE,
Gnome. Then a distribution that uses that desktop environment can
use
it. There is no reason to try to think you have to write for a
specific distribution. The Linux kernel Is written so that a user
can
customize it easily for his/her needs or wants. Such as Cern, Pixar,
Nasa, me, just to name a few.

Naw it is a huge mess. Touch screens for example is now the new fade
(maybe one that will last for generations to come). Virtually all OS
support it right out of the box. But not Linux! Linux is that OS that
always lags behind everything else. Try to get Linux to learn a new
trick is like a pulling a lazy donkey while it kicks and screams.

Like I said You haven't really used Linux especially recently.

Look at your comment below. " Even this distro is outdated..."
If you keep current with Windows and use Linux why don't you keep
current with Linux?
Really? This looks like Linux. It works like Linux. Go figure.

Works pretty good doesn't it?
If you regularly use Linux why are you so down on it. And since you are
so down on Linux why don't you stay with Windows? How do I know you're
not using an user agent spoofer?

And it remains very stable. Unlike MS which will not let you see
their
code, and is not as stable.

My Windows machines are all stable. Although I am not into beta
testing
the latest and greatest Windows versions. I wait until they have been
proven stable.

It is not as stable as Linux and you run into many more problems with
windows- bloatware, viruses, update problems, errors that can't be
figured out by anyone so the suggestion is to reload windows and start
over. I can go on from there.

Really? I usually install Windows once and that is it and I am done.
Not
so with Linux. Even this distro is outdated and I need to wipe it out
and to start all over again. Although I get really tired of this crap
from Linux. It is like driving on the same road that is always under
construction.


I have been using Linux for years and never reinstalled an OS. Just do a
search and see how many times a Windows user has had to reinstall. I
also do maintenance on Windows machines. I'm not ignorant of that OS.
Why haven't you kept it updated? If you stay with the same root OS
(Debian,Redhat, etc.) All you have to do is keep your /Home partition
and load the new distro and you're fine. Unless you are trying to keep
your /Home from a 15 year old system. Things have progressed. Crap? How
about Windows? How many versions have they had? And how many times has
their software been updated and not compatible with the previous
version? Needed a Patch to fix the problem, several times. Office
software in the free software can usually import/export in many formats.
Such as Corel file types,Linux file tyoes, all of the different Windows
file types. Windows can't.
As far as I know you like the outdated stuff. WordStar, Palm. What else?

You're right about the /home directory. People will point to the fact
that it is recommended that you completely reinstall the OS at every new
version (generally every six months) but I believe the upgrade process
has become seamless in the past few years and the recommendation no
longer applies. Besides, even if you DID have to reinstall every six
months, making sure that the /home remains untouched will prevent you
from losing any kind of data. However, this six-month reinstall process
is actually something I like because it ensures that a rather recent
version of the operating system is always available. Unlike installing
Windows 7 or 8 and then going through hours of updating (it literally
takes me a day with Windows 7), if you install a recent version of a
distribution in say 20 minutes, you already have much of the most recent
software and even if you don't, the update process is done ONCE and
everything is updated in that one cycle. This is a gigantic advantage.


Agreed. Some don't like the 6 month cycle so they should stay with the
LTS versions. They are every 2 years.

Isn't Ubuntu's LTS every year actualy? As far as I know, the April
release is generally a LTS one.

--
Silver Slimer
Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter

On 14-05-07 12:55 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 12:27 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-07 11:13 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 09:13 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 10:55 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 01:28 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 06:28 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2014 05:12:18 -0500, BillW50 wrote:

So I've never found one killer app for Linux in all of these
years.

Shotwell? Nothing better on Windows or Linux (don't know about
Apple).


The problem with GNU/Linux killer apps is that they're not
exclusive in
any way. Shotwell is nice, so is Handbrake and LibreOffice. They're
all
free but they're also available for other operating systems. For
something to be a killer app, it has to be exclusive and in this
case,
no GNU/Linux software is.



That doesn't mean that Windows is better.
None of the "Killer" apps in Windows is free or multi platform. So
Linux
supplies good software for everybody. Windows doesn't. Not all Linux
software is multi platform. So some GNU/Linux software is.

Oh, clearly Windows isn't better. I'll just give you an example of how
it might be worse. This laptop I'm posting on was bought in 2010. It
was
retired earlier this year in favour of a Windows 8 laptop which I
quickly put aside because of its slow performance and lack of ports. I
therefore revived it and installed a new WD Black 7200RPM HD to replace
the dead Seagate it came with.

The new HD, for whatever reason, prevented the system's recovery discs
from installing the OS. Installed Windows 7 on its own using the
product
key underneath the laptop worked but obviously was lacking some bundled
software I liked. After two days though, Windows was popping up a
message telling me that the battery on the laptop, which has never been
disconnected since 2010, was incompatible with the device or badly
connected.

Meanwhile, Ubuntu works beautifully. I'm actually a Windows advocate in
most cases, but what happened to me with this laptop and Windows 7
is so
insulting that I'm considering moving to Ubuntu on all of my machines
and never looking back.


Use what works. I am a full time Linux user. but I do have to maintain
some Windows machines. Only reason I'm here. Retired also.

I don't find either operating system to be perfect but I can't help but
notice that I "enjoy" using Ubuntu a lot more than Windows and I think
that a lot of that has to do with the excellent upgrading process as
well as the Unity interface. A lot of people dislike Unity but I find it
to be near perfect.

Either way, my last adventure with Windows reinstallation soured me on
the operating system quite a bit. Like I said, I'm generally a Windows
advocate but I really came out of the last one feeling absolutely
insulted by Microsoft. My battery is incompatible? Really? You can't
restore a system because the new hard drive is faster than the previous
one? Really?

I'm thinking of finishing off the games I bought in Steam that are
Windows only and then migrating to Ubuntu on all of my computers.



There is a Steam version for Linux now. Not as many games as for Windows
yet but they are adding all the time.

The big problem is that there are few games which actually push the
envelope. In most cases, you'll be stuck playing games which are
independent and look like something out of the 1980's or early 1990's.
Either that or adventure games in the vein of King's Quest. However, the
creators of Civilization already expressed that their next release will
appear on GNU/Linux as well, Valve is already committed and I wouldn't
be surprised to see other big names move to the platform as well once
the Steam Machines are released.

I think Valve should do whatever it can to convince Electronic Arts to
release its games for GNU/Linux but it appears that their relationship
has already been strained for a while. UbiSoft would be my personal
choice as they have excellent must-have titles such as the Assassin's
Creed and Far Cry series.

--
Silver Slimer
Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter

On 06/05/2014 14:45, Caver1 wrote:

What work can't you do in Linux?
Obviously really haven't really used you Linux for work. Especially
lately.

Until a couple of years ago I was working with 2d CAD files and sketchup
models. Windows or nothing for that kind of thing, but that is to miss
the point somewhat.

If you are working constantly at something you become very aware of the
strengths and limitations of your tools and very interested in getting
the best out of them. For serious work you want the best tools, not some
second rate thing which will just about do the job but not particularly
well. If Photoshop is the best tool then it has to be Photoshop for
work. If gimp is only nearly as good it isn't good enough.

Tim W

On 05/07/2014 01:15 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-07 12:53 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/07/2014 12:18 PM, Silver Slimer wrote:
On 14-05-06 11:35 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 03:08 PM, BillW50 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 11:32 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 05/06/2014 12:07 PM, BillW50 wrote:
"Caver1" wrote in message
...
On 05/06/2014 06:12 AM, BillW50 wrote:

Sure, it is the OS that is crazier than a three-ring circus with
306
distros and counting. The Linux community doesn't believe in
standardization either. Because there wouldn't be 300+ distros if
they did. And it is very tough to write applications that would
run
on 300+ distros. So you end up with many lame basic applications
like
Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, VLC, etc. Hell Android, iOS,
Windows RT, Palm OS, etc can do that stuff too. So I've never
found
one killer app for Linux in all of these years.

Wow! I had to dig up my old post because whatever you used to
quote it
sure screwed it up. Compare the above to your quoted version. Big
difference.

You're fooling only yourself. I didn't quote anything. That was a
direct
follow up to the newsgroup. Go back and look at it again there is no
difference. If there is prove it.

Yeah well you are going to have to wait. As Thunderbird under Windows
and Linux isn't showing your original post at all.

That's funny I can see it in Thunderbird in Linux. Your's also. Anyways
the point was to prove what you said not me.
Still can't can you?



You only have to write for a Linux desktop environment such as KDE,
Gnome. Then a distribution that uses that desktop environment can
use
it. There is no reason to try to think you have to write for a
specific distribution. The Linux kernel Is written so that a user
can
customize it easily for his/her needs or wants. Such as Cern,
Pixar,
Nasa, me, just to name a few.

Naw it is a huge mess. Touch screens for example is now the new fade
(maybe one that will last for generations to come). Virtually all OS
support it right out of the box. But not Linux! Linux is that OS
that
always lags behind everything else. Try to get Linux to learn a new
trick is like a pulling a lazy donkey while it kicks and screams.

Like I said You haven't really used Linux especially recently.

Look at your comment below. " Even this distro is outdated..."
If you keep current with Windows and use Linux why don't you keep
current with Linux?
Really? This looks like Linux. It works like Linux. Go figure.

Works pretty good doesn't it?
If you regularly use Linux why are you so down on it. And since you are
so down on Linux why don't you stay with Windows? How do I know you're
not using an user agent spoofer?

And it remains very stable. Unlike MS which will not let you see
their
code, and is not as stable.

My Windows machines are all stable. Although I am not into beta
testing
the latest and greatest Windows versions. I wait until they have
been
proven stable.

It is not as stable as Linux and you run into many more problems with
windows- bloatware, viruses, update problems, errors that can't be
figured out by anyone so the suggestion is to reload windows and
start
over. I can go on from there.

Really? I usually install Windows once and that is it and I am done.
Not
so with Linux. Even this distro is outdated and I need to wipe it out
and to start all over again. Although I get really tired of this crap
from Linux. It is like driving on the same road that is always under
construction.


I have been using Linux for years and never reinstalled an OS. Just
do a
search and see how many times a Windows user has had to reinstall. I
also do maintenance on Windows machines. I'm not ignorant of that OS.
Why haven't you kept it updated? If you stay with the same root OS
(Debian,Redhat, etc.) All you have to do is keep your /Home partition
and load the new distro and you're fine. Unless you are trying to keep
your /Home from a 15 year old system. Things have progressed. Crap? How
about Windows? How many versions have they had? And how many times has
their software been updated and not compatible with the previous
version? Needed a Patch to fix the problem, several times. Office
software in the free software can usually import/export in many
formats.
Such as Corel file types,Linux file tyoes, all of the different Windows
file types. Windows can't.
As far as I know you like the outdated stuff. WordStar, Palm. What
else?

You're right about the /home directory. People will point to the fact
that it is recommended that you completely reinstall the OS at every new
version (generally every six months) but I believe the upgrade process
has become seamless in the past few years and the recommendation no
longer applies. Besides, even if you DID have to reinstall every six
months, making sure that the /home remains untouched will prevent you
from losing any kind of data. However, this six-month reinstall process
is actually something I like because it ensures that a rather recent
version of the operating system is always available. Unlike installing
Windows 7 or 8 and then going through hours of updating (it literally
takes me a day with Windows 7), if you install a recent version of a
distribution in say 20 minutes, you already have much of the most recent
software and even if you don't, the update process is done ONCE and
everything is updated in that one cycle. This is a gigantic advantage.


Agreed. Some don't like the 6 month cycle so they should stay with the
LTS versions. They are every 2 years.

Isn't Ubuntu's LTS every year actualy? As far as I know, the April
release is generally a LTS one.


No I checked before I wrote this cause I couldn't remember if it was 2
or 3 years. It's 2.

--
Caver1

On 05/07/2014 01:23 PM, Tim w wrote:
On 06/05/2014 14:45, Caver1 wrote:

What work can't you do in Linux?
Obviously really haven't really used you Linux for work. Especially
lately.

Until a couple of years ago I was working with 2d CAD files and sketchup
models. Windows or nothing for that kind of thing, but that is to miss
the point somewhat.

If you are working constantly at something you become very aware of the
strengths and limitations of your tools and very interested in getting
the best out of them. For serious work you want the best tools, not some
second rate thing which will just about do the job but not particularly
well. If Photoshop is the best tool then it has to be Photoshop for
work. If gimp is only nearly as good it isn't good enough.

Tim W


True. Habits are hard to break. There are CAD programs available in
GNU/Linux. Haven't ever used one so don't know anything about them but I
did have AutoCad running in Wine afew years ago, ran fine. Haven't kept
up with it as its way to expensive and they are not compatible from one
version to the next.

--
Caver1

On 5/6/14 9:10 AM, BillW50 wrote:
5) No support for my Precision Xtra glucose meter.

No support for a Mac either.

--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On 05/07/2014 10:55 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/6/14 9:10 AM, BillW50 wrote:
5) No support for my Precision Xtra glucose meter.

Not a fault of Linux. The manufacturer's fault.
Good reason.

No support for a Mac either.


Windows doesn't either.

--
Caver1

On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:23:11 -0400, Silver Slimer
wrote:


I just read a posting form someone who loves Windows and it took him 4
hours to install Windows 8.1. He wanted to make sure that nothing went
wrong. He was worried. Heck it takes longer just to download Windows
updates than it takes Linux to download them and install them.

For a moment I wondered if you might be referring to me, but then I
realised I don't think I've ever completed any Windows installation
since 3.1 in as *little* as 4 hours. I usually set aside half a day
before I expect to have a usable system. For Linux it's usually less
than half an hour.

Reinstalling Windows is literally the most annoying process a human
being can go through. I'm surprised it only took you half a day to
complete it. I generally require a whole day.

I hope I never need to do it to my most recent computer, a Windows 8
laptop. After a straightforward fresh installation of the system it
was supplied with onto a replacement SSD, it then required upgrading
to 8.1, which was a download of several gigabytes and many hours, then
shortly after that it updated itself to "8.1 update", which was a bit
less than one gigabyte but still made the computer unusable for an
hour or two while it sorted itself out. They just seem to get worse
and worse, while the Linux versions just get better and better. I
wonder which version of Windows is going to push me over the edge?

Rod.

Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:23:11 -0400, Silver Slimer
wrote:

I just read a posting form someone who loves Windows and it took him 4
hours to install Windows 8.1. He wanted to make sure that nothing went
wrong. He was worried. Heck it takes longer just to download Windows
updates than it takes Linux to download them and install them.
For a moment I wondered if you might be referring to me, but then I
realised I don't think I've ever completed any Windows installation
since 3.1 in as *little* as 4 hours. I usually set aside half a day
before I expect to have a usable system. For Linux it's usually less
than half an hour.
Reinstalling Windows is literally the most annoying process a human
being can go through. I'm surprised it only took you half a day to
complete it. I generally require a whole day.

I hope I never need to do it to my most recent computer, a Windows 8
laptop. After a straightforward fresh installation of the system it
was supplied with onto a replacement SSD, it then required upgrading
to 8.1, which was a download of several gigabytes and many hours, then
shortly after that it updated itself to "8.1 update", which was a bit
less than one gigabyte but still made the computer unusable for an
hour or two while it sorted itself out. They just seem to get worse
and worse, while the Linux versions just get better and better. I
wonder which version of Windows is going to push me over the edge?

Rod.

This is why I keep the 8.1 DVD image and the gigabyte of U1 files
on disk here. If I need to reinstall the OS, it will take
me less time, as I have all the materials on hand. No trip to
Windows Update, no long downloads. (I will only pay the price once
for them.) If you keep all the files separately, you won't be trapped
in download land. That takes most of the pain out of it. I have
8.0 DVD, 8.1 DVD, U1_file_set, all as separate items, ready to go.
When U2 comes out, I'll be keeping those separately as well.

As for why the installations take so long, you can discover
for yourself, how other processes running on the machine
(Search Indexer, Windows Defender or your own AV, tiworker),
are sucking up cycles and disk accesses, while
the real stuff you want done are running. These installation
processes would run a *lot* faster, if it wasn't for idiotic
maintenance activity in the background, that simply does
not belong there.

To give an example, I attempted to run Disk Cleanup, after
updating to 8.1 and U1. Basically, to remove Windows.old and
free up some space (only do that, if you're happy with the
results of your update). If you do nothing, Windows 8 will
delete Windows.old after 30 days anyway. But I decided to
just use Disk Cleanup, as previously worked. It took *one hour*
for Disk Cleanup to run. I did some checking in the background,
and tiworker decided to start running, reading all sorts of
packages on the disk. This was preventing Disk Cleanup from
finishing. That's why it took an hour. By starting Windows
Update in Windows 8, that caused tiworker to abruptly finish.
And within the next minute, the Disk Cleanup finished. I didn't
issue any commands in Windows Update. Just starting it was
enough to give tiworker a nudge to the curb.

Paul

On 05/08/2014 07:47 AM, Paul wrote:
Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:23:11 -0400, Silver Slimer
wrote:

I just read a posting form someone who loves Windows and it took him 4
hours to install Windows 8.1. He wanted to make sure that nothing went
wrong. He was worried. Heck it takes longer just to download Windows
updates than it takes Linux to download them and install them.
For a moment I wondered if you might be referring to me, but then I
realised I don't think I've ever completed any Windows installation
since 3.1 in as *little* as 4 hours. I usually set aside half a day
before I expect to have a usable system. For Linux it's usually less
than half an hour.
Reinstalling Windows is literally the most annoying process a human
being can go through. I'm surprised it only took you half a day to
complete it. I generally require a whole day.

I hope I never need to do it to my most recent computer, a Windows 8
laptop. After a straightforward fresh installation of the system it
was supplied with onto a replacement SSD, it then required upgrading
to 8.1, which was a download of several gigabytes and many hours, then
shortly after that it updated itself to "8.1 update", which was a bit
less than one gigabyte but still made the computer unusable for an
hour or two while it sorted itself out. They just seem to get worse
and worse, while the Linux versions just get better and better. I
wonder which version of Windows is going to push me over the edge?

Rod.

This is why I keep the 8.1 DVD image and the gigabyte of U1 files
on disk here. If I need to reinstall the OS, it will take
me less time, as I have all the materials on hand. No trip to
Windows Update, no long downloads. (I will only pay the price once
for them.) If you keep all the files separately, you won't be trapped
in download land. That takes most of the pain out of it. I have
8.0 DVD, 8.1 DVD, U1_file_set, all as separate items, ready to go.
When U2 comes out, I'll be keeping those separately as well.

Paul

What about if your HD goes south. Why not slipstream them.
It will give you faster reinstall as well a secure backup if all else
fails? Great idea though.

--
Caver1

Caver1 wrote:
On 05/08/2014 07:47 AM, Paul wrote:
Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:23:11 -0400, Silver Slimer
wrote:

I just read a posting form someone who loves Windows and it took
him 4
hours to install Windows 8.1. He wanted to make sure that nothing
went
wrong. He was worried. Heck it takes longer just to download Windows
updates than it takes Linux to download them and install them.
For a moment I wondered if you might be referring to me, but then I
realised I don't think I've ever completed any Windows installation
since 3.1 in as *little* as 4 hours. I usually set aside half a day
before I expect to have a usable system. For Linux it's usually less
than half an hour.
Reinstalling Windows is literally the most annoying process a human
being can go through. I'm surprised it only took you half a day to
complete it. I generally require a whole day.

I hope I never need to do it to my most recent computer, a Windows 8
laptop. After a straightforward fresh installation of the system it
was supplied with onto a replacement SSD, it then required upgrading
to 8.1, which was a download of several gigabytes and many hours, then
shortly after that it updated itself to "8.1 update", which was a bit
less than one gigabyte but still made the computer unusable for an
hour or two while it sorted itself out. They just seem to get worse
and worse, while the Linux versions just get better and better. I
wonder which version of Windows is going to push me over the edge?

Rod.

This is why I keep the 8.1 DVD image and the gigabyte of U1 files
on disk here. If I need to reinstall the OS, it will take
me less time, as I have all the materials on hand. No trip to
Windows Update, no long downloads. (I will only pay the price once
for them.) If you keep all the files separately, you won't be trapped
in download land. That takes most of the pain out of it. I have
8.0 DVD, 8.1 DVD, U1_file_set, all as separate items, ready to go.
When U2 comes out, I'll be keeping those separately as well.

Paul

What about if your HD goes south. Why not slipstream them.
It will give you faster reinstall as well a secure backup if all else
fails? Great idea though.


Slipstreaming worked in older OSes.

I haven't seen any good recipes for OSes like Windows 8.

There's already a toolset for working with OSes (WAIK or ADK).
That basically builds an image of the OS, for some purpose.
That is the most likely path to "slipstreaming", but the
process is entirely different.

Paul

On 14-05-08 12:24 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:23:11 -0400, Silver Slimer
wrote:


I just read a posting form someone who loves Windows and it took him 4
hours to install Windows 8.1. He wanted to make sure that nothing went
wrong. He was worried. Heck it takes longer just to download Windows
updates than it takes Linux to download them and install them.

For a moment I wondered if you might be referring to me, but then I
realised I don't think I've ever completed any Windows installation
since 3.1 in as *little* as 4 hours. I usually set aside half a day
before I expect to have a usable system. For Linux it's usually less
than half an hour.

Reinstalling Windows is literally the most annoying process a human
being can go through. I'm surprised it only took you half a day to
complete it. I generally require a whole day.

I hope I never need to do it to my most recent computer, a Windows 8
laptop. After a straightforward fresh installation of the system it
was supplied with onto a replacement SSD, it then required upgrading
to 8.1, which was a download of several gigabytes and many hours, then
shortly after that it updated itself to "8.1 update", which was a bit
less than one gigabyte but still made the computer unusable for an
hour or two while it sorted itself out. They just seem to get worse
and worse, while the Linux versions just get better and better. I
wonder which version of Windows is going to push me over the edge?

Being told that the battery you've been using on a laptop since its
initial purchase is not compatible with your laptop was the last straw
for me. I will actively be playing the Steam games which are exclusive
to Windows on my desktop with the intent of eventually replacing Windows
altogether and making a GNU/Linux gaming system. It'll obviously have a
smaller number of games but at least I won't be told that because of a
recent HD upgrade, I can't recover my system or that the manufacturer's
own battery is incompatible. I don't take very kindly to being insulted
by the technology I choose to use.

--
Silver Slimer
Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter