Re: Ubuntu erased my whole hard drive

[dennis@home]

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:yqqdneUOjLVLuojanZ2dnUVZ8s3inZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:02:16 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> "lee h" <noti@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:MM7Ri.10622$lD6.5170@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>> rodolfo.garcia44@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>>> lost.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> For the simplest Ubuntu install on a windows box, use Wubi (Windows
>>> Ubuntu Installer).
>>
>> Its a bit too late for that.
>> The lack of a suitable warning has made sure another potential Linux
>> user will stick with something else.
>> This is the problem with Linux .. it is written by geeks who have no
>> idea how simple it has to be for the mass market. Windows would have
>> warned the user at least twice before removing a Linux partition and
>> that would be after selecting the partition and saying delete.
>
> Oh come on Dennis...
>
> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
> mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!

Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with.
If they select manual then they get presented with even more problems.

> How can you blame the OS Installer if the user is incapable of reading
> the whole sentence?
>
> Also, the Ubuntu installer will show a list of partition / file system
> changes it makes to what drives and what partition that the user has to
> OK before actually doing it.
>
> So you can't even accidentally click continue and overwrite the system.
> You need to do so twice.

At no time does it actually tell the user that the data on their system will
be lost if they proceed.
As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much.
It was written by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or
don't expect Linux to be used by the masses.

> Also, how is this different from installing XP or Vista?
>
> Last time I checked, XP and Vista also give you just a list of drives /
> partitions and you just go pick one to install on, or you can manually
> configure the partitions. How is that any different? Except of course
> Vista or XP don't ask a second time just to make sure you didn't make a
> mistake. I suppose that is one difference.

Except that they will not remove the data from a partition without warning
the user unlike what you state above.
Also if you were truthful you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice before
removing a partition and tell the user that it may contain data that will be
lost if they do. It even asks twice before it will format one.
I suggest you dig out you windows disks and try an install as you appear to
have forgotten what it does.

 

[spike1@freenet.co.uk]

In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,
dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble thusly:
> 3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
> and a few I have forgotten.
> Which have you installed?

Too many.

> Do you doubt it?
> Have you never installed windows?

As I said, Too many times.

>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then,
>> shall we?


Didn't think so.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Adam Albright]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:11:42 +0100, "dennis@home"
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>
><spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message

>> No it isn't. Ever installed windows?
>
>3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>and a few I have forgotten.
>Which have you installed?

Still acting like a pompous ass aren't you. What's the matter, can't
break an old bad habit?

 

[Adam Albright]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:25:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>> Oh come on Dennis...
>>
>> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
>> mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>
>Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with.

You're really getting out of control. I know what your problem is. You
simply can't stand to get corrected. Even when you are wrong. Why else
you think I keep calling you a pompous jerk.

ROTFLMAO!

>As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much.
>It was written by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or
>don't expect Linux to be used by the masses.

Don't get me started on all the Microsoft screw ups. It would be a
very long detailed list starting with illegal snooping on customer's
computers reporting back to Redmond and marking legit copies of Vista
as counterfeit. Just wondering, you REALLY want me to post such a
list?

Face facts. You're nothing but another head up your ass Microsoft
apologist that gets his shorts all bunched up any time anybody exposes
what rubes Microsoft designers really are.

>Also if you were truthful you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice before
>removing a partition and tell the user that it may contain data that will be
>lost if they do.

Now you're cherry picking. How come you never want to face all the
stupid things Vista does? You simply have no clue what being fair and
balanced means. If you want to start nitpicking Linux or Macs, first
clean up Microsoft's house. It's a mess. You know it too.

>It even asks twice before it will format one.
>I suggest you dig out you windows disks and try an install as you appear to
>have forgotten what it does.

I can't forget what a a-hole you always are. You make it impossible to
forget.

 

[Frank]

Adam Albright wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:11:42 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>
>><spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
>
>
>>>No it isn't. Ever installed windows?
>>
>>3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>and a few I have forgotten.
>>Which have you installed?
>
>
> Still acting like a pompous ass aren't you.

Oh, I don't think he has any intention at all of stealing your pompous
act, you as*hole!
Frank

 

[Adam Albright]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:18:31 -0700, Frank <fb@spamm.nrz> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:11:42 +0100, "dennis@home"
>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>><spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>>No it isn't. Ever installed windows?
>>>
>>>3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>>and a few I have forgotten.
>>>Which have you installed?
>>
>>
>> Still acting like a pompous ass aren't you.
>
>Oh, I don't think he has any intention at all of stealing your pompous
>act, you as*hole!

Kiss my grits Frank.

 

[Frank]

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:25:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>Oh come on Dennis...
>>>
>>>What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
>>>mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>>
>>Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with.
>
>
> You're really getting out of control. I know what your problem is. You
> simply can't stand to get corrected. Even when you are wrong. Why else
> you think I keep calling you a pompous jerk.

Oh the irony!
>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
>
>>As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much.
>>It was written by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or
>>don't expect Linux to be used by the masses.
>
>
> Don't get me started on all the Microsoft screw ups. It would be a
> very long detailed list starting with illegal snooping on customer's
> computers reporting back to Redmond and marking legit copies of Vista
> as counterfeit. Just wondering, you REALLY want me to post such a
> list?
>
> Face facts. You're nothing but another head up your ass Microsoft
> apologist that gets his shorts all bunched up any time anybody exposes
> what rubes Microsoft designers really are.
>
>
>>Also if you were truthful you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice before
>>removing a partition and tell the user that it may contain data that will be
>>lost if they do.
>
>
> Now you're cherry picking. How come you never want to face all the
> stupid things Vista does? You simply have no clue what being fair and
> balanced means. If you want to start nitpicking Linux or Macs, first
> clean up Microsoft's house. It's a mess. You know it too.
>
>
>>It even asks twice before it will format one.
>>I suggest you dig out you windows disks and try an install as you appear to
>>have forgotten what it does.
>
>
> I can't forget what a a-hole you always are. You make it impossible to
> forget.
>
You must be the most brain dead jacka*s loser of all times.
You are truly one fulkked up scumbag idiot.
Frank

 

[Charlie Tame]

Stephan Rose wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:02:16 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> "lee h" <noti@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:MM7Ri.10622$lD6.5170@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>> rodolfo.garcia44@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>>> lost.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> For the simplest Ubuntu install on a windows box, use Wubi (Windows
>>> Ubuntu Installer).
>> Its a bit too late for that.
>> The lack of a suitable warning has made sure another potential Linux
>> user will stick with something else.
>> This is the problem with Linux .. it is written by geeks who have no
>> idea how simple it has to be for the mass market. Windows would have
>> warned the user at least twice before removing a Linux partition and
>> that would be after selecting the partition and saying delete.
>
> Oh come on Dennis...
>
> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
> mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>
> How can you blame the OS Installer if the user is incapable of reading
> the whole sentence?
>
> Also, the Ubuntu installer will show a list of partition / file system
> changes it makes to what drives and what partition that the user has to
> OK before actually doing it.
>
> So you can't even accidentally click continue and overwrite the system.
> You need to do so twice.
>
> Also, how is this different from installing XP or Vista?
>
> Last time I checked, XP and Vista also give you just a list of drives /
> partitions and you just go pick one to install on, or you can manually
> configure the partitions. How is that any different? Except of course
> Vista or XP don't ask a second time just to make sure you didn't make a
> mistake. I suppose that is one difference.
>


In my experience Windows has only ever warned if you are about to damage
another "Windows" installation, seems like it always ignored anything
else, at least as far as I have encountered.

Anyway this is a silly topic, the OP obviously didn't think / didn't
read / didn't understand ow whatever and that is unfortunate but I'm
sure we have all experienced that [Enter] Oh sh*t feeling.

You cannot go through a Ubuntu install hitting defaults, you have to
make a conscious selection (Or unconscious depending on state of mind I
guess) so some here are just plain lying (Surprise surprise).

 

[caver1]

Stephan Rose wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>
>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>> lost.
>>>
>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>> drive.
>>>
>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>
>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>
>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>
>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>
>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>
>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>
>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of work,
>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>
>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>
>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>
> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>
> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
> comprehension?
>
>


There's also an option to use free space.
caver1

 

[Charlie Tame]

caver1 wrote:
> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>>> drive.
>>>>
>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>
>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>
>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>
>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of work,
>>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>>
>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>
>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>
>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>
>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>> comprehension?
>>
>>
>
>
> There's also an option to use free space.
> caver1


Yeah, the bit between the ears...

It is possible he unwittingly used that and his XP or whatever is still
there.

 

[dennis@home]

<spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aeqfu4-0re.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble
> thusly:
>> 3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>> and a few I have forgotten.
>> Which have you installed?
>
> Too many.
>
>> Do you doubt it?
>> Have you never installed windows?
>
> As I said, Too many times.
>
>>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then,
>>> shall we?
>
>
> Didn't think so.

If you are so sure it does you could show the warning.
The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
exist.
You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding evidence.

 

[dennis@home]

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news5gah3lle5rev4826vsadfpc1hek0ishc4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:11:42 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>>
>><spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
>
>>> No it isn't. Ever installed windows?
>>
>>3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>and a few I have forgotten.
>>Which have you installed?
>
> Still acting like a pompous ass aren't you. What's the matter, can't
> break an old bad habit?
>

Ho Crazy.
When do your doctors decide you have had enough free time?

 

[Peter Köhlmann]

dennis@home wrote:

>
> <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:aeqfu4-0re.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
>> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble
>> thusly:
>>>
3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>> and a few I have forgotten.
>>> Which have you installed?
>>
>> Too many.
>>
>>> Do you doubt it?
>>> Have you never installed windows?
>>
>> As I said, Too many times.
>>
>>>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then,
>>>> shall we?
>>
>>
>> Didn't think so.
>
> If you are so sure it does you could show the warning.

Well, why should he? People who have actually installed it know that it
exists.

> The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
> exist.

The "fact" that you can't show the warning is evidence that you are lying.
Or too stupid to even attempt a linux install. Or both

> You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding evidence.

Hilarious
--
Law of Probable Dispersal:
Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.

 

[Stephan Rose]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:25:41 -0400, caver1 wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my
>>>> C: drive.
>>>>
>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>
>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>
>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>
>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>> work, or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu
>>>> erases whole hard drive without warning.
>>>>
>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>
>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>
>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>
>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>> comprehension?
>>
>>
>>
>
> There's also an option to use free space. caver1

Not on that screenshot there isn't.

I think the free space option only appears if there acutally *is* free
space that could be used in the first place or if there is a partition
that can be safely resized to make free space.

And then, the option will also be called such and won't be called "Use
entire disk".

--
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‚‰

 

[dennis@home]

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:j8gah3p9lebb67c6g3m0fr5heql6o6runf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:25:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>>> Oh come on Dennis...
>>>
>>> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
>>> mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>>
>>Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with.
>
> You're really getting out of control. I know what your problem is. You
> simply can't stand to get corrected. Even when you are wrong. Why else
> you think I keep calling you a pompous jerk.

Because you are crazy thats why.
Didn't I make it plain enough for you?
Lets try again.

You are crazy.

>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
>>As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much.
>>It was written by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or
>>don't expect Linux to be used by the masses.
>
> Don't get me started on all the Microsoft screw ups. It would be a
> very long detailed list starting with illegal snooping on customer's
> computers reporting back to Redmond and marking legit copies of Vista
> as counterfeit. Just wondering, you REALLY want me to post such a
> list?

Do I care what you think of anything?
No not really. every time you open your mouth I think less of what you say.

>
> Face facts. You're nothing but another head up your ass Microsoft
> apologist that gets his shorts all bunched up any time anybody exposes
> what rubes Microsoft designers really are.

Lets face facts Adam you act crazy.
I don't know what you get out of appearing crazy so I assume you really are
crazy.
Have a nice day and remember to take the pills it will make everyone feel
better.

>
>>Also if you were truthful you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice
>>before
>>removing a partition and tell the user that it may contain data that will
>>be
>>lost if they do.
>
> Now you're cherry picking. How come you never want to face all the
> stupid things Vista does? You simply have no clue what being fair and
> balanced means. If you want to start nitpicking Linux or Macs, first
> clean up Microsoft's house. It's a mess. You know it too.

Maybe it because unlike you I am not an expert on Vista so I can hardly
pronounce upon it like you do.
However I am sure the vast majority recognise your expertise for waht it is
and act appropriatly.

>
>>It even asks twice before it will format one.
>>I suggest you dig out you windows disks and try an install as you appear
>>to
>>have forgotten what it does.
>
> I can't forget what a a-hole you always are. You make it impossible to
> forget.
>

At least I am not crazy like you Adam.
I doubt if I will be able to forget that either.. who did you say you were?
Do you have any significance here? I thought not.

 

[dennis@home]

"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>>> drive.
>>>>
>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>
>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>
>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>
>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of work,
>>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>>
>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>
>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>
>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>
>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>> comprehension?
>>
>>
>
>
> There's also an option to use free space.
> caver1

This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the level of
a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting unfixable
problems.
This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after all
a lot of people think the case is a CPU.

This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
estimate the knowledge of their target users.
Until the developers sort out the installation routines Linux will not be
mass market as it still relies on someone being able to download it and
install it.
Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems stops
the ~95% from using it.
Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals by
the sound of it.

Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can *never*
underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).

 

[Alias]

dennis@home wrote:
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Stephan Rose wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>>> lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>>>> drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>>> work,
>>>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>>
>>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>>
>>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>>> comprehension?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> There's also an option to use free space.
>> caver1
>
> This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
> If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the
> level of a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting
> unfixable problems.
> This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after
> all a lot of people think the case is a CPU.
>
> This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
> estimate the knowledge of their target users.
> Until the developers sort out the installation routines Linux will not
> be mass market as it still relies on someone being able to download it
> and install it.
> Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems
> stops the ~95% from using it.
> Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals
> by the sound of it.
>
> Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can
> *never* underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).
>

Which is why a lot of computer stores here are pre installing Ubuntu,
even though it really is easier to install than Windows. Most Windows
users, as you know, use a computer with Windows preinstalled. Why should
it be any different with Ubuntu?

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes

 

[dennis@home]

"Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ff4i5c$aj0$1@aioe.org...

>
> Which is why a lot of computer stores here are pre installing Ubuntu, even
> though it really is easier to install than Windows. Most Windows users, as
> you know, use a computer with Windows preinstalled. Why should it be any
> different with Ubuntu?

Because it is.
If you can't see that it is different then you are unlikely to be a part of
the solution.

 

[Alias]

dennis@home wrote:
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ff4i5c$aj0$1@aioe.org...
>
>>
>> Which is why a lot of computer stores here are pre-installing Ubuntu,
>> even though it really is easier to install than Windows. Most Windows
>> users, as you know, use a computer with Windows preinstalled. Why
>> should it be any different with Ubuntu?
>
> Because it is.
> If you can't see that it is different then you are unlikely to be a part
> of the solution.

What did you not understand when I wrote "Which is why a lot of computer
stores here are pre-installing Ubuntu"? I have ten people lined up who
want to pay me to install Gutsy for them because they are afraid of
doing it themselves, just as they are afraid to install Windows themselves.

Fortunately, Ubuntu is easier to install than Windows and the latest
version will support *any* hardware that Mac supports. Ubuntu is
evolving and Windows is hung up on pirates and most of the "development"
involves the new WGA versions, controlling the users' computers and
stricter activation.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes

 

[Rick]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:14:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Stephan Rose wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C:
>>>>> was lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my
>>>>> C: drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole
>>>>> hard drive without a single warning?
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>>> work, or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu
>>>>> erases whole hard drive without warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set
>>>>> as the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>>
>>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>>
>>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>>> comprehension?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There's also an option to use free space. caver1
>
> This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is. If it is to
> take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the level of a moron
> so that almost anyone can install it without getting unfixable problems.
> This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after
> all a lot of people think the case is a CPU.

Then why does Windows ask about partitioning and formatting when doing an
install?


>
> This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
> estimate the knowledge of their target users. Until the developers sort
> out the installation routines Linux will not be mass market as it still
> relies on someone being able to download it and install it.

Hopefully more vendors, especially visible ones like Dell, will start
shipping Linux pre-installed.


> Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems
> stops the ~95% from using it.

How many people can properly install Windows?

> Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals
> by the sound of it.

People don't read manuals when running any software, for the most part.
They don't read them when setting up stereos and VCRs, either.

>
> Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can
> *never* underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).


--
Rick