PCLinuxOs...

[xfile]

> Does "Joe Average" go out, buy an OS, and install it on their computer?
> No, "Joe Average" generally does not do that. Sure, there are
> exceptions...but generally speaking, "Joe Average" simply goes out and
> buys a computer with the OS pre-installed.

Agreed. So what is the point for the neverending OS advocacy in here?


> What I am trying to get at is that everyone focuses too much on the one
> thing that most uses do the list: "Installing the OS".

Not everyone. It's Linux advocates by asking people coming to here to
switch to a new OS.

> And in that regard, I just recently set up a co-worker with Ubuntu who had
> a WinXP install so horribly messed up it was beyond repair. His level of
> technical knowledge is so low that he thought having 60
> concurrently running malware, spyware and virus processes was normal. No,
> I am not exaggerating. I counted them.Ya really think he would be able to
> install any version of windows or would know where to even start? Even if
> said installation were easier than say Ubuntu?

> He's had absolutely zero problems with Ubuntu once I installed and
> configured it. He just happily uses it. Reinstalling XP would have been
> pointless as it would have been a matter of time until it became that
> infected with crap again.


No doubt at all, and in this case, you are the OEM. I along countless
others suggested that you guys will have a better result by spending your
efforts on OEM's and application providers who then will deliver Linux as
part of a solution. Most people coming here to ask questions are end users
(a.k.a. Joe Average) and regulars are geeks who have determined already.

So again, what's the poing for annoying people here?


"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:WdGdnaDrE9-Wvj_bRVnyiQA@giganews.com...
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 02:23:05 -0400, Lang Murphy wrote:
>
>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't ready
>> for
>> "Joe Normal."
>>
>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that said,
>> I
>> d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried installing it on a
>> laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>
>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK. Got
>> to
>> the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one access the
>> local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh... then open "Remote
>> Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive the msg "The Lisa
>> daemon
>> does not appear to be running. In order to use the LAN browser, the Lisa
>> daemon must be installed and activated by the system administrator."
>>
>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from nix
>> folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>
>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>
>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
>> the
>> "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
>> install
>> and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>
>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>> Were
>> one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the Lisa
>> daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it out -eventually-,
>> right?
>>
>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That said...
>> when
>> I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop that takes me
>> right
>> to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa daemon" stuff...
>>
>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope to
>> claim otherwise.
>>
>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>> might
>> be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>
>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>
>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>
> Well I am telling you Ubuntu. Go there, do that again. =P
>
> As far as I am concerned, it is by far the most newbie friendly.
> Everything else doesn't even register on the radar for me honestly.
>
> Though, disregarding OS, I think we all forget one big thing.
>
> Does "Joe Average" go out, buy an OS, and install it on their computer?
> No, "Joe Average" generally does not do that. Sure, there are
> exceptions...but generally speaking, "Joe Average" simply goes out and
> buys a computer with the OS pre-installed.
>
> "Joe Average" would likely have plenty of problems installing and
> configuring *any* operating system, I don't care who makes it and what it
> is called. There can be a fair share of problems installing windows too.
> Right now I am dealing with the problem that my file system under XP isn't
> quite toast yet but appears to have damage from somewhere (non-hardware
> related, disk passes any and all tests I have thrown at it). But I also
> can't re-install XP because not a *single* XP install CD I have, and I
> have several, will boot on this computer (*nix live CDs as well as the
> maxtor diagnostic cd boot fine though ruling out a problem with the
> drive)! Appears that the problem resides with the XP Setup's inability to
> handle certain types of partitions or too many of them causing it to
> freeze in the very beginning.
>
> Could "Joe Average" deal with this? Actually yea Joe Average could...by
> taking it to a computer shop and having the OS installed for them...
>
> What I am trying to get at is that everyone focuses too much on the one
> thing that most uses do the list: "Installing the OS".
>
> This can be anything ranging from a pleasant experience to an absolute
> nightmare with every OS depending on the hardware thrown at it. Vista
> Included!
>
> What's more important, and nobody appears to care about this, is using the
> OS once it is installed and configured. I rank that far higher than any
> problems I could ever encounter when installing and configuring an OS.
>
> And in that regard, I just recently set up a co-worker with Ubuntu who had
> a WinXP install so horribly messed up it was beyond repair. His level of
> technical knowledge is so low that he thought having 60
> concurrently running malware, spyware and virus processes was normal. No,
> I am not exaggerating. I counted them.Ya really think he would be able to
> install any version of windows or would know where to even start? Even if
> said installation were easier than say Ubuntu?
>
> He's had absolutely zero problems with Ubuntu once I installed and
> configured it. He just happily uses it. Reinstalling XP would have been
> pointless as it would have been a matter of time until it became that
> infected with crap again.
>
> --
> Stephan
> 2003 Yamaha R6
>
> §g???«ä?¥X?¤é???????
> §g???§Ñ?????????

 

[xfile]

Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?




"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> xfile wrote:
>> Thanks for sharing.
>>
>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>
>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer". Over
>> years, they have been told countless times but they are too proud to take
>> any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people don't appreciate
>> their works. LOL.
>>
>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>> finished car.
>>
>> My two cents.
>
> Your sweeping generalizations.
>
> Alias
>>
>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't ready
>>> for "Joe Normal."
>>>
>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried installing
>>> it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>
>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK. Got
>>> to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one access
>>> the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh... then open
>>> "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive the msg "The
>>> Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to use the LAN
>>> browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated by the system
>>> administrator."
>>>
>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from nix
>>> folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>
>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>
>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
>>> the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
>>> install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>
>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>>> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
>>> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>
>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That said...
>>> when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop that takes
>>> me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa daemon"
>>> stuff...
>>>
>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope to
>>> claim otherwise.
>>>
>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>>> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>
>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>
>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>
>>> Lang
>>

 

[Stephan Rose]

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:04:23 -0700, xfile wrote:

>> Does "Joe Average" go out, buy an OS, and install it on their computer?
>> No, "Joe Average" generally does not do that. Sure, there are
>> exceptions...but generally speaking, "Joe Average" simply goes out and
>> buys a computer with the OS pre-installed.
>
> Agreed. So what is the point for the neverending OS advocacy in here?

Don't ask me, I don't know. =)

>
>
>> What I am trying to get at is that everyone focuses too much on the one
>> thing that most uses do the list: "Installing the OS".
>
> Not everyone. It's Linux advocates by asking people coming to here to
> switch to a new OS.

I generally don't unless someone directs specific questions at me about it.

>
>> And in that regard, I just recently set up a co-worker with Ubuntu who had
>> a WinXP install so horribly messed up it was beyond repair. His level of
>> technical knowledge is so low that he thought having 60
>> concurrently running malware, spyware and virus processes was normal. No,
>> I am not exaggerating. I counted them.Ya really think he would be able to
>> install any version of windows or would know where to even start? Even if
>> said installation were easier than say Ubuntu?
>
>> He's had absolutely zero problems with Ubuntu once I installed and
>> configured it. He just happily uses it. Reinstalling XP would have been
>> pointless as it would have been a matter of time until it became that
>> infected with crap again.
>
>
> No doubt at all, and in this case, you are the OEM. I along countless
> others suggested that you guys will have a better result by spending your
> efforts on OEM's and application providers who then will deliver Linux as
> part of a solution. Most people coming here to ask questions are end users
> (a.k.a. Joe Average) and regulars are geeks who have determined already.
>
> So again, what's the poing for annoying people here?

You'd need to ask Alias that....

I usually only answer to posts such as the one by the original poster if I
feel I have something to add to it that is constructive. I don't go around
posting "Get Ubuntu" to users with Vista Problems nor do I engage in
pissing contest like some people here like to do.

So dunno, can't really answer that question. =)

--
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‚‰

 

[xfile]

Well, to be honest, you are just more skillful and careful than Alias but
what you two and others have been doing are pretty much the same. And it's
the same for Vista and MS fanbois.

I'm not a Vista or Microsoft fan and we are considering alternatives
including Linux for server side but certainly won't appreciate your
consistent preach on Linux.

Well, that's about it.


"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:OdWdnbcyjZYVPD_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:04:23 -0700, xfile wrote:
>
>>> Does "Joe Average" go out, buy an OS, and install it on their computer?
>>> No, "Joe Average" generally does not do that. Sure, there are
>>> exceptions...but generally speaking, "Joe Average" simply goes out and
>>> buys a computer with the OS pre-installed.
>>
>> Agreed. So what is the point for the neverending OS advocacy in here?
>
> Don't ask me, I don't know. =)
>
>>
>>
>>> What I am trying to get at is that everyone focuses too much on the one
>>> thing that most uses do the list: "Installing the OS".
>>
>> Not everyone. It's Linux advocates by asking people coming to here to
>> switch to a new OS.
>
> I generally don't unless someone directs specific questions at me about
> it.
>
>>
>>> And in that regard, I just recently set up a co-worker with Ubuntu who
>>> had
>>> a WinXP install so horribly messed up it was beyond repair. His level of
>>> technical knowledge is so low that he thought having 60
>>> concurrently running malware, spyware and virus processes was normal.
>>> No,
>>> I am not exaggerating. I counted them.Ya really think he would be able
>>> to
>>> install any version of windows or would know where to even start? Even
>>> if
>>> said installation were easier than say Ubuntu?
>>
>>> He's had absolutely zero problems with Ubuntu once I installed and
>>> configured it. He just happily uses it. Reinstalling XP would have been
>>> pointless as it would have been a matter of time until it became that
>>> infected with crap again.
>>
>>
>> No doubt at all, and in this case, you are the OEM. I along countless
>> others suggested that you guys will have a better result by spending your
>> efforts on OEM's and application providers who then will deliver Linux as
>> part of a solution. Most people coming here to ask questions are end
>> users
>> (a.k.a. Joe Average) and regulars are geeks who have determined already.
>>
>> So again, what's the poing for annoying people here?
>
> You'd need to ask Alias that....
>
> I usually only answer to posts such as the one by the original poster if I
> feel I have something to add to it that is constructive. I don't go around
> posting "Get Ubuntu" to users with Vista Problems nor do I engage in
> pissing contest like some people here like to do.
>
> So dunno, can't really answer that question. =)
>
> --
> Stephan
> 2003 Yamaha R6
>
> §g???«ä?¥X?¤é???????
> §g???§Ñ?????????

 

[Tim Judd]

xfile wrote:
> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?

Not likely. Just one of those people who but in long enough to disagree
and then splits.

> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> xfile wrote:
>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>
>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>
>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer". Over
>>> years, they have been told countless times but they are too proud to take
>>> any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people don't appreciate
>>> their works. LOL.
>>>
>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>> finished car.
>>>
>>> My two cents.
>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>
>> Alias
>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't ready
>>>> for "Joe Normal."
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried installing
>>>> it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>
>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK. Got
>>>> to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one access
>>>> the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh... then open
>>>> "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive the msg "The
>>>> Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to use the LAN
>>>> browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated by the system
>>>> administrator."
>>>>
>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from nix
>>>> folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>
>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>
>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
>>>> the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
>>>> install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>
>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>>>> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
>>>> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>
>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That said...
>>>> when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop that takes
>>>> me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa daemon"
>>>> stuff...
>>>>
>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope to
>>>> claim otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>>>> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>
>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>
>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>
>>>> Lang
>

 

[Alias]

xfile wrote:
> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?

"Linux are for techies"

I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an
eight year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the
imagination, techies.

Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it
(patents and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?

The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
want to switch to a new OS.

Alias
>
>
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> xfile wrote:
>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>
>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>
>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer". Over
>>> years, they have been told countless times but they are too proud to take
>>> any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people don't appreciate
>>> their works. LOL.
>>>
>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>> finished car.
>>>
>>> My two cents.
>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>
>> Alias
>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't ready
>>>> for "Joe Normal."
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried installing
>>>> it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>
>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK. Got
>>>> to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one access
>>>> the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh... then open
>>>> "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive the msg "The
>>>> Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to use the LAN
>>>> browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated by the system
>>>> administrator."
>>>>
>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from nix
>>>> folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>
>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>
>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
>>>> the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
>>>> install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>
>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>>>> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
>>>> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>
>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That said...
>>>> when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop that takes
>>>> me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa daemon"
>>>> stuff...
>>>>
>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope to
>>>> claim otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>>>> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>
>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>
>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>
>>>> Lang
>

 

[Alias]

Tim Judd wrote:
> xfile wrote:
>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?

Read my reply. Sorry it wasn't quick enough for you but I do other
things besides post here.

Alias
>
> Not likely. Just one of those people who but in long enough to disagree
> and then splits.
>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> xfile wrote:
>>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just
>>>> like other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do
>>>> DIY needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>>
>>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer".
>>>> Over years, they have been told countless times but they are too
>>>> proud to take any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people
>>>> don't appreciate their works. LOL.
>>>>
>>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>>> finished car.
>>>>
>>>> My two cents.
>>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't
>>>>> ready for "Joe Normal."
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried
>>>>> installing it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>>
>>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went
>>>>> OK. Got to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How
>>>>> does one access the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh,
>>>>> heh, heh... then open "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network",
>>>>> only to receive the msg "The Lisa daemon does not appear to be
>>>>> running. In order to use the LAN browser, the Lisa daemon must be
>>>>> installed and activated by the system administrator."
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers
>>>>> from nix folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the
>>>>> user? Is the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as
>>>>> administrator and install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>>
>>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe
>>>>> me. Were one to have the time to determine how to install and
>>>>> activate the Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure
>>>>> it out -eventually-, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That
>>>>> said... when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop
>>>>> that takes me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install
>>>>> Lisa daemon" stuff...
>>>>>
>>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a
>>>>> dope to claim otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones
>>>>> that might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lang
>>

 

[xfile]

You are nothing close to an average user so does your friend and Stephan
Rose, and in all cases, you guys are the OEM for the user.

Just to be clear about one thing, I have nothing to against Linux and
nowhere did I ever say nor imply that Linux is not a good OS.

Which part of mainstream users want to have a "solution" that you don't
understand?

MS and Apple all do that with different ways and what makes you think that
you can fight against consumers?

I have a term reserved for people like you - technical arrogance.


"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:uc$wJRFzHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> xfile wrote:
>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>
> "Linux are for techies"
>
> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an eight
> year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the imagination,
> techies.
>
> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it (patents
> and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>
> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
> want to switch to a new OS.
>
> Alias
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> xfile wrote:
>>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>>
>>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer". Over
>>>> years, they have been told countless times but they are too proud to
>>>> take any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people don't
>>>> appreciate their works. LOL.
>>>>
>>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>>> finished car.
>>>>
>>>> My two cents.
>>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't
>>>>> ready for "Joe Normal."
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried
>>>>> installing it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>>
>>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK.
>>>>> Got to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one
>>>>> access the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh...
>>>>> then open "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive
>>>>> the msg "The Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to
>>>>> use the LAN browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated
>>>>> by the system administrator."
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from
>>>>> nix folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user?
>>>>> Is the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator
>>>>> and install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>>
>>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>>>>> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
>>>>> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That
>>>>> said... when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop
>>>>> that takes me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa
>>>>> daemon" stuff...
>>>>>
>>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope
>>>>> to claim otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>>>>> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lang
>>

 

[Alias]

xfile wrote:
> You are nothing close to an average user so does your friend and Stephan
> Rose, and in all cases, you guys are the OEM for the user.
>
> Just to be clear about one thing, I have nothing to against Linux and
> nowhere did I ever say nor imply that Linux is not a good OS.
>
> Which part of mainstream users want to have a "solution" that you don't
> understand?
>
> MS and Apple all do that with different ways and what makes you think that
> you can fight against consumers?
>
> I have a term reserved for people like you - technical arrogance.

You're not making any sense.

Alias
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:uc$wJRFzHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> xfile wrote:
>>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>> "Linux are for techies"
>>
>> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
>> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
>> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
>> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an eight
>> year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the imagination,
>> techies.
>>
>> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
>> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it (patents
>> and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>>
>> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
>> want to switch to a new OS.
>>
>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> xfile wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer". Over
>>>>> years, they have been told countless times but they are too proud to
>>>>> take any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people don't
>>>>> appreciate their works. LOL.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>>>> finished car.
>>>>>
>>>>> My two cents.
>>>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't
>>>>>> ready for "Joe Normal."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried
>>>>>> installing it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK.
>>>>>> Got to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one
>>>>>> access the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh...
>>>>>> then open "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive
>>>>>> the msg "The Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to
>>>>>> use the LAN browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated
>>>>>> by the system administrator."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from
>>>>>> nix folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user?
>>>>>> Is the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator
>>>>>> and install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
>>>>>> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
>>>>>> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That
>>>>>> said... when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop
>>>>>> that takes me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa
>>>>>> daemon" stuff...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope
>>>>>> to claim otherwise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones that
>>>>>> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lang
>
>

 

[MICHAEL]

* Alias:
> xfile wrote:
>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>
> "Linux are for techies"
>
> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an
> eight year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the
> imagination, techies.
>
> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it
> (patents and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>
> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
> want to switch to a new OS.

Alias, while I agree with you in general about the readiness and
viability of Linux as a mainstream desktop OS, there are most definitely
times when I just think you're blowing smoke, or exaggerating.

WinXP and Vista can be secured properly so that critters and crapware
are not a problem. It's been a long time since I've had any type of
infection on any of my machines. When you were helping the older
lady with her computer when she had XP- did you not properly secure
it for her? Changing a few settings in IE can make big difference. Having
an AV, of course. And anti-spyware. But you know this. Did you do these
things for her? Of course, the best thing you could have done for her
was make her a Limited User account. I seriously doubt a 74 year-old lady
is going to need to mess around in the settings and/or install a bunch of
software. Especially, once you had her setup. I do think it's a good thing
that you have taken the time to help someone... an older person, especially.

When I see folks talk about how they are infected with so much garbage,
I cringe. Of course, it's possible. But there are effective means to properly
secure a Windows' machine, and with a little bit of user education, they can
stay infection free.

Recently I have been speaking up about Linux and especially, PCLinuxOS.
I really like PCLinuxOS. I don't dislike Ubuntu, but for me, PCLinuxOS just
"feels" better. I sincerely hope Linux keeps growing and I want them to
do well.... competition is *never* a bad thing, and I've never understood
why so many Microsoft fan-childs get so defensive. So many of them act
like Microsoft is their mommy or daddy, and when you offer criticism, it's
like you've attacked something sacred of theirs.... quite pitiful, really.
However, that also goes the other way, too. There are lots of die-hard Linux
users who have nothing but contempt for anyone who uses Windows, and
that's a shame, too.

I use Microsoft products and it may be awhile before I even seriously
consider leaving those products behind. I actually want Microsoft to be
better, to make a better OS, and deliver on their hype and promises.
While I do not think Vista is crap, I am quite disappointed, and this is not
coming from someone who tried it and gave up.... I've been using Vista regularly
since June 2006. All I can really say about Vista, it works and might be a bit
more stable than XP... once you get some kinks worked out. It's really not
any faster, and I strongly dislike the poor performance of Windows Explorer.
The expanded intrusions of DRM and WGA are a major concern, and probably
have a lot to do with some of Vista's performance problems. The many problems
folks seem to be having with reactivation just because someone across the street
farted, is getting beyond ridiculous.

Linux is ready now for many users who would like to switch, and it is
only getting better. Windows seems to be stagnant and may be getting
a bit stale. I welcome the competition- it will either make Microsoft better
or destroy them. Time will tell. Linux isn't going away, but behemoths like
Microsoft have come and gone throughout history. They either adapt and
innovate, or they die slow deaths.... think American car companies.

Anyway, that's my Sunday morning preachin'.


-Michael

 

[xfile]

Microsoft deliveries its OS mainly through OEM's and many of its products,
e.g. Office, is part of the solution or enhanced user experience (e.g. games
and hardware) of using the computers.

Techies, hobbyists, and enthusiasts are served as opninon leaders in the
ball game.

Promotions and educational materials are prepared sepcifically for business
and technical professionals as well as for average users.

At early stage, it partnershiped with Intel (not officially) so that it
would gain supports from the most critical hardware component and thus we
have this Wintel term.

Apple, known by everyone, deliveries the solution with everything built by
itself and focus on nice segments.

By the way, to be a nich segment player is not a bad thing. Many nice
products only serve nich segments for highly specialized people with special
tastes and needs, and we are also a nice player.

But if you want to go for the mass market, do it accordinly.

Finally, it is three of you that helped the user to install and configure
the system so that they could enjoy it and that makes you similar to an OEM
or system builder.

Which part doesn't make sense? It is your or Linux's business model doesn't
make any sense.




"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:Oseec1FzHHA.5380@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> xfile wrote:
>> You are nothing close to an average user so does your friend and Stephan
>> Rose, and in all cases, you guys are the OEM for the user.
>>
>> Just to be clear about one thing, I have nothing to against Linux and
>> nowhere did I ever say nor imply that Linux is not a good OS.
>>
>> Which part of mainstream users want to have a "solution" that you don't
>> understand?
>>
>> MS and Apple all do that with different ways and what makes you think
>> that you can fight against consumers?
>>
>> I have a term reserved for people like you - technical arrogance.
>
> You're not making any sense.
>
> Alias
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:uc$wJRFzHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> xfile wrote:
>>>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>>> "Linux are for techies"
>>>
>>> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
>>> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
>>> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
>>> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an
>>> eight year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the
>>> imagination, techies.
>>>
>>> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
>>> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it
>>> (patents and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>>>
>>> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
>>> want to switch to a new OS.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> xfile wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>>>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>>>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>>>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer".
>>>>>> Over years, they have been told countless times but they are too
>>>>>> proud to take any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people
>>>>>> don't appreciate their works. LOL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>>>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>>>>> finished car.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My two cents.
>>>>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't
>>>>>>> ready for "Joe Normal."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried
>>>>>>> installing it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK.
>>>>>>> Got to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does
>>>>>>> one access the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh,
>>>>>>> heh... then open "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to
>>>>>>> receive the msg "The Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In
>>>>>>> order to use the LAN browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and
>>>>>>> activated by the system administrator."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from
>>>>>>> nix folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user?
>>>>>>> Is the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as
>>>>>>> administrator and install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe
>>>>>>> me. Were one to have the time to determine how to install and
>>>>>>> activate the Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That
>>>>>>> said... when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop
>>>>>>> that takes me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install
>>>>>>> Lisa daemon" stuff...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a
>>>>>>> dope to claim otherwise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones
>>>>>>> that might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lang
>>

 

[Alias]

xfile wrote:
> Microsoft deliveries its OS mainly through OEM's and many of its products,
> e.g. Office, is part of the solution or enhanced user experience (e.g. games
> and hardware) of using the computers.
>
> Techies, hobbyists, and enthusiasts are served as opninon leaders in the
> ball game.
>
> Promotions and educational materials are prepared sepcifically for business
> and technical professionals as well as for average users.
>
> At early stage, it partnershiped with Intel (not officially) so that it
> would gain supports from the most critical hardware component and thus we
> have this Wintel term.
>
> Apple, known by everyone, deliveries the solution with everything built by
> itself and focus on nice segments.
>
> By the way, to be a nich segment player is not a bad thing. Many nice
> products only serve nich segments for highly specialized people with special
> tastes and needs, and we are also a nice player.
>
> But if you want to go for the mass market, do it accordinly.
>
> Finally, it is three of you that helped the user to install and configure
> the system so that they could enjoy it and that makes you similar to an OEM
> or system builder.
>
> Which part doesn't make sense? It is your or Linux's business model doesn't
> make any sense.

Sorry, but I don't see the connection between the truisms above and
Ubuntu not being ready for the average computer user.

Alias
>
>
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:Oseec1FzHHA.5380@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> xfile wrote:
>>> You are nothing close to an average user so does your friend and Stephan
>>> Rose, and in all cases, you guys are the OEM for the user.
>>>
>>> Just to be clear about one thing, I have nothing to against Linux and
>>> nowhere did I ever say nor imply that Linux is not a good OS.
>>>
>>> Which part of mainstream users want to have a "solution" that you don't
>>> understand?
>>>
>>> MS and Apple all do that with different ways and what makes you think
>>> that you can fight against consumers?
>>>
>>> I have a term reserved for people like you - technical arrogance.
>> You're not making any sense.
>>
>> Alias
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>> news:uc$wJRFzHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> xfile wrote:
>>>>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>>>> "Linux are for techies"
>>>>
>>>> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
>>>> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
>>>> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
>>>> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an
>>>> eight year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the
>>>> imagination, techies.
>>>>
>>>> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
>>>> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it
>>>> (patents and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>>>>
>>>> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
>>>> want to switch to a new OS.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>> news:uq0upx5yHHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> xfile wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In addition, mainstream users buy computers as a "solution" just like
>>>>>>> other products, and they don't want nor have the interest to do DIY
>>>>>>> needless to say to install a new OS or switch to a new OS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Linux are for techies because they never want to userstand mainsteam
>>>>>>> users, and they have no idea about what is "solution" or "offer".
>>>>>>> Over years, they have been told countless times but they are too
>>>>>>> proud to take any others' advises, and yet, they blame why people
>>>>>>> don't appreciate their works. LOL.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Using automobiles as an example, they are sales people for auto
>>>>>>> accessories and parts, while the mainstream car owners want to buy a
>>>>>>> finished car.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My two cents.
>>>>>> Your sweeping generalizations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>> "Lang Murphy" <lang_murphy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:330D72CD-8EAC-42BC-8144-3C11E57ADC52@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>>> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't
>>>>>>>> ready for "Joe Normal."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
>>>>>>>> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried
>>>>>>>> installing it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK.
>>>>>>>> Got to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does
>>>>>>>> one access the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh,
>>>>>>>> heh... then open "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to
>>>>>>>> receive the msg "The Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In
>>>>>>>> order to use the LAN browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and
>>>>>>>> activated by the system administrator."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from
>>>>>>>> nix folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user?
>>>>>>>> Is the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as
>>>>>>>> administrator and install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe
>>>>>>>> me. Were one to have the time to determine how to install and
>>>>>>>> activate the Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it
>>>>>>>> out -eventually-, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That
>>>>>>>> said... when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop
>>>>>>>> that takes me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install
>>>>>>>> Lisa daemon" stuff...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a
>>>>>>>> dope to claim otherwise.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros ones
>>>>>>>> that might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lang
>

 

[Alias]

MICHAEL wrote:
> * Alias:
>> xfile wrote:
>>> Which part? And can you provide "specific" comments on it?
>> "Linux are for techies"
>>
>> I installed Ubuntu for a 74 year old lady who is no techie. She's very
>> happy with it and hasn't had a problem in over six months. With XP, she
>> was calling every week to have all the viruses and malware removed. Last
>> week, a friend installed it for a family with a six year old and an
>> eight year old. They love it and are not, by any stretch of the
>> imagination, techies.
>>
>> Face it, Linux is ready for the general public. I know it and all the
>> Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux knows it and Microsoft knows it
>> (patents and all that jazz). Why don't the MS fanboys and girls know it?
>>
>> The above also counters your theory that the "mainstream public" doesn't
>> want to switch to a new OS.
>
> Alias, while I agree with you in general about the readiness and
> viability of Linux as a mainstream desktop OS, there are most definitely
> times when I just think you're blowing smoke, or exaggerating.

Well, I'm only human

> WinXP and Vista can be secured properly so that critters and crapware
> are not a problem. It's been a long time since I've had any type of
> infection on any of my machines. When you were helping the older
> lady with her computer when she had XP- did you not properly secure
> it for her?

Of course.

> Changing a few settings in IE can make big difference.

We told her to use Fire Fox.

> Having
> an AV, of course. And anti-spyware. But you know this.

Yes, but she forgets to update the anti spyware. She has Avast! which
updates itself.

> Did you do these
> things for her? Of course, the best thing you could have done for her
> was make her a Limited User account. I seriously doubt a 74 year-old lady
> is going to need to mess around in the settings and/or install a bunch of
> software.

You don't know this lady. She reinstalled eMule even though we told her
not to. Now she uses aMule in Ubuntu.

Especially, once you had her setup. I do think it's a good thing
> that you have taken the time to help someone... an older person, especially.
>
> When I see folks talk about how they are infected with so much garbage,
> I cringe. Of course, it's possible. But there are effective means to properly
> secure a Windows' machine, and with a little bit of user education, they can
> stay infection free.

Only if they do what they're told.

>
> Recently I have been speaking up about Linux and especially, PCLinuxOS.
> I really like PCLinuxOS. I don't dislike Ubuntu, but for me, PCLinuxOS just
> "feels" better. I sincerely hope Linux keeps growing and I want them to
> do well.... competition is *never* a bad thing, and I've never understood
> why so many Microsoft fan-childs get so defensive. So many of them act
> like Microsoft is their mommy or daddy, and when you offer criticism, it's
> like you've attacked something sacred of theirs.... quite pitiful, really.
> However, that also goes the other way, too. There are lots of die-hard Linux
> users who have nothing but contempt for anyone who uses Windows, and
> that's a shame, too.

I use XP every day. I am not against Windows but some of the "features"
like WPA and WGA.
>
> I use Microsoft products and it may be awhile before I even seriously
> consider leaving those products behind. I actually want Microsoft to be
> better, to make a better OS, and deliver on their hype and promises.
> While I do not think Vista is crap, I am quite disappointed, and this is not
> coming from someone who tried it and gave up.... I've been using Vista regularly
> since June 2006. All I can really say about Vista, it works and might be a bit
> more stable than XP... once you get some kinks worked out. It's really not
> any faster, and I strongly dislike the poor performance of Windows Explorer.
> The expanded intrusions of DRM and WGA are a major concern, and probably
> have a lot to do with some of Vista's performance problems. The many problems
> folks seem to be having with reactivation just because someone across the street
> farted, is getting beyond ridiculous.

I agree entirely. My take on Vista when I played with is that it's XP SE.

>
> Linux is ready now for many users who would like to switch, and it is
> only getting better. Windows seems to be stagnant and may be getting
> a bit stale. I welcome the competition- it will either make Microsoft better
> or destroy them. Time will tell. Linux isn't going away, but behemoths like
> Microsoft have come and gone throughout history. They either adapt and
> innovate, or they die slow deaths.... think American car companies.
>
> Anyway, that's my Sunday morning preachin'.
>
>
> -Michael

I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and if MS
somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the WPA and WGA
crap, it may not die a slow death.

Alias

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:


>
> I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and if MS
> somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the WPA and WGA
> crap, it may not die a slow death.
>
> Alias

Your "take" on Vista while you "played" with it on a store computer is
that it's "XP SE"?
You're clueless!
Totally clueless.
Frank

 

[Alias]

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and if
>> MS somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the WPA
>> and WGA crap, it may not die a slow death.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Your "take" on Vista while you "played" with it on a store computer is
> that it's "XP SE"?

My goodness, the man can read! Is there a full moon out in Virgina?

Alias

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:

> Frank wrote:
>
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and if
>>> MS somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the WPA
>>> and WGA crap, it may not die a slow death.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> Your "take" on Vista while you "played" with it on a store computer is
>> that it's "XP SE"?
>
>
> My goodness, the man can read! Is there a full moon out in Virgina?
>
> Alias

Virgina...? You lost something in Virginia? You're fixated on Virginia?
You want to go to Virginia? Or is that simply a diversionary tacit to
change the subject matter that points out what a really clueless person
you are claiming playing with Vista in a store...don't make me laugh.
Also you've never supplied the phone number to that store where you
claim (lied) about...well, who cares...we've all got your number and
you're still clueless...totally clueless.
Frank

 

[Alias]

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and if
>>>> MS somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the WPA
>>>> and WGA crap, it may not die a slow death.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>> Your "take" on Vista while you "played" with it on a store computer
>>> is that it's "XP SE"?
>>
>>
>> My goodness, the man can read! Is there a full moon out in Virgina?
>>
>> Alias
>
> Virgina...? You lost something in Virginia? You're fixated on Virginia?
> You want to go to Virginia? Or is that simply a diversionary tacit to
> change the subject matter that points out what a really clueless person

Your ISP is in Virgina. I assume you live near by.

> you are claiming playing with Vista in a store...don't make me laugh.

You can laugh? Why would you doubt that? Stores want to sell Vista and
they let potential customers try it out. Not only did the nice clerk let
me try it out, he explained a lot of things about Vista that I might not
have seen by myself. They don't do that in the USA?

> Also you've never supplied the phone number to that store where you
> claim (lied) about...well, who cares...we've all got your number and
> you're still clueless...totally clueless.
> Frank

www.elcorteingles.es has all the phone numbers you want, your lame
attempt at trying to find out where I live notwithstanding.

Alias

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with most of this post. Like you said, time will tell and
>>>>> if MS somehow realizes that most people are honest and removes the
>>>>> WPA and WGA crap, it may not die a slow death.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your "take" on Vista while you "played" with it on a store computer
>>>> is that it's "XP SE"?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My goodness, the man can read! Is there a full moon out in Virgina?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> Virgina...? You lost something in Virginia? You're fixated on
>> Virginia? You want to go to Virginia? Or is that simply a diversionary
>> tacit to change the subject matter that points out what a really
>> clueless person
>
>
> Your ISP is in Virgina. I assume you live near by.

It is? Hahaha...you don't know how to read a header do you? I couldn't
be farther away from Virginia unless I left the Continental limits of
the United States!
>
>> you are claiming playing with Vista in a store...don't make me laugh.
>
>
> You can laugh? Why would you doubt that? Stores want to sell Vista and
> they let potential customers try it out. Not only did the nice clerk let
> me try it out, he explained a lot of things about Vista that I might not
> have seen by myself. They don't do that in the USA?

Of course they have Vista loaded on in-store computers. They do not let
them connect to the Internet for obvious reasons which in my travels to
Europe, I have never seen them do in any store.
Also store computers, like most pre-loaded computers, don't come with
any really useful software.
In other words, the only real way to get a true feeling for Vista is to
load it, sit down and be productive with it. Something you've yet to do.


> www.elcorteingles.es has all the phone numbers you want, your lame
> attempt at trying to find out where I live notwithstanding.

You're afraid I'll come see you? A little paranoid huh?
What, or who are you so afraid of?
Who do you think you're hiding from?
Hahahah...sorry pal, I couldn't possibly care less about you or where
you live.
You're very unimportant to me.
Frank

 

[Mike]

In article <#7ZfI0HzHHA.4928@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,
Frank <fb@nospamer.cmn> wrote:

> > Your ISP is in Virgina. I assume you live near by.
>
> It is? Hahaha...you don't know how to read a header do you? I couldn't
> be farther away from Virginia unless I left the Continental limits of
> the United States!

Alias is clearly not too bright. He obviously did a WHOIS lookup on
your IP address, which is owned by Road Runner. The address is listed
as Herndon, VA.

Unfortunately for Alias, he's *not* smart enough to figure out what
socal.res.rr.com means. Yes, that's about as far away from Virginia as
you can get without leaving the US!

Note to Alias. The address of record of the owner of an IP address
doesn't always relate to the location of the poster currently using said
IP address.

Mike

 

[here@home.again]

"Mike" proved...
> Alias is clearly not too bright. He obviously did a WHOIS lookup on
> your IP address, which is owned by Road Runner. The address is listed
> as Herndon, VA.
>
> Unfortunately for Alias, he's *not* smart enough to figure out what
> socal.res.rr.com means. Yes, that's about as far away from Virginia as
> you can get without leaving the US!
>
> Note to Alias. The address of record of the owner of an IP address
> doesn't always relate to the location of the poster currently using said
> IP address.
>

Too funny. LMAO