For those who think Linux is the greatest since sliced bread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill Yanaire
  • Start date Start date
B

Bill Yanaire

A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
not ready for prime time.


Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.

I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer know-how,
but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I purchased a full
computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them myself. I've installed
Windows more times than I can count. Not just simple installs, by the way,
but rather complicated installs with multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not
bragging, just setting the scene.

Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
internet to figure out the problem.

Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of the
websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge thing.
It's been around forever.

Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which conflict
with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with Firefox
open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't even
customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes even
now. It is crap.

This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't have
as much experience with them, because they actually are well designed. Linux
is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many cooks spoil the pot?
There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled pot, all over the place.

Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell, with
Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the point
of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?

I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical, and
completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
that's so difficult, isn't it?

That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated for
even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its ridiculous
learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.

One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows could
say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it your
time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.

So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I wait
for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I will
install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression right
the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global group-hugs. And
you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate. Revel in enjoyment
that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows (whatever its faults)
is actually a system people can use.

And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of what I
said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical meaning
in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product. It follows
no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the point that it
never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary, it turns on,
tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you worry that one
day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of its own vomit.

Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to Vista.
I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to Ubuntu, just
for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to either wade
through it or ignore it.

Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying it's
so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting comparison.
Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on me) that's
exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
 
Bill, hate to tell you this, but if you are in the U.S. tomorrow is
Thanksgiving and FedEx doesn't deliver on Holidays.

"Bill Yanaire" wrote:

> A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
> not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>
> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer know-how,
> but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I purchased a full
> computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them myself. I've installed
> Windows more times than I can count. Not just simple installs, by the way,
> but rather complicated installs with multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not
> bragging, just setting the scene.
>
> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
> internet to figure out the problem.
>
> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of the
> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge thing.
> It's been around forever.
>
> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which conflict
> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with Firefox
> open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't even
> customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes even
> now. It is crap.
>
> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't have
> as much experience with them, because they actually are well designed. Linux
> is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many cooks spoil the pot?
> There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled pot, all over the place.
>
> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell, with
> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the point
> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
>
> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical, and
> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
> that's so difficult, isn't it?
>
> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated for
> even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its ridiculous
> learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
>
> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows could
> say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it your
> time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
>
> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I wait
> for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I will
> install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression right
> the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global group-hugs. And
> you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate. Revel in enjoyment
> that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows (whatever its faults)
> is actually a system people can use.
>
> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of what I
> said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical meaning
> in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product. It follows
> no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the point that it
> never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary, it turns on,
> tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you worry that one
> day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of its own vomit.
>
> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to Vista.
> I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to Ubuntu, just
> for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to either wade
> through it or ignore it.
>
> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying it's
> so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting comparison.
> Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on me) that's
> exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
>
>
>
 
"LarryE" <LarryE@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C805627D-C24F-4288-9FA6-E00C8E5C805E@microsoft.com...
> Bill, hate to tell you this, but if you are in the U.S. tomorrow is
> Thanksgiving and FedEx doesn't deliver on Holidays.


That's OK. The first sentence in my post was: A Friend sent me a post!!!!
Just passing it along. :-)

>
> "Bill Yanaire" wrote:
>
>> A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
>> just
>> not ready for prime time.
>>
>>
>> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
>> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
>> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>>
>> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer
>> know-how,
>> but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I purchased a
>> full
>> computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them myself. I've
>> installed
>> Windows more times than I can count. Not just simple installs, by the
>> way,
>> but rather complicated installs with multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not
>> bragging, just setting the scene.
>>
>> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
>> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
>> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
>> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
>> internet to figure out the problem.
>>
>> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In
>> some
>> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
>> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of
>> the
>> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge
>> thing.
>> It's been around forever.
>>
>> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which
>> conflict
>> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with
>> Firefox
>> open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't even
>> customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes even
>> now. It is crap.
>>
>> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
>> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
>> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't
>> have
>> as much experience with them, because they actually are well designed.
>> Linux
>> is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many cooks spoil the
>> pot?
>> There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled pot, all over the
>> place.
>>
>> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
>> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell,
>> with
>> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the
>> point
>> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
>>
>> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical,
>> and
>> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
>> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
>> that's so difficult, isn't it?
>>
>> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
>> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
>> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated
>> for
>> even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its
>> ridiculous
>> learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
>>
>> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
>> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows
>> could
>> say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it your
>> time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
>>
>> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I
>> wait
>> for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I
>> will
>> install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression
>> right
>> the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global group-hugs.
>> And
>> you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate. Revel in
>> enjoyment
>> that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows (whatever its
>> faults)
>> is actually a system people can use.
>>
>> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of
>> what I
>> said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical
>> meaning
>> in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product. It
>> follows
>> no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the point that it
>> never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary, it turns on,
>> tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you worry that
>> one
>> day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of its own vomit.
>>
>> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to
>> Vista.
>> I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to Ubuntu,
>> just
>> for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to either wade
>> through it or ignore it.
>>
>> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying
>> it's
>> so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting comparison.
>> Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on me) that's
>> exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
>>
>>
>>
 
LOL That's what's called "selective reading".

Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Larry

"Bill Yanaire" wrote:

>
> "LarryE" <LarryE@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C805627D-C24F-4288-9FA6-E00C8E5C805E@microsoft.com...
> > Bill, hate to tell you this, but if you are in the U.S. tomorrow is
> > Thanksgiving and FedEx doesn't deliver on Holidays.

>
> That's OK. The first sentence in my post was: A Friend sent me a post!!!!
> Just passing it along. :-)
>
> >
> > "Bill Yanaire" wrote:
> >
> >> A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
> >> just
> >> not ready for prime time.
> >>
> >>
> >> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> >> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> >> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
> >>
> >> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer
> >> know-how,
> >> but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I purchased a
> >> full
> >> computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them myself. I've
> >> installed
> >> Windows more times than I can count. Not just simple installs, by the
> >> way,
> >> but rather complicated installs with multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not
> >> bragging, just setting the scene.
> >>
> >> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
> >> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> >> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
> >> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
> >> internet to figure out the problem.
> >>
> >> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In
> >> some
> >> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
> >> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of
> >> the
> >> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge
> >> thing.
> >> It's been around forever.
> >>
> >> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which
> >> conflict
> >> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with
> >> Firefox
> >> open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't even
> >> customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes even
> >> now. It is crap.
> >>
> >> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
> >> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
> >> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't
> >> have
> >> as much experience with them, because they actually are well designed.
> >> Linux
> >> is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many cooks spoil the
> >> pot?
> >> There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled pot, all over the
> >> place.
> >>
> >> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
> >> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell,
> >> with
> >> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the
> >> point
> >> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
> >>
> >> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical,
> >> and
> >> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
> >> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
> >> that's so difficult, isn't it?
> >>
> >> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
> >> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
> >> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated
> >> for
> >> even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its
> >> ridiculous
> >> learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
> >>
> >> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
> >> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows
> >> could
> >> say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it your
> >> time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
> >>
> >> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I
> >> wait
> >> for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I
> >> will
> >> install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression
> >> right
> >> the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global group-hugs.
> >> And
> >> you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate. Revel in
> >> enjoyment
> >> that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows (whatever its
> >> faults)
> >> is actually a system people can use.
> >>
> >> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of
> >> what I
> >> said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical
> >> meaning
> >> in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product. It
> >> follows
> >> no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the point that it
> >> never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary, it turns on,
> >> tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you worry that
> >> one
> >> day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of its own vomit.
> >>
> >> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to
> >> Vista.
> >> I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to Ubuntu,
> >> just
> >> for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to either wade
> >> through it or ignore it.
> >>
> >> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying
> >> it's
> >> so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting comparison.
> >> Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on me) that's
> >> exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
> >>
> >>
> >>

>
>
>
 
"Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
>not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.



....the very definition of a troll.
 
"john" <john@msn.com> wrote in message
news:eTqyPLHLIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
> "Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
> news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
>>just not ready for prime time.
>>
>>
>> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
>> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
>> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.

>
>
> ...the very definition of a troll.


Well now, if you feel that you are a troll, you shouldn't be posting here.
Just FYI.

>
>
 
Tell your mate, the proper saying is: "Too many cooks spoil the broth"

"Bill Yanaire" wrote:

> A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
> not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>
> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer know-how,
> but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I purchased a full
> computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them myself. I've installed
> Windows more times than I can count. Not just simple installs, by the way,
> but rather complicated installs with multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not
> bragging, just setting the scene.
>
> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
> internet to figure out the problem.
>
> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of the
> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge thing.
> It's been around forever.
>
> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which conflict
> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with Firefox
> open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't even
> customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes even
> now. It is crap.
>
> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't have
> as much experience with them, because they actually are well designed. Linux
> is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many cooks spoil the pot?
> There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled pot, all over the place.
>
> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell, with
> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the point
> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
>
> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical, and
> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
> that's so difficult, isn't it?
>
> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated for
> even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its ridiculous
> learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
>
> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows could
> say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it your
> time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
>
> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I wait
> for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I will
> install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression right
> the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global group-hugs. And
> you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate. Revel in enjoyment
> that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows (whatever its faults)
> is actually a system people can use.
>
> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of what I
> said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical meaning
> in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product. It follows
> no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the point that it
> never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary, it turns on,
> tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you worry that one
> day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of its own vomit.
>
> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to Vista.
> I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to Ubuntu, just
> for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to either wade
> through it or ignore it.
>
> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying it's
> so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting comparison.
> Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on me) that's
> exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
>
>
>
 
"Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
news:egjGJOHLIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "john" <john@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:eTqyPLHLIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
>> news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
>>>just not ready for prime time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
>>> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
>>> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.

>>
>>
>> ...the very definition of a troll.

>
> Well now, if you feel that you are a troll, you shouldn't be posting here.
> Just FYI.
>
>


....and a stupid one at that.
 
"john" <john@msn.com> wrote in message
news:OZ6g6vILIHA.2432@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
> news:egjGJOHLIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "john" <john@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:eTqyPLHLIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
>>>>just not ready for prime time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It
>>>> doesn't work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come
>>>> out of the woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>>>
>>>
>>> ...the very definition of a troll.

>>
>> Well now, if you feel that you are a troll, you shouldn't be posting
>> here. Just FYI.
>>
>>

>
> ...and a stupid one at that.


Now John, don't be so hard on yourself. Tomorrow is Thanksgiving. Just FYI

>
>
 
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:30:34 -0800, Bill Yanaire wrote:

> A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is
> just not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>
> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer
> know-how, but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I
> purchased a full computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them
> myself. I've installed Windows more times than I can count. Not just
> simple installs, by the way, but rather complicated installs with
> multiple RAID arrays, etc. Not bragging, just setting the scene.
>
> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs,
> a variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And
> that was just to get my screen working at its native resolution.
> Thankfully I have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able
> to use the internet to figure out the problem.


Odd, all I do is click "enable" next to the driver. It's so much simpler,
no installs, no command-line scripts, no workarounds. Just...click a
button. Oh, and one reboot for the driver to take effect.

>
> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In
> some cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No
> flash games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words,
> 75% of the websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this
> cutting edge thing. It's been around forever.


Hmmm, yea I suppose clicking the install button when Firefox so nicely
asks me if I'd like to install the Adobe Flash Button is an exceedingly
difficult task. Took me a whole fraction of a second to do it. Terrible.

<snip remainder of bs>


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®äº‹æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®äº‹å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Linux is different from Windows so a slightly different skill set is needed
to install and use it. That said - I've done thousands of Windows installs
and hundreds of Linux installs. With the latest main stream distros and main
stream hardware they are both easy to install for someone with minimum pc
experience. I use Vista and Linux. I don't prefer one over the other. Both
have their place and are better at doing some things than the other.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca


"Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
>not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>
> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer
> know-how, but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I
> purchased a full computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them
> myself. I've installed Windows more times than I can count. Not just
> simple installs, by the way, but rather complicated installs with multiple
> RAID arrays, etc. Not bragging, just setting the scene.
>
> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
> internet to figure out the problem.
>
> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of the
> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge
> thing. It's been around forever.
>
> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which conflict
> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with
> Firefox open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't
> even customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes
> even now. It is crap.
>
> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't
> have as much experience with them, because they actually are well
> designed. Linux is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many
> cooks spoil the pot? There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled
> pot, all over the place.
>
> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell, with
> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the point
> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
>
> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical, and
> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
> that's so difficult, isn't it?
>
> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated
> for even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its
> ridiculous learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
>
> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows
> could say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it
> your time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
>
> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I
> wait for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I
> will install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression
> right the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global
> group-hugs. And you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate.
> Revel in enjoyment that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows
> (whatever its faults) is actually a system people can use.
>
> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of what
> I said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical
> meaning in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product.
> It follows no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the
> point that it never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary,
> it turns on, tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you
> worry that one day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of
> its own vomit.
>
> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to
> Vista. I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to
> Ubuntu, just for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to
> either wade through it or ignore it.
>
> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying
> it's so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting
> comparison. Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on
> me) that's exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
>
 
I have never advocated Linux for beginners.
I installed it on 30 older boxes that do some word processing,
email/internet and run terminal emulation software to access our AS800
server.
For that it works fine, it's not expected to be used like a home PC with all
the downloads, media players, burners, games, etc.
But from what I have seen of Vista, people may give Linux a spin just
because Vista is such a pain.
If you're going to use something you don't like anyway, it might as well be
free.
--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!
CarGodZeroOne@hotmail.com
Change Alpha to Numeric to reply

"Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
news:OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>A friend sent me a post after working with Linux for awhile. Linux is just
>not ready for prime time.
>
>
> Ok, I thought Linux would be fun. But it's not. You know why? It doesn't
> work. It doesn't do squat. Let's see how fast the nerds come out of the
> woodwork to ream me out. But I am going to tell the truth.
>
> I didn't have high hopes. I knew that Linux demanded some computer
> know-how, but I'm a very experienced computer user. The last time I
> purchased a full computer system was 1998. Since then I've built them
> myself. I've installed Windows more times than I can count. Not just
> simple installs, by the way, but rather complicated installs with multiple
> RAID arrays, etc. Not bragging, just setting the scene.
>
> Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
> variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> was just to get my screen working at its native resolution. Thankfully I
> have two computers at my desk, or I wouldn't have been able to use the
> internet to figure out the problem.
>
> Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
> cases (mine, as it turns out) it is impossible. So, no YouTube. No flash
> games. No even moderately complicated websites. In other words, 75% of the
> websites I visit don't work. It's not like Flash is this cutting edge
> thing. It's been around forever.
>
> Every piece of software has its own idiosyncrasies, some of which conflict
> with each other. I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with
> Firefox open. Why? I have no idea. It was the first thing I did. I hadn't
> even customized the operating system at all. It crashed. It still crashes
> even now. It is crap.
>
> This wouldn't bother me if it weren't for the ridiculous defense of Linux
> put up by its fanboys. It's easy, they say, you've just got to think
> differently. I can think fine. I can work on a Mac, even though I don't
> have as much experience with them, because they actually are well
> designed. Linux is a complete disaster. You know that saying, too many
> cooks spoil the pot? There is a lot of spoiled pot here, people. Spoiled
> pot, all over the place.
>
> Just watch what happens when you mention Windows. The nerds come out in
> force then. Vista sucks, they say. It's slow. It's got spyware. Hell, with
> Linux I don't need spyware--the thing trashes itself. But what's the point
> of getting on the internet without spyware if none of the websites work?
>
> I'm not even going to try to explain the convoluted, overly technical, and
> completely buggy way software is installed. It's so easy, they say. Well,
> it's not so difficult on Windows, either. Download. Double click. Damn,
> that's so difficult, isn't it?
>
> That would all be fine if Linux boosters didn't constantly claim that
> everyday computer users could use Linux with little or no loss of
> functionality, and with little training. Bull. It is way too complicated
> for even basic tasks. If I don't have the patience to deal with its
> ridiculous learning curve, I'm sure most people don't.
>
> One guy actually said that Linux was easier than doing a fresh install of
> Windows XP. Only someone who has never done a clean install of Windows
> could say it is difficult. You put the CD in. Click a few buttons. Tell it
> your time zone. Voila. Done. Difficult? No.
>
> So, why did I do this? Mostly, I needed to get to the internet while I
> wait for Vista to arrive in the mail, likely tomorrow. And when it does, I
> will install that resource-hogging, bloated, tool of corporate oppression
> right the hell over Ubuntu Linux, the supposed software of global
> group-hugs. And you know what I will do then? Rejoice. Laugh. Celebrate.
> Revel in enjoyment that only a true nerd can appreciate. Because Windows
> (whatever its faults) is actually a system people can use.
>
> And so, in this moment of rejoicing, I will engage in a little bit of what
> I said yesterday was BS. I will invest a hearty amount of metaphysical
> meaning in Ubuntu Linux. It is every bit a hippie piece-of-crap product.
> It follows no discernible rules. It revels in chaotic freedom, to the
> point that it never knows what it is doing. With apologies to Tim Leary,
> it turns on, tunes in...and then drops out. And like a hippie junky, you
> worry that one day you're going to find your computer dead in a pool of
> its own vomit.
>
> Do I sound irritated? I am. Just for the record, I'll do the same to
> Vista. I'll report all the difficulties I run into and compare them to
> Ubuntu, just for fun. And you poor non-nerds out there will just have to
> either wade through it or ignore it.
>
> Stop comparing Linux to Vista! the nerds kept saying. Well stop saying
> it's so much better than Vista, then! All you're doing is inviting
> comparison. Well, starting tomorrow (less the FedEx gods' wrath falls on
> me) that's exactly what I'm going to do. Mwuwahahaha!
>
 
"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:pMOdnZUe2-RjKtnanZ2dnUVZ8qGdnZ2d@giganews.com...


> Hmmm, yea I suppose clicking the install button when Firefox so nicely
> asks me if I'd like to install the Adobe Flash Button is an exceedingly
> difficult task. Took me a whole fraction of a second to do it. Terrible.
>


Funny enough.. it asked me to click that button when I booted the Ubuntu
7.10 live CD.
It didn't work when I did.
It couldn't run java either so I erased the CD to use for something else.
Ubuntu appears to be the worst distro of linux I have ever tried, Suse seems
significantly better.
 
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:58:28 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
> news:pMOdnZUe2-RjKtnanZ2dnUVZ8qGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
>
>> Hmmm, yea I suppose clicking the install button when Firefox so nicely
>> asks me if I'd like to install the Adobe Flash Button is an exceedingly
>> difficult task. Took me a whole fraction of a second to do it.
>> Terrible.
>>
>>

> Funny enough.. it asked me to click that button when I booted the Ubuntu
> 7.10 live CD.
> It didn't work when I did.
> It couldn't run java either so I erased the CD to use for something
> else. Ubuntu appears to be the worst distro of linux I have ever tried,
> Suse seems significantly better.


It's no problem when the OS is actually installed. I've done it often
enough after all to know. Live CD I can't really comment on as the only
thing I use the LiveCD is to install. However, "installing things" on the
LiveCD generally doesn't work very well as the file system is very
limited, it runs entirely in RAM after all. That's probably why the flash
plugin failed to install.

And actually, these days, I usually just use the alternate install CD
instead rather than the LiveCD. It loads faster than the LiveCD does due
to not having a graphical GUI, uses a Win9x style installer instead which
is just as simple to use and the only thing I need the CD for anyway is
to install.

I personally don't really care for running an OS from removable media.
It's slow and cumbersome.

Can't really compare to Suse, never used it. Though seeing how it uses
KDE, that is an instant turn off for me. I don't like KDE at all. I
prefer the simplicity of Gnome.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:26:46 -0800, Kerry Brown wrote:

> Linux is different from Windows so a slightly different skill set is
> needed to install and use it. That said - I've done thousands of Windows
> installs and hundreds of Linux installs. With the latest main stream
> distros and main stream hardware they are both easy to install for
> someone with minimum pc experience. I use Vista and Linux. I don't
> prefer one over the other. Both have their place and are better at doing
> some things than the other.


Finally someone with common sense and reasoning. A rare thing these days.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Quite frankly, I'm not impressed with sliced bread - I'd rather slice it
myself and have more control over what I'm getting - thin slice when I
want that thick slice when I want that.

I'm not disputing what you say in the slightest. I believe you when you
said you difficulties with Linux. But, in all honesty, it would lend more
credence to your claims if you documented a little better: what Linux
distribution what version what computer what graphic card what did you
try for flash.

This calendar year, I've installed Fedora, Open SuSE, SuSE Linux
Enterprise, Mandriva, Debian, Xandros, Sabayon, Ubuntu and Gentoo on a
variety of Compaq, Gateway, Everex and VIA mini-itx systems with Nvidia,
Intel and VIA graphics sets and never once had any difficulty with the
video setup. Recently, installing a 19" widescreen LCD was simply a matter
of shutting down to change monitors, rebooting and redecting the monitor.
I'm currently using that via a KVM switch on a Gentoo mini-itx and a
desktop Ubuntu 7.04 installation.

Just the other day my wife was using her new Ubuntu 7.10 install on her
Everex (walmart special) computer and happened to a 'flash' web page. She
encountered a box on the page which said 'click here to install plugin'.
She did and it did. Restarted the browser and it displayed properly.

Software is quite simple with Ubuntu, using 'synaptic'. Open synaptic,
search for the package you want, right click to select and click to
'apply'. And it's free. And the only time you might have to reboot is if
an update installs a new kernel.
 
In article <OT1kOvFLIHA.4948@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>,
Bill Yanaire <bill@yanaire.com> wrote:
> [...]
>Just setting up my video card correctly required two separate installs, a
>variety of command-line scripts, and a rather clunky workaround. And that
> [...]
>Then came the internet. There is no easy way to get Flash working. In some
>[...]
>I was crashing when I tried to run Open Office with Firefox open.


Wow. What are you running, Slackware .9?

Oh. Ubuntu. I'm not very familiar with that, but I don't have
those kinds of problems in other Linux variants.
 
Back
Top