Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alias
  • Start date Start date
A

Alias

My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.

Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org...
> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124 updates,
> all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>
> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>
> Alias

Of course Windows XP took days for you to finish. You don't know what you
are doing. Being a Ubuntu zealot, your productivity is probably down around
zero anyway.

On the other hand, I can install XP in an hour and install my software
within the next hour. Two hours total and I'm productive.

You should stick with Ubuntu, it's more your speed. XP is way over your
head.
 
Alias wrote:
> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>
> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>
> Alias

Well goody for you!
So why are you posting linux crap in a Vista ng (remember, you don't
have Vista)?
Frank
 
"Frank" <fb@sto.clm> wrote in message
news:4846c977$0$4264$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Alias wrote:
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Well goody for you!
> So why are you posting linux crap in a Vista ng (remember, you don't have
> Vista)?
> Frank

Alias uses Ubuntu so he is "S.L.O.W" and his reasoning is skewed. A better
avenue for him is Heroin additction.
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
says...
> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>
> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.

Then you didn't know what you were doing.

Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
to prompts.

MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.

Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min

Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min

Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.

Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.

--
- 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)
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

Leythos wrote:
> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
> says...
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>
> Then you didn't know what you were doing.

And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>
> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
> to prompts.

Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.

> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.

That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the install.

> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
>
> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min

Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.

>
> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.

Liar.

>
> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.

You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other program?

Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.

Alias
 
"Frank" <fb@sto.clm> wrote in message
news:4846c977$0$4264$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Alias wrote:
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Well goody for you!
> So why are you posting linux crap in a Vista ng (remember, you don't have
> Vista)?
> Frank

If it took him days to install XP and the updates it's a clear
indication he doesn't know what he's doing.

C.B.


--
It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
and unfortunate among us.
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

Alias wrote:
> Leythos wrote:
>
>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>> says...
>>
>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>>
>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>
>>
>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>
>
> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>
>>
>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying
>> attention to prompts.
>
>
> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>
>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>
>
> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the
> install.
>
>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
>>
>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>
>
> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>
>>
>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>
>
> Liar.
>
>>
>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>
>
> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other program?
>
> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>
> Alias
Are you as dumb and stupid as you appear to be?
Figures.
Frank
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

"Frank" <fb@sto.clm> wrote in message
news:4846da1d$0$4234$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Alias wrote:
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>> says...
>>>
>>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>>>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my
>>>> liking.
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>>
>>
>> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>>
>>>
>>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
>>> to prompts.
>>
>>
>> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>>
>>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>>
>>
>> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
>> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
>> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the
>> install.
>>
>>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
>>>
>>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>>
>>
>> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>>
>>>
>>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>>
>>
>> Liar.
>>
>>>
>>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>>
>>
>> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
>> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other
>> program?
>>
>> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
>> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>>
>> Alias
> Are you as dumb and stupid as you appear to be?
> Figures.
> Frank

Alias is dumber and "stupider" then he appears to be.
 
C.B. wrote:
>
>
> "Frank" <fb@sto.clm> wrote in message
> news:4846c977$0$4264$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Alias wrote:
>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>>
>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> Well goody for you!
>> So why are you posting linux crap in a Vista ng (remember, you don't
>> have Vista)?
>> Frank

I do have vista sitting on the shelf. What you don't have is a memory
because I've informed you of this on numerous occasions.

> If it took him days to install XP and the updates it's a clear
> indication he doesn't know what he's doing.
>
> C.B.
>
>

Really, how so? I didn't mean I was doing it two days straight without
doing anything else. The first install of the OS, SP3, updates and
programs was enough for one day. The next day I did the devices and anti
virus/malware apps. I waiting another day to make sure that there was
nothing askew before activating Office and XP and then I got the Office
updates. So, about 4 hours all told with many reboots. Ubuntu required
two reboots.

Of course, I don't just throw everything on without doing a clean up and
defrag between large or installs or a bunch of smaller program installs
which takes time. Now, that install of XP boots up in 48 seconds and is
as smooth as silk so, yes, booby, I DO know what I'm doing.

Alias
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

In article <g26l7c$24a$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
says...
> Leythos wrote:
> > In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
> > says...
> >> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
> >> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
> >> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
> >>
> >> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
> >
> > Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>
> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
> >
> > Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
> > to prompts.
>
> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.

Nope, you posted to a Vista group, not an XP group, so you were confused
and trolling - my times are completely accurate.

> > MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>
> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the install.

Activation took seconds, always has. No reason to wait, activation works
fine, no reason to delay.

> > Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
> >
> > Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>
> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.

Why, you blindly install Ubuntu updates and I've had that crash Ubuntu
more than once, so what's the difference. It's worked on more than 50
computers I've done so far. Ubuntu has a less spectacular record in my
experience.

> > Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>
> Liar.

You can't do basic addition very well.

> > Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
> > screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>
> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other program?
>
> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.

You posted to an Vista group, this is not an XP group, and you didn't
state what apps you installed, I did, and the times are accurate.

You don't even own Vista or office 2007, at least according to you, so
you don't have a clue.

I didn't have to install any drivers, it worked out of the box.

--
- 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)
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

Leythos wrote:
> In article <g26l7c$24a$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
> says...
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>> says...
>>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>>>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
>>> to prompts.
>> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>
> Nope, you posted to a Vista group, not an XP group,

I know.

> so you were confused
> and trolling

I wasn't.

> - my times are completely accurate.

Liar.

>
>>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
>> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
>> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the install.
>
> Activation took seconds, always has. No reason to wait, activation works
> fine, no reason to delay.

Is Office the only program you use?

>
>>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
>>>
>>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>
> Why, you blindly install Ubuntu updates and I've had that crash Ubuntu
> more than once, so what's the difference. It's worked on more than 50
> computers I've done so far. Ubuntu has a less spectacular record in my
> experience.

I wasn't referring to which updates to download but the way you were
installing updates is stupid. I've never had Ubuntu crash.

>
>>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>> Liar.
>
> You can't do basic addition very well.

Oh, I can. I just don't believe your figures.

>
>>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
>> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other program?
>>
>> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
>> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>
> You posted to an Vista group, this is not an XP group, and you didn't
> state what apps you installed, I did, and the times are accurate.

You said the only app you installed was Office and I don't believe you.
I installed about 25 programs in Ubuntu.

> You don't even own Vista or office 2007, at least according to you, so
> you don't have a clue.

I do own Vista and Office 03. I have no interest in Office 2007.

>
> I didn't have to install any drivers, it worked out of the box.

So your printer had no software to install? And your camera and scanner
didn't either? So you didn't have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti
malware app or any other programs besides Office? Yasee, this is the
kind of thing that makes people believe your LYING.

Alias
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

Leythos wrote:
> In article <g26l7c$24a$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
> says...
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>> says...
>>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>>>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying attention
>>> to prompts.
>> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>
> Nope, you posted to a Vista group, not an XP group, so you were confused
> and trolling - my times are completely accurate.
>
>>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
>> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
>> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the install.
>
> Activation took seconds, always has. No reason to wait, activation works
> fine, no reason to delay.
>
>>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0 min
>>>
>>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>
> Why, you blindly install Ubuntu updates and I've had that crash Ubuntu
> more than once, so what's the difference. It's worked on more than 50
> computers I've done so far. Ubuntu has a less spectacular record in my
> experience.
>
>>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>> Liar.
>
> You can't do basic addition very well.
>
>>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
>> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other program?
>>
>> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
>> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>
> You posted to an Vista group, this is not an XP group, and you didn't
> state what apps you installed, I did, and the times are accurate.
>
> You don't even own Vista or office 2007, at least according to you, so
> you don't have a clue.
>
> I didn't have to install any drivers, it worked out of the box.
>

Oh, and you didn't count the time it takes to download and install
Updates and I did for both XP and Ubuntu. If I don't count those, Ubuntu
took a half an hour.

Checkmate, game.

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org...
> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124 updates,
> all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.

Last time I tried installing ubuntu (about 6 weeks ago)
it hung for > 2 hours just detecting my hardware. It eventually completed
the install but then when it rebooted, I got
kernel panic. I ended up dumping it and installing Fedora 6. It took about
90 minutes to install and around
90 minutes to configure the way that I wanted.

> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.

My box at the office was dual booting XP/Fedora. Installing XP took
me around 30 minutes. Visual Studio, Qt and most of my other development
stuff
took longer but the whole thing was certainly less than 3 hours.

I just had to reinstall on my new PC running Vista and it still took < 3
hours and that's
even considering all of the clown suit stuff that I had to turn off.

Anyway, if you hate Vista so much and love Ubuntu so much, what are you
doing here?
 
Alias wrote:
> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>
> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>
> Alias
You forgot Windows Genuine Disadvantage
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g26occ$dla$1@aioe.org...
> Leythos wrote:
>> In article <g26l7c$24a$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>> says...
>>> Leythos wrote:
>>>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>>> says...
>>>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>>>>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my
>>>>> liking.
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>>> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>>>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying
>>>> attention to prompts.
>>> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>>
>> Nope, you posted to a Vista group, not an XP group, so you were confused
>> and trolling - my times are completely accurate.
>>
>>>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>>> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
>>> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
>>> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the
>>> install.
>>
>> Activation took seconds, always has. No reason to wait, activation works
>> fine, no reason to delay.
>>
>>>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0
>>>> min
>>>>
>>>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>>> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>>
>> Why, you blindly install Ubuntu updates and I've had that crash Ubuntu
>> more than once, so what's the difference. It's worked on more than 50
>> computers I've done so far. Ubuntu has a less spectacular record in my
>> experience.
>>
>>>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>>> Liar.
>>
>> You can't do basic addition very well.
>>
>>>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>>>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>>> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
>>> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other
>>> program?
>>>
>>> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
>>> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>>
>> You posted to an Vista group, this is not an XP group, and you didn't
>> state what apps you installed, I did, and the times are accurate.
>>
>> You don't even own Vista or office 2007, at least according to you, so
>> you don't have a clue.
>>
>> I didn't have to install any drivers, it worked out of the box.
>>
>
> Oh, and you didn't count the time it takes to download and install Updates
> and I did for both XP and Ubuntu. If I don't count those, Ubuntu took a
> half an hour.
>
> Checkmate, game.
>
> Alias

You're a lying piece of sh*t turd gurgling linsux loser. Go back to the
basement and put your mommies panties back on..
 
"Duane Hebert" <spoo@flarn.com> wrote in message
news:OFDOKUnxIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org...
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>
> Last time I tried installing ubuntu (about 6 weeks ago)
> it hung for > 2 hours just detecting my hardware. It eventually completed
> the install but then when it rebooted, I got
> kernel panic. I ended up dumping it and installing Fedora 6. It took
> about 90 minutes to install and around
> 90 minutes to configure the way that I wanted.
>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>
> My box at the office was dual booting XP/Fedora. Installing XP took
> me around 30 minutes. Visual Studio, Qt and most of my other development
> stuff
> took longer but the whole thing was certainly less than 3 hours.
>
> I just had to reinstall on my new PC running Vista and it still took < 3
> hours and that's
> even considering all of the clown suit stuff that I had to turn off.
>
> Anyway, if you hate Vista so much and love Ubuntu so much, what are you
> doing here?
>

Alias is the resident troll who has to try and convince everyone to run that
piece of crap OS TOY Ubuntu. He has no other purpose being here.
 
"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
news:mGB1k.3853$xZ.234@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
> Alias wrote:
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and it
>> took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>
>> Alias
> You forgot Windows Genuine Disadvantage

And you forgot that your head should be placed firmly up your ass. Please
read the instructions and put it back.

Thank you.
 
Re: Ubuntu is MUCH Easier to Install than Windows - NOT

upyurbuttoo wrote:
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g26occ$dla$1@aioe.org...
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> In article <g26l7c$24a$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>> says...
>>>> Leythos wrote:
>>>>> In article <g26gd5$f9t$1@aioe.org>, iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com
>>>>> says...
>>>>>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>>>>>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>>>>>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my
>>>>>> liking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>>>> Then you didn't know what you were doing.
>>>> And then Leythos proves he doesn't know what he's doing:
>>>>> Vista Business - 38 minutes to install because I wasn't paying
>>>>> attention to prompts.
>>>> Note, I said XP, not Vista Business. Nonetheless, 38 minutes is a lie.
>>> Nope, you posted to a Vista group, not an XP group, so you were confused
>>> and trolling - my times are completely accurate.
>>>
>>>>> MS Office 2007 Prof - 12 minutes to install.
>>>> That's the only program you use? You just activate both Vista and Office
>>>> upon install or aren't you counting that? I wait a few days before
>>>> activating XP or Office 2003 in case something went awry during the
>>>> install.
>>> Activation took seconds, always has. No reason to wait, activation works
>>> fine, no reason to delay.
>>>
>>>>> Worked with system while it downloaded updates in the background - 0
>>>>> min
>>>>>
>>>>> Let it install updates when I was done - 0 min
>>>> Pretty stupid of you to do the above but, hey, it's your computer.
>>> Why, you blindly install Ubuntu updates and I've had that crash Ubuntu
>>> more than once, so what's the difference. It's worked on more than 50
>>> computers I've done so far. Ubuntu has a less spectacular record in my
>>> experience.
>>>
>>>>> Less than half of Ubuntu - thanks for making the point Alias.
>>>> Liar.
>>> You can't do basic addition very well.
>>>
>>>>> Oh, no searching for drivers, no anything, all my printers, drives,
>>>>> screens, devices just worked as soon as I connected them.
>>>> You didn't have to install your video drivers? Sound drivers? You didn't
>>>> have to install Java, Flash, an AV, anti malware app, or any other
>>>> program?
>>>>
>>>> Lies don't cut it, Leythos, and you're obviously lying and know nothing
>>>> about how to install Vista or XP properly, much less Ubuntu.
>>> You posted to an Vista group, this is not an XP group, and you didn't
>>> state what apps you installed, I did, and the times are accurate.
>>>
>>> You don't even own Vista or office 2007, at least according to you, so
>>> you don't have a clue.
>>>
>>> I didn't have to install any drivers, it worked out of the box.
>>>
>> Oh, and you didn't count the time it takes to download and install Updates
>> and I did for both XP and Ubuntu. If I don't count those, Ubuntu took a
>> half an hour.
>>
>> Checkmate, game.
>>
>> Alias
>
> You're a lying piece of sh*t turd gurgling linsux loser. Go back to the
> basement and put your mommies panties back on..
>
>

Must be Frank's inbred cousin. The Vista users here sure are educated
and classy ...

Alias
 
measekite wrote:
>
>
> Alias wrote:
>> My hard drive went south so I had to reinstall Ubuntu. I timed it and
>> it took exactly one hour to install Ubuntu, download and install 124
>> updates, all the programs I use and tweaking Compiz Fusion to my liking.
>>
>> Windows XP, OTOH, on the same drive, took DAYS to finish.
>>
>> Alias
> You forgot Windows Genuine Disadvantage

I didn't install or forget that -)

Alias
 
Back
Top