Why is SP2 so big? It doesn't do much

Perhaps some day Linux will be easy enough for the typical user to
operate.

It's easy enough for the typical user who only wants to browse the web,
enjoy porn/music and send/recieve email, right now. Those who use an OS
to easily create/view image/text documents of various flavors also have
everything they need, right now.

It's the game-players that have problems (IMHO).

Don't forget telecommuters who need to run Microsoft Office, not some
imitation that works "OK" if other people send you files. -Dave

If you aren't running Microsoft Office,
and a very specific version of Microsoft Office at that, you have no way
of
knowing what that document will look like before you hit the "send"
button.

Well, try saving it as "text only".


I notice the smiley face. -Dave

ToolPackinMama wrote:

David Maynard wrote:

ToolPackinMama wrote:


Good lord, yes. Linux comes with hundreds of programs. Windows XP
would fill several CDs if you included SP1 all the patches, and SP2,

No, a slipstreamed SP2 Windows XP CD, which includes all updates, is just
one plain ole' CD. Less than full at that.


Does that include the full OS?

Yes, of course.

Even so, it wouldn't equal a Linux CD with hundreds of applications,
including a full office suite, and GIMP. Especially not at the same
price. Linux ~with~ all the extras is a fraction of the cost of Windows
XP alone, without extras.

I didn't say it did. The point of discussion was whether Windows XP and
SP2, with all updates, would fill several CDs. It doesn't, when 'put together'.

ToolPackinMama wrote:

David Maynard wrote:


Perhaps some day Linux will be easy enough for the typical user to operate.


It's easy enough for the typical user who only wants to browse the web,
enjoy porn/music and send/recieve email, right now. Those who use an OS
to easily create/view image/text documents of various flavors also have
everything they need, right now.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

Even before one gets to any 'operational' issues they've first got to get
past which of the umpty dump dump bazillion versions to try and then what
the heck those umpty dump dump thousands of 'free programs' do and what the
cryptic names mean. And then 'root' and super user if they're to accomplish
almost anything.

Plus, I think you way underestimate the value to 'typical' users of wizards
and windows being more tightly integrated.


It's the game-players that have problems (IMHO).

Dave C. wrote:

The last time I installed a linux distro, the
installation when smoother, faster and easier than any windows

installation.

Beside it not being as 'simple' as you suggest, 'installing' wasn't what I
meant by easy enough for the typical user to operate.


That was a couple of distros ago, so the latest distros are probably

pretty

damned impressive from the viewpoint of a "typical user". Oh, and

clicking

a mouse in linux is just as easy as clicking a mouse in windows.

That's like saying moving your feet is just as easy going uphill as it is
on flat ground. It isn't the 'clicking' of the mouse button that matters.

But before you even get to that point one has to figure out which GUI
you're using.

And then there's the ever fun "I just installed insert whatever. I

wonder

where the hell it went." Doesn't always happen but it happens often

enough.



Yes, I know there are ways to tweak the open source apps. to match a
particular version of Office. But without a working PC *RUNNING* Microsoft
Office, you have no way of knowing if the software is working correctly
until it's too late. If you need to run Microsoft Office anyway, what's the
point of trying to coax linux to emulate it? Besides which, the typical
computer user wouldn't bother to even try, and therein lies the real
problem.

I wasn't talking about tweaking Open Source apps; I was talking about you
saying there was a problem from one version of MS Office to the other.
Trying to open a new doc in an ancient version might be a problem but I've
got docs going back to Word 2 for DOS and I never, in all the newer
versions, ran into any problems that I can remember. I can also open all
the Works 2 docs I've got, just as they were when I was using Works for DOS.


But linux really IS as easy as I suggest. Anybody comfortable with Windows
XP should find any recent linux distro a real breeze to both install and
operate. Note that's if their particular distro comes with all the software
they want pre-packaged. (I know there's still some software installation
headaches that need to be addressed).

I've GOT various Linux versions and I disagree that they're just as easy
for the 'typical' user, although they're certainly a lot better than just a
few years ago.

Last one I tried was Lindows 4.5 but it apparently doesn't understand the
display card in the test machine I put it on because all I got was a blank
screen after the initial boot. Gonna try it on another one when I get
around to it (I'm having more fun with the mini live CD distros at the
moment), but that's just one of the 'surprises' folks can run into.


OH, and it doesn't matter what GUI you want to use with linux. Last I
checked, there were only two major choices of GUI for linux (and some others
that the real geeks play around with). Of the two major ones, they both
operate identically, and they run each other's software seamlessly. From
memory, I believe the last major distribution I installed actually installed
BOTH GUI's by default, and then asked you to choose one to use at login. I
could bounce back and forth between the two if I wanted, but the one I used
(gnome) worked fine, so I stuck with that. And yes, I was running some KDE
apps. on that, no problems at all.

Maybe you didn't try enough things to discover some of the problems.

Before someone gets the wrong impression, I'm not a linux fanatic. I LIKE
linux, but I run Windows XP. Even if I wasn't "required" to run Windows for
telecommuting, I'd still run Windows XP. Eventually I'll be running linux
again. It might not happen until I retire, but it'll happen. Linux is just
too good to ignore indefinitely. And yes, I was dual booting linux and
windows for a while. I finally figured out that was a waste of time, as I
HAD to run windows but didn't have to run linux. Bouncing back and forth
constantly drove me nuts and Windows XP really isn't too evil, so I'm
running that exclusively now. -Dave

I like Linux but when I don't have time to 'play' and need to get something
done NOW I whip up one of the windows machines.

How much space Linux uses on a CD is not relevant.
I was commenting to the WRONG information "Windows XP would fill
several CDs if you included SP1 all the patches"
Clearly a FALSE statement since it all fits on a single CD.
The other products are NOT part of the operating system.
Cost also has absolutely no bearing on the space used for the
operating system.
You keep bringing other irrelevant points to cloud the facts.

What you say may or may not be a fact in this post, but were clearly
WRONG in the post I originally responded.

Otherwise please explain this statement you made:
"Windows XP would fill several CDs if you included SP1 all the
patches"
Just because you may be incapable of placing Windows XP and all
current patches on a single CD, do not assume others can't.

Fortunately not all Linux users feel the need to misrepresent a
product to show the value of Linux.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"ToolPackinMama" wrote in message
...
Yes, for the OS alone...

The Linux CD's aren't for the OS alone. One CD is enough to hold
the
Linux OS alone. The Linux CDs include hundreds (thousands?) of
utilities and applications, including a full office suite (Open
Office)
and a Photoshop-type image manipulation program (GIMP). Therefore,
several Linux CDs is not the same as one XP CD, especially not at
that
price. A Linux distro of several CDs worth of OS and apps and
add-ons
costs a tiny fraction of what it costs for the XP OS alone.

That's a fact.

"NoNoBadDog!" mypants_bjsledgeATpixi.com wrote in message ...
And Aquila Deus is still having problems adjusting to his new
anti-hallucination drugs.

Prove your claims of SP2 containing Viruses,

Isn't windows itself a big virus?

adware or spyware.

Windows Update service.

I dare you to validate a single claim you have made.

Does sp2 make xp immune to all the viruses and spywares/adwares on Internet?


You can't, can you?

dude, I just did.


Shut up and crawl back into the hole you came out of.

You are a loser and a moron.

BWHAHAHAHA!!


Bobby

Is this pronounced as Bou-Bee or Bah-Bee?



"Aquila Deus" wrote in message

///SNIP////




But:
- It stills use a lot of RAM
- It's still as slow as it used to be
- Still has virus, adware and spyware!
- As u wrote above, the new firewall is still lame
- Where is tabbed interface for IE?

So what's the difference?

"Dave C." wrote in message ...
- Where is tabbed interface for IE?


It's called Mozilla. -Dave

But M$ should just replace IE with it.

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 16:57:21 -0400, "Dave C." wrote:


SOP for any software house to do a rollup.

and now SP2 (272 mb).

Same thing, except it also adds new functionality that's almost enough to
have been called WindowsXP SE and sold as a new release.


OK, what can you do with SP2 that couldn't be done before? I've heard it
turns on the XP firewall which was always there, but you should WANT to turn
that one off anyway, if you have a decent firewall. I'm curious. What can
SP2 users do that I can't? (typing this on SP1a) -Dave

Read this for the background fixes made to XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;811113

"Dave C." writes:
....
But linux really IS as easy as I suggest. Anybody comfortable with Windows
XP should find any recent linux distro a real breeze to both install and
operate.
....

One likely not representative data point.
Have an XP box with all my expensive licensed (math) software running
on it. A person I was working with suggested I try out Linux. That
seemed reasonable, I earned my money a couple of decades ago writing
code sitting inside of BSD Unix, I even did a bit of system
administration before the world went Windows and networking crazy.

So I built a little Linux box, stuck a Knoppix CD in it, and because
this was strictly a trial to see how things would go and because
some of the licensed software on the XP box doesn't want to be
disturbed, I thought I would try out this new-fangled Internet
Connection Sharing, using the XP box to connect to the net and let
the Linux box borrow access to the net through the XP box, the
bandwidth needed for the project software was very small but
absolutely essential. XP seemed to claim that this could work.

I had no idea the responses I would get from people when I had
problems with this and went looking for a little help. Without too
much trouble I got to the point where I could, sometimes, ping back
and forth between the two. But any attempt to get the Linux box
to reach the net failed. I borrowed a pile of books from the
library. No luck, borrowed more, searched the net, no luck. So I
politely asked a few questions of the Linux folks. Roughly the
response was that if I wanted them to come over and burn anything
I had that ever had any Microsoft on it and replace it all with
Linux then they would help, not otherwise. So I tried the opposite
side, and asked Microsoft folks. Roughly the response was that
they would help me burn the Linux stuff OR that they had no idea
how to do anything with Linux. I even offered to pay people. Nope.

I struggled trying to make this work, and not having any time to
spend on what I was really supposed to be doing, for three months.
Finally I told the person I was doing the work for that I was going
to abandon the project, sorry I couldn't help him but I quit. The
person who I was working with on the math project rewrote a bunch
of the code so we could run it without needing any networking at
all. I transfer data back and forth between the group of Linux
boxes using a floppy disk now.

To Aquila Deus
Bobby ask nonobaddog. Has a problem understanding people. If he
does not understand people he claims they are on drugs.

He accused my being on drugs as well. Had to tell him, my grammar
is bad at time due to my disability. A form of dyslexia. I will say
something if he gives incorrect information out. Other than that I
just ignore him.

He still didn’t get the message Symantec Ghost was acquired from
Binary Research Limited group.

He keep saying ghost was a Symantec/Norton product since it inception.
Symantec/Norton’s did not develop ghost. Binary Research did.

http://www.symantec.com/corporate/


Greg R




And Aquila Deus is still having problems adjusting to his new
anti-hallucination drugs.

On 9 Sep 2004 00:36:17 -0700, (Aquila Deus)
wrote:

"NoNoBadDog!" mypants_bjsledgeATpixi.com wrote in message ...
And Aquila Deus is still having problems adjusting to his new
anti-hallucination drugs.

Prove your claims of SP2 containing Viruses,

Isn't windows itself a big virus?
?????


adware or spyware.

Windows Update service.
Anonymous logging of downloads from Microsofts site. Its the same as a
website cookie. It does not log key strokes. It does not popup ads.

And its not compulsory. Updates can be downloaded without using this
service.


I dare you to validate a single claim you have made.

Does sp2 make xp immune to all the viruses and spywares/adwares on Internet?
So how does that validate your claim? Of course it doesnt make XP
immune, its an OS not an anti virus/anti spam/anti spyware product.


You can't, can you?

dude, I just did.
Sorry, try again......


Shut up and crawl back into the hole you came out of.

You are a loser and a moron.

BWHAHAHAHA!!


Bobby

Is this pronounced as Bou-Bee or Bah-Bee?



"Aquila Deus" wrote in message

///SNIP////




But:
- It stills use a lot of RAM
- It's still as slow as it used to be
- Still has virus, adware and spyware!
- As u wrote above, the new firewall is still lame
- Where is tabbed interface for IE?

So what's the difference?

OK, what can you do with SP2 that couldn't be done before? I've heard it
turns on the XP firewall which was always there, but you should WANT to
turn
that one off anyway, if you have a decent firewall. I'm curious. What
can
SP2 users do that I can't? (typing this on SP1a) -Dave

Read this for the background fixes made to XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;811113


Good information. TONS of bug fixes. It's just odd that in years of
running Windows XP, I haven't experienced any of those specific issues. I
suspect if I did run into one of those bugs, I could find a better solution
than installing ~200MB of worthless software. -Dave

"Don Taylor" wrote in message
...
"Dave C." writes:
...
But linux really IS as easy as I suggest. Anybody comfortable with
Windows
XP should find any recent linux distro a real breeze to both install and
operate.
...

One likely not representative data point.
Have an XP box with all my expensive licensed (math) software running
on it. A person I was working with suggested I try out Linux. That
seemed reasonable, I earned my money a couple of decades ago writing
code sitting inside of BSD Unix, I even did a bit of system
administration before the world went Windows and networking crazy.

So I built a little Linux box, stuck a Knoppix CD in it, and because
this was strictly a trial to see how things would go and because
some of the licensed software on the XP box doesn't want to be
disturbed, I thought I would try out this new-fangled Internet
Connection Sharing, using the XP box to connect to the net and let
the Linux box borrow access to the net through the XP box,

(snip)

Yikes. I'm experienced with both operating systems, and that sounds like a
real nightmare. It's not always easy to get two Windows XP boxes to
cooperate for ICS, so I can imagine the headaches caused by one of the boxes
running linux. I haven't tried ICS on linux. My experience with broadband
and linux is that linux will configure itself for Internet access if it is
connected directly to the Internet or through a hardware router. I'm sorry
you had such a problem getting someone to try to help you with this issue.
I would have advised you to invest in a router. That has nothing to do with
linux in particular. It's just that a router is the best solution if you
need more than one computer of any kind connected to a single Internet
connection. On a side note, broadband downloads are faster in linux, in my
experience. -Dave

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

How much space Linux uses on a CD is not relevant.
I was commenting to the WRONG information "Windows XP would fill
several CDs if you included SP1 all the patches"
Clearly a FALSE statement since it all fits on a single CD.

Well, the Linux OS also fts on a single CD. That other stuff is free
extras.