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
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:20 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
T wrote: chrisv wrote: Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? That's not an email address, it's a usenet message-id http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cphiknedtsvjrs4kiblk1s1egiicad 7q2bq%404ax.com%3E Okay I see now: T wrote: The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his Quick Books and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Many people have no need of such special applications. I see tons of folks over two counties for the last 24 years. There is always one program they have to run that kills Linux. Usually is is Quick Books, and virtually every business uses it. Some times it is M$ Office. A lot of time it it is things like Turbo Tax and those ancestry programs. There is always something. And believe me, I don't care much for Windows, even though it provided me with a fine living. I'd much rather put Linux on my customers. It is far more reliable, faster, and to be quite honest, a lot more fun to work on. Oh ya, GnuCash work on Linux (I personally use it), but it does not do inventory or payroll. And good luck trying to find an accountant that understands it. I have personally witnessed accountants tell Apple users with Quick Books files to go home, get a Windows computer, and come back with a Windows quick books file. Are you seeing a trend? Also, as the years progress, more and more applications become browser-based, making it less and less important what OS is being used. True for Cloud based programs. Edge base not so true. And I think Cloud Based systems have met their usefulness and have started to get a bit ridiculous. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. The Linux community is already doing what it should be doing. Obviously, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they could keep-up, in applications, with the 40X larger Windows ecosystem. As I have stated before, Linux is technically superior to Windows, and not by a little, by a lot. From the users standpoint, if the programs don't work, they don't care, the OS doesn't work. Here is a quarter, go tell it to someone who cares. Maybe the solution is for someone like Red Hat to get behind Wine and make Wine work right for all Windows programs. But that maybe bad too as programmers would never port to Linux. |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:20:08 -0400, Rabid Rogue wrote:
On 2019-09-12 1:14 p.m., T wrote: On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? I think that's a Message-ID. How does one look up a Message-ID, anyway? Proper newsreaders allow you to double click it and the message opens in a new window. That works for me. (Forte Agent 2.0) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 2019-09-12, Mr Hand wrote:
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:03:32 -0500, chrisv wrote: Mr. Hand wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux And there are many others. How you can deny this is laughable. You focus only on those who are critical. No. I made a statement that you claim was untrue. I offered proof. You offered insults. There are also those who praise the community. Of course there are. Who said otherwise. You are now moving the goal posts after you snipped what I've said. There are billions of people who have benefitted from the community's efforts. Of course. Goal post move again. What is "laughable" is that you think that you can present only "one side of the story" and arrive at the truth. No. What is laughable is how you lashed out and attacked me while I provided data for my claims and you snip and then try to move the goal posts. Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it. They become aware the first time they enter the typical Linux group and get told to RTFM. Although trolls with bad attitudes will claim otherwise, that normally does not happen. Almost always, people who are respectful get treated with respect. There is a reason for the bad reputation of the Linux community. And it's easy to Google examples, I provided some, you snipped the data. Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them. I'm talking about the community not a company. On what basis would you claim that reputations are less important to companies than they are to communities? The fact that Linux doesn't have a company, maybe? I thought that would be obvious. So, people like you for example as you prove my points rather succinctly. Now you have resorted to lying. Your snipping, goal post moving and straw man building along with your personal attacks on me proves my points rather well. Do you, by chance, also go by the name of "Mayayana"? He also likes to launch insulting attacks, and then, when people object, claim that his "point was proven". I'm not Mayayana, and you are resorting to lying. I didn't attack anyone, you did. You attacked me. As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text based system needing a command line to run. Sad but true. Neither sad nor true. It is true. Nope. It's pulled from your rear end. See. You attack. I will provide evidence of my claim right here. You will snip it, move the goal posts and continue to attack me though but I will post it anyway. And again, this is but a single example. Google is filled with others. https://itsfoss.com/myths-about-linux/ "You are he Home / List / 5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New Users 5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New Users Last updated March 4, 2019 By Abhishek Prakash 94 Comments Myths about Linux debunked Are there really myths about Linux? I mean there are plenty of facts about Linux and how powerful and secure it is that the entire tech world is relying on it. Yes, the world relies on Linux to power its technologies but we are not talking about the ‘industrial Linux’. We are talking the desktop Linux. The Linux that a normal user should be using as its daily driver for surfing web, for document editing, listening to music and casual gaming. When it comes to the desktop version, there are actually some famous myths about Linux and if one believes them, he/she will be very reluctant to use Linux. 5 myths about Linux that you shouldn’t believe In this article, I will bust these myths about Linux. I am not going to trick you in switching to Linux by lying, I’ll counter these rumors with facts, the best way to do it. Myth 1: Linux is very difficult to use Myth about Linux: It's difficult to use If you think Linux is difficult to use, let me ask you this. When you used a computer for the very first time, how did you feel? The answer would be that you just didn’t know how to navigate or use the operating system (Windows, I presume). Creating new files, installing software, troubleshooting issues, everything seems complicated at beginning. But did you quit it at that point? No, you kept using it and gradually, you get comfortable with it. Linux is no different. Things might seem a little complicated in the beginning but give it enough time before being judgemental. Still not convinced? Okay! You do know that Apple’s macOS is a popular desktop operating system. But have you ever tried to use macOS? macOS is as much confusing in the beginning as Linux. You will have a hard time figuring out how to navigate to files, folders. Installing new software in macOS is another challenge when you just don’t know how to do it. Linux is no different. Perhaps it gives so many options that it overwhelms a newcomer but this doesn’t mean it is difficult to use Linux. Myth 2: You need to know commands to use Linux Myth about Linux: You need to know commands This is another myth that scares a new user. Using command line for an operating system? That could be a nightmare for many. Linux has a powerful command line interface, there is no doubt about it. In fact, you can use Linux entirely in the command line. But this is not what you have to do while using desktop Linux. If you know a few commands, it will help you troubleshoot issues you may encounter (like in any other operating system). But you don’t have to know commands or become a command line ninja for that. Most beginner friendly Linux distributions provide a complete graphical interface. You might never need to use the command line. At worst, if you find some issue or if you are trying to install software in Linux, you might come across commands suggested by people on the internet. Using those commands is very simple. Open a terminal and copy-paste the commands. However, basic knowledge of Linux commands will help you at this point to avoid using dangerous Linux commands that might harm your system. Linux command line is like a very sharp knife. You can do wonder with it but you can also cut yourself. It depends on how you handle the knife. To sum it up, use a Windows like Linux distribution that will have almost no requirement to use the command line." Try it yourself. How about you prove your ridiculous claim. So you can snip it like you did my other claims? I just did. The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a "GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of people. While it is true most people may not even know about Linux, from the ones that do, many still believe it's a CLI system for geeks. Nonsense. See above. I strongly suspect you will soon be resorting to your usual "snipped unread" routine as you have once again been out debated. Evidence that someone else believes as you do is NOT evidence that the statement is true. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
Mr. Hand wrote:
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:03:32 -0500, chrisv wrote: Mr. Hand wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux And there are many others. How you can deny this is laughable. You focus only on those who are critical. No. I made a statement that you claim was untrue. I offered proof. No you didn't. Have you ever seen a trial? The prosecution doesn't "offer proof". They present "evidence". You presented some evidence, supporting one side of the debate. In a trial, the other side gets to present evidence, also. Every group has some assholes. I could present evidence that Steve Jobs was an asshole. Does that mean that he has a "bad reputation"? No, it does not. You offered insults. Yet another lie, from you. I will read no further. In truth, it is you who offered insults. It is you who offered unsupported claims. When challenged, you lamely responded that I should go-around asking a ****-load of people what they thought Linux is. Do you think that you being so unreasonable gets you off the hook? You made the claims, your job to support them, buddy. You're just yet another asshole who pulls **** out of his ass and insults decent people. Then, when someone objects, you claim that they proved your point (I'm sure that you will again do so, in response to this post). When it's clear that you are beaten, you attack with idiocy and lies. (snipped, unread) -- "GNU/Linux takes all of the technology world's biggest failures and bundles them all together into 500,000 different distributions for your convenience." - "Slimer" |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:14 AM, T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? He is saying people have no need for such amazingly specialized programs as basic tax or personal accounting programs. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote:
T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. In short: you think for people who have amazingly simple needs, not even using things as common and basic as tax and personal finance apps, or other common programs, Linux is a fine choice. That is you damning with faint praise. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:21:40 -0000 (UTC), William Unruh
wrote: On 2019-09-12, Mr Hand wrote: On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:03:32 -0500, chrisv wrote: Mr. Hand wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux And there are many others. How you can deny this is laughable. You focus only on those who are critical. No. I made a statement that you claim was untrue. I offered proof. You offered insults. There are also those who praise the community. Of course there are. Who said otherwise. You are now moving the goal posts after you snipped what I've said. There are billions of people who have benefitted from the community's efforts. Of course. Goal post move again. What is "laughable" is that you think that you can present only "one side of the story" and arrive at the truth. No. What is laughable is how you lashed out and attacked me while I provided data for my claims and you snip and then try to move the goal posts. Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it. They become aware the first time they enter the typical Linux group and get told to RTFM. Although trolls with bad attitudes will claim otherwise, that normally does not happen. Almost always, people who are respectful get treated with respect. There is a reason for the bad reputation of the Linux community. And it's easy to Google examples, I provided some, you snipped the data. Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them. I'm talking about the community not a company. On what basis would you claim that reputations are less important to companies than they are to communities? The fact that Linux doesn't have a company, maybe? I thought that would be obvious. So, people like you for example as you prove my points rather succinctly. Now you have resorted to lying. Your snipping, goal post moving and straw man building along with your personal attacks on me proves my points rather well. Do you, by chance, also go by the name of "Mayayana"? He also likes to launch insulting attacks, and then, when people object, claim that his "point was proven". I'm not Mayayana, and you are resorting to lying. I didn't attack anyone, you did. You attacked me. As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text based system needing a command line to run. Sad but true. Neither sad nor true. It is true. Nope. It's pulled from your rear end. See. You attack. I will provide evidence of my claim right here. You will snip it, move the goal posts and continue to attack me though but I will post it anyway. And again, this is but a single example. Google is filled with others. https://itsfoss.com/myths-about-linux/ "You are he Home / List / 5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New Users 5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New Users Last updated March 4, 2019 By Abhishek Prakash 94 Comments Myths about Linux debunked Are there really myths about Linux? I mean there are plenty of facts about Linux and how powerful and secure it is that the entire tech world is relying on it. Yes, the world relies on Linux to power its technologies but we are not talking about the ‘industrial Linux’. We are talking the desktop Linux. The Linux that a normal user should be using as its daily driver for surfing web, for document editing, listening to music and casual gaming. When it comes to the desktop version, there are actually some famous myths about Linux and if one believes them, he/she will be very reluctant to use Linux. 5 myths about Linux that you shouldn’t believe In this article, I will bust these myths about Linux. I am not going to trick you in switching to Linux by lying, I’ll counter these rumors with facts, the best way to do it. Myth 1: Linux is very difficult to use Myth about Linux: It's difficult to use If you think Linux is difficult to use, let me ask you this. When you used a computer for the very first time, how did you feel? The answer would be that you just didn’t know how to navigate or use the operating system (Windows, I presume). Creating new files, installing software, troubleshooting issues, everything seems complicated at beginning. But did you quit it at that point? No, you kept using it and gradually, you get comfortable with it. Linux is no different. Things might seem a little complicated in the beginning but give it enough time before being judgemental. Still not convinced? Okay! You do know that Apple’s macOS is a popular desktop operating system. But have you ever tried to use macOS? macOS is as much confusing in the beginning as Linux. You will have a hard time figuring out how to navigate to files, folders. Installing new software in macOS is another challenge when you just don’t know how to do it. Linux is no different. Perhaps it gives so many options that it overwhelms a newcomer but this doesn’t mean it is difficult to use Linux. Myth 2: You need to know commands to use Linux Myth about Linux: You need to know commands This is another myth that scares a new user. Using command line for an operating system? That could be a nightmare for many. Linux has a powerful command line interface, there is no doubt about it. In fact, you can use Linux entirely in the command line. But this is not what you have to do while using desktop Linux. If you know a few commands, it will help you troubleshoot issues you may encounter (like in any other operating system). But you don’t have to know commands or become a command line ninja for that. Most beginner friendly Linux distributions provide a complete graphical interface. You might never need to use the command line. At worst, if you find some issue or if you are trying to install software in Linux, you might come across commands suggested by people on the internet. Using those commands is very simple. Open a terminal and copy-paste the commands. However, basic knowledge of Linux commands will help you at this point to avoid using dangerous Linux commands that might harm your system. Linux command line is like a very sharp knife. You can do wonder with it but you can also cut yourself. It depends on how you handle the knife. To sum it up, use a Windows like Linux distribution that will have almost no requirement to use the command line." Try it yourself. How about you prove your ridiculous claim. So you can snip it like you did my other claims? I just did. The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a "GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of people. While it is true most people may not even know about Linux, from the ones that do, many still believe it's a CLI system for geeks. Nonsense. See above. I strongly suspect you will soon be resorting to your usual "snipped unread" routine as you have once again been out debated. Evidence that someone else believes as you do is NOT evidence that the statement is true. Of course not. There are people who still think the earth is flat However, unlike something that can be proven by scientific or other means, these items I made references to are opinions based upon experiences and observations of behavior, such as Linus lashing out and the USB developer's experiences so YMMV. The point is, when there are so many, many examples to be found then it becomes a valid point for discussion. I think chrisv's behavior and reaction towards my posts, his insults and lashing out, have confirmed yet another excellent example of some of the items I discussed. Does "everyone" have similar experiences or opinions? Of course not. There are plenty of people, probably the majority by far, who have had positive experiences with Linux and the community. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:48:02 -0700, T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:20 AM, Andy Burns wrote: T wrote: chrisv wrote: Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? That's not an email address, it's a usenet message-id http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cphiknedtsvjrs4kiblk1s1egiicad 7q2bq%404ax.com%3E Okay I see now: T wrote: The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his Quick Books and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Many people have no need of such special applications. I see tons of folks over two counties for the last 24 years. There is always one program they have to run that kills Linux. Usually is is Quick Books, and virtually every business uses it. Some times it is M$ Office. A lot of time it it is things like Turbo Tax and those ancestry programs. There is always something. And believe me, I don't care much for Windows, even though it provided me with a fine living. I'd much rather put Linux on my customers. It is far more reliable, faster, and to be quite honest, a lot more fun to work on. Oh ya, GnuCash work on Linux (I personally use it), but it does not do inventory or payroll. And good luck trying to find an accountant that understands it. I have personally witnessed accountants tell Apple users with Quick Books files to go home, get a Windows computer, and come back with a Windows quick books file. Are you seeing a trend? Also, as the years progress, more and more applications become browser-based, making it less and less important what OS is being used. True for Cloud based programs. Edge base not so true. And I think Cloud Based systems have met their usefulness and have started to get a bit ridiculous. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. The Linux community is already doing what it should be doing. Obviously, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they could keep-up, in applications, with the 40X larger Windows ecosystem. As I have stated before, Linux is technically superior to Windows, and not by a little, by a lot. From the users standpoint, if the programs don't work, they don't care, the OS doesn't work. Here is a quarter, go tell it to someone who cares. Maybe the solution is for someone like Red Hat to get behind Wine and make Wine work right for all Windows programs. But that maybe bad too as programmers would never port to Linux. Personally I feel that if an application is a must have, like PhotoShop, Quicken etc then the user should probably have chosen the platform first based upon that. As for wine, I have never been much of a wine fan, except a fine Chianti. Linux development should stay focused on developing Linux applications. IBM screwed the pooch trying to support Windows within OS/2. Not exactly the same, but similar. I know many will disagree, and that's alright. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
chrisv wrote in
: Mr. Hand wrote: On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:03:32 -0500, chrisv wrote: Mr. Hand wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux And there are many others. How you can deny this is laughable. You focus only on those who are critical. No. I made a statement that you claim was untrue. I offered proof. No you didn't. Have you ever seen a trial? The prosecution doesn't "offer proof". They present "evidence". You presented some evidence, supporting one side of the debate. In a trial, the other side gets to present evidence, also. Every group has some assholes. I could present evidence that Steve Jobs was an asshole. Does that mean that he has a "bad reputation"? No, it does not. You offered insults. Yet another lie, from you. I will read no further. In truth, it is you who offered insults. It is you who offered unsupported claims. When challenged, you lamely responded that I should go-around asking a ****-load of people what they thought Linux is. Do you think that you being so unreasonable gets you off the hook? You made the claims, your job to support them, buddy. You're just yet another asshole who pulls **** out of his ass and insults decent people. Then, when someone objects, you claim that they proved your point (I'm sure that you will again do so, in response to this post). When it's clear that you are beaten, you attack with idiocy and lies. (snipped, unread) You are being trolled by snit sock puppets. There are several in this thread. Mr Hand is just another snit sock puppet. Key phrase:lashing out. It's a snit phrase. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:14:16 -0700, T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? Bro, do you even compute? 200 news.astraweb.com NNRP Service Ready (posting ok) (fx34.iad) (yEnc enabled). 381 PASS required 281 Welcome to usenetxs.com (Posting Allowed) article 220 0 Path: not-for-mail From: chrisv Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth Message-ID: References: qlccfj$g6o$1@dont- email.me X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 27 X-Complaints-To: NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:49:23 UTC Organization: fastusenet - www.fastusenet.org Bytes: 1607 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:49:23 -0500 X-Received-Bytes: 1658 X-Received-Body-CRC: 98773473 T wrote: The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his Quick Books and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Many people have no need of such special applications. Also, as the years progress, more and more applications become browser-based, making it less and less important what OS is being used. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. The Linux community is already doing what it should be doing. Obviously, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they could keep-up, in applications, with the 40X larger Windows ecosystem. -- "If we're even mildly critical of GNU/Linux, we're liars and trolls." - "Slimer", lying shamelessly .. -- -v | Two-time winner of the Checkyâ„¢. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
Snit wrote in
: On 9/12/19 2:19 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: Mr Hand is just another snit sock puppet. Perhaps the most open you have been about your psychological problems, Carroll... and the fact you posted it with a sock only emphasizes how much help you need. Thanks snit for confirming that you are indeed behind the Mr.hand and Sprocket posts in this thread. Folks, we can now ignore this thread like we ignore everything else snit posts. P.S. You should have stayed silent snit and you might have been able to cultivate this troll. But we all know you can't do that. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 2019-09-12 5:31 p.m., Charlie Tuna wrote:
In article , lid says... Wingnut wrote: Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth Let me know when there's a transcript available; I don't 'do' video interviews. That recent Shuttleworth interview on Kubernetes had a transcript. What's the matter, can't you get Linux to play the video? Too bad for you. That's an unfair question. To be honest, Linux plays more video formats out of the box than any other operating system even if VLC isn't pre-installed. If it doesn't play the video, it gives you the option to install the codec which WILL play it. -- Your friendly neighborhood Rabid Rogue |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
In article , Rabid Rogue
wrote: Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth Let me know when there's a transcript available; I don't 'do' video interviews. That recent Shuttleworth interview on Kubernetes had a transcript. What's the matter, can't you get Linux to play the video? Too bad for you. That's an unfair question. To be honest, Linux plays more video formats out of the box than any other operating system even if VLC isn't pre-installed. no it definitely does not. If it doesn't play the video, it gives you the option to install the codec which WILL play it. so much for more video formats, and that's the same for other oses. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|