Re: Ubuntu erased my whole hard drive

  • Thread starter Thread starter rodolfo.garcia44@gmail.com
  • Start date Start date
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:OHHcn2CFIHA.2268@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>>
>> And how are you going to use the whole disk and not destroy the data
>> already
>> on there? This has been a fact since the DOS DAYS.
>
> But why does Ubuntu put out exactly the same warning when it isn't going
> to destroy any data?


?
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:OHHcn2CFIHA.2268@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>>
>> And how are you going to use the whole disk and not destroy the data
>> already
>> on there? This has been a fact since the DOS DAYS.
>
> But why does Ubuntu put out exactly the same warning when it isn't going
> to destroy any data?


The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
nothing is wrong?

Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?

You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
understand a simple message like this one?

http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
 
"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>
> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to bomb
> somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there? Are you
> know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when nothing is
> wrong?
>
> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?

Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?

> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot understand
> a simple message like this one?
>
> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg

So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they are
all correct.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>>
>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>> nothing is wrong?
>>
>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>
> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>
>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>
>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>
> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
> are all correct.


WTF difference does it make which HAS data, the installer is telling you
that it soon won't have if you proceed. If by this time in the procedure
you don't know then a) you should not be installing operating systems
and b) you cancel the operation and check.

If you are suggesting the installer should detect and identify every
operating system and file system ever created then you better tell them
to correct the Vista and XP installers because they don't wipe your butt
for you either...

What you have proven conclusively is your ability to behave like a
complete idiot...
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>>
>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>> nothing is wrong?
>>
>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>
> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>
>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>
>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>
> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
> are all correct.


There is no pleasing you. No matter what the
answer you say but- "what if?'
You're shown that the warning is there. Then you
ask why is it there.
The partitions that are going to be destroyed are
the ones that you are going to repartition.
If its the whole disk its the whole disk. If its
the free space its the free space. If you do it
manually its the ones you pick. No you cannot use
the same partition for two different OS's.
Of course if you say okay you might want to warn
your neighbors that they will have to shut their
computers down so it won't destroy their data.
And by the way give me a screen shot to prove that
it won't.
caver1
 
caver1 wrote:
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>
>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>>> nothing is wrong?
>>>
>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>
>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>
>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>
>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>
>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick
>> they are all correct.
>
>
> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what if?'
> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
> The partitions that are going to be destroyed are the ones that you are
> going to repartition.
> If its the whole disk its the whole disk. If its the free space its the
> free space. If you do it manually its the ones you pick. No you cannot
> use the same partition for two different OS's.
> Of course if you say okay you might want to warn your neighbors that
> they will have to shut their computers down so it won't destroy their data.
> And by the way give me a screen shot to prove that it won't.
> caver1


Well the point is quite admirably illustrated. There is no pleasing
someone who does not want to be pleased.

It is unfortunate that it is not possible to make things completely
idiot proof but it is not, and all Dennis has proved is that not only is
it impossible but if anyone could prove that fact 'twould be Dennis.

You don't give a ten year old a gallon of gas and some matches and tell
him to light the grill, and apparently some are not safe with a CD. I
guess that's life :)
 
Charlie Tame wrote:
> caver1 wrote:
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is
>>>> there? Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn
>>>> you when nothing is wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>>
>>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>>
>>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>>
>>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick
>>> they are all correct.
>>
>>
>> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what
>> if?'
>> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
>> The partitions that are going to be destroyed are the ones that you
>> are going to repartition.
>> If its the whole disk its the whole disk. If its the free space its
>> the free space. If you do it manually its the ones you pick. No you
>> cannot use the same partition for two different OS's.
>> Of course if you say okay you might want to warn your neighbors that
>> they will have to shut their computers down so it won't destroy their
>> data.
>> And by the way give me a screen shot to prove that it won't.
>> caver1
>
>
> Well the point is quite admirably illustrated. There is no pleasing
> someone who does not want to be pleased.
>
> It is unfortunate that it is not possible to make things completely
> idiot proof but it is not, and all Dennis has proved is that not only is
> it impossible but if anyone could prove that fact 'twould be Dennis.
>
> You don't give a ten year old a gallon of gas and some matches and tell
> him to light the grill, and apparently some are not safe with a CD. I
> guess that's life :)


Thank you Charlie.
caver1
 
caver1 wrote:
> Charlie Tame wrote:
>> caver1 wrote:
>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going
>>>>> to bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is
>>>>> there? Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn
>>>>> you when nothing is wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>>>
>>>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>>>
>>>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>>>
>>>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>>>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick
>>>> they are all correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but-
>>> "what if?'
>>> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
>>> The partitions that are going to be destroyed are the ones that you
>>> are going to repartition.
>>> If its the whole disk its the whole disk. If its the free space its
>>> the free space. If you do it manually its the ones you pick. No you
>>> cannot use the same partition for two different OS's.
>>> Of course if you say okay you might want to warn your neighbors that
>>> they will have to shut their computers down so it won't destroy their
>>> data.
>>> And by the way give me a screen shot to prove that it won't.
>>> caver1
>>
>>
>> Well the point is quite admirably illustrated. There is no pleasing
>> someone who does not want to be pleased.
>>
>> It is unfortunate that it is not possible to make things completely
>> idiot proof but it is not, and all Dennis has proved is that not only
>> is it impossible but if anyone could prove that fact 'twould be Dennis.
>>
>> You don't give a ten year old a gallon of gas and some matches and
>> tell him to light the grill, and apparently some are not safe with a
>> CD. I guess that's life :)
>
>
> Thank you Charlie.
> caver1


Well it is rather like politics and religion, since there IS no definite
answer the debate can be endless.

I wouldn't get rich but wouldn't turn down $10 for every time I've fskd
something up and wished it wasn't my fault. If all else fails read the
instructions. I personally think that both the Windows and Ubuntu
installers are as idiot proof as is necessary, there'll always be a
better idiot than you can create a workaround for :)

I wasn't very happy when my install failed but there IS something about
my particular system here that's causing it which I can isolate because
I have the luxury of slide mounted drives. I "Could" have just said to
hell with it but would rather try and at least isolate the problem even
if I am not able to find a technical reason for it. I suspect it may be
because GRUB is installed on a data drive but either way it is worth
knowing about.
 
UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit
posting about it on this NG.
-

"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:tWKSi.24082$G25.11445@edtnps89...
> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:
>
>>Unruh wrote:
>>> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Unruh wrote:
>>>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...
>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...
>>>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>> 8<
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is
>>>>>>>>>>> irrelevant.
>>>>>>>>>>> Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to
>>>>>>>>>>> start installing
>>>>>>>>>>> I notice that I get the same warning screen
>>>>>>>>>>> (identical AFAICS) if I
>>>>>>>>>>> select use
>>>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free
>>>>>>>>>>> space.
>>>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are
>>>>>>>>>>> changed: SCSI1
>>>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)
>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted:
>>>>>>>>>>> partition #1 of
>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of
>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap
>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are
>>>>>>>>>>> changed: SCSI1
>>>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)
>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted:
>>>>>>>>>>> partition #1 of
>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of
>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap
>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.
>>>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.
>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?
>>>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the
>>>>>>>>>> partitions were
>>>>>>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover
>>>>>>>>>> your Win
>>>>>>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.
>>>>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you
>>>>>>>>>> tell it to use
>>>>>>>>>> the whole disk.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There
>>>>>>>>> may be a need for
>>>>>>>>> more warnings or just a better partitioner but that
>>>>>>>>> is an addition.
>>>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from
>>>>>>>> you win
>>>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting
>>>>>>>> the disk is
>>>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed
>>>>>>>> the windows data.
>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF
>>>>>>>> you managed to
>>>>>>>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it
>>>>>>>> was before, you
>>>>>>>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant
>>>>>>>> to almost all
>>>>>>>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability
>>>>>>>> to access the
>>>>>>>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the
>>>>>>>> repartitioning then that is
>>>>>>>> where the problem lies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few
>>>>>>> more questions and
>>>>>>> then applies the changes.
>>>>>> No, the user applies the changes.
>>>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes
>>>>>>> that it puts up
>>>>>>> the warning about destroying data.
>>>>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed
>>>>>>> to be made, I
>>>>>>> have not checked myself).
>>>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the
>>>>>>> majority of users and
>>>>>>> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.
>>>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating
>>>>>> systems.
>>>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is
>>>>> (almost) impossible to
>>>>> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing
>>>>> needs to be set up
>>>>> to allow installation by users. If the installer does not
>>>>> give adequate
>>>>> warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the
>>>>> fault of the
>>>>> installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings
>>>>> Ubuntu 7.1 gives and
>>>>> whether or not they are adequate.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or
>>>> not, or even if they are given or not,
>>>> how can you even comment?
>>>
>>> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting
>>> on the previous
>>> comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the
>>> conditional (If) I
>>> seems from various comments that it does NOT give adequate
>>> warning, and the
>>> warning that was posted was certainly well beyond the point
>>> at which a
>>> warning should have been given. Do you have more information
>>> about what the
>>> warning actually is?
>
>
>>Here is a quote as I haven't figured out how to
>>get a screen shot in here,
>> "If you continue,the changes listed below
>>will be written to the
>>disks. Otherwise, you will be able to make further
>>changes manually.
>
>>Warning: This will destroy all data on any
>>partition you have removed as well as on the
>>partitions that are going to be formatted.
>>................................
>>Write the changes to disk?"
>
>>caver1
>
>
> I believe that occurs during the formatting, not the selection
> of
> partitions. And the warning is generic. It comes up if you
> placed
> partitions onto a completely empty disk, as well as one that
> was previously
> partitioned. The system KNOWS if the disk had previous
> partitions on it. It
> is at that point that the system should warn you, not after it
> has
> repartitioned the disk. It especially KNOWS if there were NTFS
> partitions
> on the disk previously. That is when it should give the
> warning. IF the
> user selects manaul repartitioning, the system may well assume
> that he
> knows what he is doing. If the system automatically
> repartitions the disk
> for the user, the system should assume that the person's grasp
> of
> partitioning is weak and be extra careful to give warnings,
> and not generic
> idiotic warnings like the above, which you get if you
> partition a brand new
> completely blank disk.
>
> I believe that the OP stated that the Ubuntu people have
> admitted that the
> lack of warning is a bug. If there is a lack of warning at the
> repartitioning stage, then that IS a bug.
>
>
 
"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:upTIUCEFIHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>
>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
>> are all correct.
>
>
> WTF difference does it make which HAS data, the installer is telling you
> that it soon won't have if you proceed. If by this time in the procedure
> you don't know then a) you should not be installing operating systems and
> b) you cancel the operation and check.

But what you say is not ture.
The installer may be going to destroy data or it may not be.
If you continue you may end up with a dual boot system or not.
Why is it you can't see that the warnings are wrong as in some circumstances
they lie.

>
> If you are suggesting the installer should detect and identify every
> operating system and file system ever created then you better tell them to
> correct the Vista and XP installers because they don't wipe your butt for
> you either...

No I am suggesting that if the installer is not going to destroy data it
should not say it is.
At best it confuses the newbies and they abandon linux, at worst the
experience user will ignore it as they know its wrong and delete their
system.
Its simple enough if you think about it.
>
> What you have proven conclusively is your ability to behave like a
> complete idiot...
 
"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
news:eu2QUSEFIHA.5752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>
>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>>> nothing is wrong?
>>>
>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>
>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>
>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>
>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>
>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
>> are all correct.
>
>
> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what
> if?'
> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.

You have not read what I wrote.

With Ubuntu you get the same warning even if no data is going to be lost.
What this does is stop newbies from installing it as they are going to lose
data (even though they aren't).
The experienced user will ignore the message as he knows it is talking
rubbish when it says it is going to remove data and will delete his system.

The messages are wrong!

Its bad enough that they are cryptic but in the case of Ubuntu they are
*wrong* they do not apply to what is actually going to happen.
Is that clear enough?

If you read the posts you will even see where I posted what the messages
said for the example where I selected use the entire disk and use the free
space and they are the *same*.
 
"Doug W." <stand@attention> wrote in message
news:emMELmFFIHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit posting
> about it on this NG.

Stop screaming and kill the thread if you don't like it.

Click in the column with the specs on adjacent to the post until a red
no-entry sign appears if you don't know how.

Abracadabra no more posts in this thread.
 
Doug W. wrote:
> UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit posting
> about it on this NG.
> -

New to Usenet?

--
Alias

To email me, remove shoes
 
Alias wrote:
> Doug W. wrote:
>> UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit posting
>> about it on this NG.
>> -
>
> New to Usenet?
>

This is why I hate this forum.
 
"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:D4A33D23-205D-4B94-B259-9450A8473E3E@microsoft.com...
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:eu2QUSEFIHA.5752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>>>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>>>> nothing is wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>>
>>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>>
>>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>>
>>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
>>> are all correct.
>>
>>
>> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what
>> if?'
>> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
>
> You have not read what I wrote.
>
> With Ubuntu you get the same warning even if no data is going to be lost.
> What this does is stop newbies from installing it as they are going to
> lose data (even though they aren't).
> The experienced user will ignore the message as he knows it is talking
> rubbish when it says it is going to remove data and will delete his
> system.
>
> The messages are wrong!
>
> Its bad enough that they are cryptic but in the case of Ubuntu they are
> *wrong* they do not apply to what is actually going to happen.
> Is that clear enough?
>
> If you read the posts you will even see where I posted what the messages
> said for the example where I selected use the entire disk and use the free
> space and they are the *same*.

It's up to the user to know what partitions are on what devices, so when the
installed gives the message that partition x will be formatted, the user
knows what was on that partition to start with.

The warning is a general warning, indicating to the user any change he has
made to a partition will result in the loss of any data on that drive.

You don't seem to be able to comprehend the messages in context. I can only
assume english is not your first language.
 
dobey wrote:
> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
> news:D4A33D23-205D-4B94-B259-9450A8473E3E@microsoft.com...
>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
>> news:eu2QUSEFIHA.5752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>>>>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>>>>> nothing is wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>>>
>>>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>>>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
>>>> are all correct.
>>>
>>> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what
>>> if?'
>>> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
>> You have not read what I wrote.
>>
>> With Ubuntu you get the same warning even if no data is going to be lost.
>> What this does is stop newbies from installing it as they are going to
>> lose data (even though they aren't).
>> The experienced user will ignore the message as he knows it is talking
>> rubbish when it says it is going to remove data and will delete his
>> system.
>>
>> The messages are wrong!
>>
>> Its bad enough that they are cryptic but in the case of Ubuntu they are
>> *wrong* they do not apply to what is actually going to happen.
>> Is that clear enough?
>>
>> If you read the posts you will even see where I posted what the messages
>> said for the example where I selected use the entire disk and use the free
>> space and they are the *same*.
>
> It's up to the user to know what partitions are on what devices, so when the
> installed gives the message that partition x will be formatted, the user
> knows what was on that partition to start with.
>
> The warning is a general warning, indicating to the user any change he has
> made to a partition will result in the loss of any data on that drive.
>
> You don't seem to be able to comprehend the messages in context. I can only
> assume english is not your first language.
>
>


Hehe, the simple fact is that even if the user should end up with a
"Dual Boot" system (Which is unlikely but Dennis knows best of course)
his "Data" has still been lost, in the sense that what he had originally
is no longer there. and without changing GRUB or something he probably
won't be able to use it. Claiming that "Use entire disk" and "Use free
space" are the same is simply lying, at least as far as my experience
demonstrates, the result is the "Same" if you get to that point and
cancel, it makes no changes, but if you understand what "Free Space"
means then the results are not. As for the answers being "Cryptic" I
don't see how anyone claiming Dennis' great experience and expertise on
all things OS could possibly be fooled.

Yes a complete idiot could mangle their system, just as they could by
not following the rather misleading "Start / Shutdown" procedure, or by
pulling the plug or having ActiveX install a virus. You may have heard
about the Lawyer's secretary who donated $1000s to a Nigerian
"Businessman" with access to someone's bank account. Fact is though that
most users (yes even just plain users) are not that stupid and those who
are will break something whatever.

Prediction:- "If" Dennis is correct Linux will get all the smart users
and Windows will get all the idiots, who have not yet broken their
systems but will, over and over again.
 
Charlie Tame wrote:

< snip >

> Prediction:- "If" Dennis is correct Linux will get all the smart users
> and Windows will get all the idiots, who have not yet broken their
> systems but will, over and over again.

Color me confused, but what exactly would change then?
Isn't that the situation we have right now?
--
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
 
"dobey" <a@v.nox> wrote in message
news:uDpO3WKFIHA.284@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
> news:D4A33D23-205D-4B94-B259-9450A8473E3E@microsoft.com...
>>
>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
>> news:eu2QUSEFIHA.5752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:uN%23NKlDFIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The same reason that GW Bush doesn't announce when he's NOT going to
>>>>> bomb somebody, because then there's nothing to worry about, is there?
>>>>> Are you know complaining that Linux doesn't constantly warn you when
>>>>> nothing is wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Christ almighty, what is wrong with this?
>>>>
>>>> Its a poor analogy? Who knows what else is wrong with what you said?
>>>>
>>>>> You are saying that someone with your claimed experience cannot
>>>>> understand a simple message like this one?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.tames.net/screenshot.jpg
>>>>
>>>> So which of those partitions has data on that is going to be destroyed?
>>>> Answer: none or one or both or the ones not listed, take your pick they
>>>> are all correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is no pleasing you. No matter what the answer you say but- "what
>>> if?'
>>> You're shown that the warning is there. Then you ask why is it there.
>>
>> You have not read what I wrote.
>>
>> With Ubuntu you get the same warning even if no data is going to be lost.
>> What this does is stop newbies from installing it as they are going to
>> lose data (even though they aren't).
>> The experienced user will ignore the message as he knows it is talking
>> rubbish when it says it is going to remove data and will delete his
>> system.
>>
>> The messages are wrong!
>>
>> Its bad enough that they are cryptic but in the case of Ubuntu they are
>> *wrong* they do not apply to what is actually going to happen.
>> Is that clear enough?
>>
>> If you read the posts you will even see where I posted what the messages
>> said for the example where I selected use the entire disk and use the
>> free space and they are the *same*.
>
> It's up to the user to know what partitions are on what devices, so when
> the installed gives the message that partition x will be formatted, the
> user knows what was on that partition to start with.
>
> The warning is a general warning, indicating to the user any change he has
> made to a partition will result in the loss of any data on that drive.
>
> You don't seem to be able to comprehend the messages in context. I can
> only assume english is not your first language.
>

They are the *same* even though different things are being done to the disk.
I assume that although English is your first language you don't bother to
read things properly.
 
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 21:13:33 -0600, Doug W. wrote:

> UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit
> posting about it on this NG.

For gawds sake learn how to read headers
comp.os.linux.misc,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windows.vista.general

For gawds sake direct your comment to the window troll that cross posted
that way to create this thread.

For gawds sake stop shouting.

For gawds sake stop top posting.

For gawds sake trim your posts.

For gawds sake and so on and so on
 
In article <e71MZ$JFIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>, greenjungle2007-
moron@yahoo.com.au.donotspam says...
> Alias wrote:
> > Doug W. wrote:
> >> UBUNTU HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WINDOWS XP. For gawds sake quit posting
> >> about it on this NG.
> >> -
> >
> > New to Usenet?
> >
>
> This is why I hate this forum.

Just create a filter for your usenet client that removes, hides, for the
Microsoft Groups only, posts that contain the following and it will be a
MUCH nicer experience:

Subject contains "Linux"
Or
Subject contains "Ubuntu"
Or
Body contains "Ubuntu"
Or
Body contains "Linux"
Or
From contains "Adam Albright"

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
 
Back
Top