Why I no Longer Use Windows 7.

I have to admit that Windows 7 is most likely the bestest version of
Windows since Windows 2000 but even still I have removed it from my Dell
system in favor of Linux Ubuntu which I just upgraded to Ubuntu 10.10 from
10.04 with not a single trouble. Linux just does everything I need and does
it for free. I can compile a slim kernel to use on my P4 system or I can
have a fat kernel for my i7 system. It's my choice. Windows 7 puts an extra
100 mb partition on my drive that I don't want. Why is that? Linux does
what I tell it to do instead of doing what some corrupt company thinks I
want to do. I use my Garmin GPS, Android phone, Sansa mp3 player and my
Sony USB turntable with Linux and have no problems. So why spend $165 on
Windows 7? I've been asking myself the same question. Time to ebay the dung
pile and get back at least some of my money. Linux may not be the most
popular system but in my opinion it's the best, at least for me.

It's my choice. Windows 7 puts an extra
100 mb partition on my drive that I don't want.


You can delete that partition another program and then do repair of
win 7. After 1-2 attempts the boot folder will be created in C:


Why is that? Linux does
what I tell it to do instead of doing what some corrupt company thinks I
want to do.


I play with linux.

At present I have Mint on my second disk root partition. It is nice.

Having paid 100 dollars for windows 7 home premium oem one year ago i consider
it the best bargain in the world for me as I value my time

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 08:35:12 GMT, Student wrote:

It's my choice. Windows 7 puts an extra
100 mb partition on my drive that I don't want.


You can delete that partition another program and then do repair of
win 7. After 1-2 attempts the boot folder will be created in C:


Why is that? Linux does
what I tell it to do instead of doing what some corrupt company thinks I
want to do.


I play with linux.

At present I have Mint on my second disk root partition. It is nice.

Having paid 100 dollars for windows 7 home premium oem one year ago i consider
it the best bargain in the world for me as I value my time

Windows 7 is one of the better offerings from Microsoft in my
opinion. Aside from some 64 bit driver issues that I had early on,
it's run decently on my systems. I just prefer Linux because I
find there is less overhead, it runs better on older hardware and
it is easier to debug should I need to. Take mini-dumps for
example. How on earth is an average person going to even begin to
figure out what he needs to download from Microsoft, just to
decode the minidump?
SDK, debugging kit, which platform, 64 bit, 32 bit, does he need
symbol crap downloaded as well and so forth.
It's a total mess.
Ever take a look at the Microsoft site where you get sent if you
Google minidump?
Good luck figuring out what you need.
Chances are you will download an ISO with the SDK and install 3.5
gigabytes of development software you don't need.
Good luck removing it as well.
Why isn't there one single program ie:minidump-reader.exe that the
average person can download, or better yet include it with Windows
in the first place?
At least with Linux, the logs are in English (or your language of
choice) and the user stands some kind of chance of figuring out
what went wrong. At worst, he can at least report the verbiage on
some blog or help group. What does he do with Windows? Bc=1010eh?
Big deal.
Linux is just more well planned and thought out in my opinion.

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 08:35:12 +0000, Student wrote:

Having paid 100 dollars for windows 7 home premium oem one year ago i
consider it the best bargain in the world for me as I value my time

I value my time also -- that's why I like Linux. Faster booting, less disk
thrashing when the OS is booted, no anti-malware or anti-virus worries (no
lost time to the constant updates required for those applications) and an
easy path to updating the OS *and* the applications all at the same time
with one command.

Nothing like that in the Windows world.

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

Windows 7 is one of the better offerings from Microsoft in my
opinion. Aside from some 64 bit driver issues that I had early on,
it's run decently on my systems.


I am not a computer person. I am in the health field

I do like Ubuntu and Mint

However I do not understand the file structure of Linux.

I use Thunderbird for email and Seamonkey as my browser for my win 7 and xp
computers.

Is the Seamonkey "bookmark.html" file from windows and the Thunderbird address book
(abook.mab) interchangeable?

If I can do that then I would use Mint on my Asus Netbook to speed up
the computer. It has XP at the moment

Which directory does it go to in Linux?

On 10/24/2010 11:56 AM, Student wrote:

Windows 7 is one of the better offerings from Microsoft in my
opinion. Aside from some 64 bit driver issues that I had early on,
it's run decently on my systems.


I am not a computer person. I am in the health field

I do like Ubuntu and Mint

However I do not understand the file structure of Linux.

I use Thunderbird for email and Seamonkey as my browser for my win 7 and xp
computers.

Is the Seamonkey "bookmark.html" file from windows and the Thunderbird address book
(abook.mab) interchangeable?

If I can do that then I would use Mint on my Asus Netbook to speed up
the computer. It has XP at the moment

Which directory does it go to in Linux?

You can install Seamonkey in Mint. Yes, they are interchangeable. In
Mint, open your Home and hit Ctrl+H to see the hidden files and you will
find Seamonkey and Thunderbird there (after you've installed Seamonkey,
of course).

--
Alias

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC), Robin T Cockslee
wrote:

Linux just does everything I need[...]

Your needs must be very rudimentary.

A_C

RonB écrivait -
september.org:

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 08:35:12 +0000, Student wrote:

Having paid 100 dollars for windows 7 home premium oem one year ago i
consider it the best bargain in the world for me as I value my time

I value my time also -- that's why I like Linux. Faster booting, less
disk
thrashing when the OS is booted, no anti-malware or anti-virus worries
(no
lost time to the constant updates required for those applications) and an
easy path to updating the OS *and* the applications all at the same time
with one command.

Nothing like that in the Windows world.


I use Windows (7) because the programs I use run under Windows.

BTW no problem, no crash, no BSOD, some bugs in one program but nothing to
do with Windows.

Note the CROSSPOST

Agent_C pulled this Usenet face plant:

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC), Robin T Cockslee
wrote:

Linux just does everything I need[...]

Your needs must be very rudimentary.

Don't be silly. Linux performs pretty much all the functions that Windows
performs, and some that Windows does not (e.g. package management, a
multitude of plug-in desktops of widely varying paradigm, scalability
from embedded devices to supercomputers...).

If Windows suddenly "disappeared", I wouldn't bat an eye. (And I develop
code on Windows.) And the decrease of the load on the Internet (due to bot
and other malware traffic) would speed things up enormously. :-)

That being said, Windows 7 is a great improvement over Vista, though you
still find seams in it after extensive usage. Enjoy it!

--
Gilbert's Discovery:
Any attempt to use the new super glues results in the two pieces
sticking to your thumb and index finger rather than to each other.

On 10/24/2010 7:55 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:


If Windows suddenly "disappeared", I wouldn't bat an eye.

This is a flat-out lie as this clown makes his living programming on the
MS platform. This hypocrite couldn't get a job on the Linux platform if
his life depended upon it. COLA crows in general are full of bull****
and lies.

Robin T Cockslee wrote:
I have to admit that Windows 7 is most likely the bestest version of
Windows since Windows 2000 but even still I have removed it from my
Dell system in favor of Linux Ubuntu which I just upgraded to Ubuntu
10.10 from
10.04 with not a single trouble. Linux just does everything I need
and does it for free. I can compile a slim kernel to use on my P4
system or I can have a fat kernel for my i7 system. It's my choice.
Windows 7 puts an extra 100 mb partition on my drive that I don't
want. Why is that? Linux does what I tell it to do instead of doing
what some corrupt company thinks I want to do. I use my Garmin GPS,
Android phone, Sansa mp3 player and my Sony USB turntable with Linux
and have no problems. So why spend $165 on Windows 7? I've been
asking myself the same question. Time to ebay the dung pile and get
back at least some of my money. Linux may not be the most popular
system but in my opinion it's the best, at least for me.

You do know with modern HD sizes a 100mb is worth around a 1 cent, right?
I know my Sansa I had to change some setting to get it work correctly with
Windows and Linux, without thier software, but mine is a few years old so
they may have changed it. I know my Netgear WG111T (wireless) USB was a
pain to get it to run under Ubuntu, I wonder if they made as easy as Window
now with 10.10?
There are cheaper options to get Windows 7 than $165, it would have been
nice to know which version of Window 7 you meant.

I am glad you like Linux but most people don't upgrade the OS other than
getting a new Computer.

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

I assume you mean most people in the USA. Here in Spain, most people buy
computers to order unless it's a laptop and I know many people who own
laptops and the first thing they did was nuke Windows and install Linux.

--
Alias

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

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

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

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



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

--
Alias

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

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



Let's see, how did you come up with that figure? Supposedly, there are
about 1 billion computers on line in the world which would mean, according
to your figures, that there a 50 million Linux users. Fact is, however,
that no one knows how many Linux installs there are because Linux doesn't
need to be activated or become "genuine" and there are no store receipts
to count like there is with Windows.

web stats don't need receipts. it counts everybody equally no matter where
or how they got their os.

got any credible stats that show linux having more than 5% market share?

of course you do not.


I suspect if you take the stats of the backwards USA out of the picture,
the user share for Linux would be much higher. After all, only the USA
could have such ignorant, biased bigots running for congress like there
are today. Those same supporters of Beck, Limbaugh, Palin, O'Donnell and
Rand Paul don't know any better than to order a computer from Best Buy
with Windows preloaded.

I never knew that only republicans buy computers with Windows preloaded.