You are so right.

 

I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they (Linux)

could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

Microsoft does.

 

Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

 

Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

Windows - thank you).

 

The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

 

--

 

Regards,

 

Richard Urban

Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

 

 

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message

news:64C1DD8C-97EB-48D6-A7D0-AF4A9F486E36@microsoft.com...

>

> "Alias" <iamalias@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:1192889255.974908.299510@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

>

>> If 25,000 programs are not enough choice for you, you need to get out

>> more.

>

> 25,000 programs is still a restricted subset and it excludes lots of

> games, CAD programs, video editors, sound processors, music composers and

> other stuff like that.

>

>

On Oct 20, 5:50 pm, "Richard Urban"

<richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> You are so right.

>

> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they (Linux)

> could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

> Microsoft does.

>

> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

> Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

> maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

> pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

> Windows - thank you).

>

> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

> --

>

> Regards,

>

> Richard Urban

> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

Most people don't need Auto Cad. What most people need a computer for,

Ubuntu will do just fine. I was at a book store today and there were

ten books on Ubuntu. It's the coming thing. Windows is the past.

Either get up to date or stay in the past. Your choice.

 

Alias

>

> "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message

>

> news:64C1DD8C-97EB-48D6-A7D0-AF4A9F486E36@microsoft.com...

>

>

>

> > "Alias" <iamal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> >news:1192889255.974908.299510@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

>

> >> If 25,000 programs are not enough choice for you, you need to get out

> >> more.

>

> > 25,000 programs is still a restricted subset and it excludes lots of

> > games, CAD programs, video editors, sound processors, music composers and

> > other stuff like that.

Richard Urban wrote:

> You are so right.

>

> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

> (Linux) could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate -

> similar to what Microsoft does.

>

> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program

> for Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of

> that 3%, maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure

> wouldn't pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works

> just fine in Windows - thank you).

>

> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

 

 

Why do you assume that AutoCAD is essential for everybody?

 

What percentage of Windows users use it?

"Alias" <iamalias@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1192900657.070344.180430@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

> On Oct 20, 5:50 pm, "Richard Urban"

> <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> You are so right.

>>

>> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

>> (Linux)

>> could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

>> Microsoft does.

>>

>> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

>> Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

>> maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>>

>> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

>> pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

>> Windows - thank you).

>>

>> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>>

>> --

>>

>> Regards,

>>

>> Richard Urban

>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

>> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>

> Most people don't need Auto Cad.

 

That is a very poor argument.

Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

 

--

 

Regards,

 

Richard Urban

Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

 

 

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

news:u7cVy6zEIHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Richard Urban wrote:

>> You are so right.

>>

>> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

>> (Linux) could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar

>> to what Microsoft does.

>>

>> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

>> Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

>> maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>>

>> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

>> pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

>> Windows - thank you).

>>

>> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>>

>

>

> Why do you assume that AutoCAD is essential for everybody?

>

> What percentage of Windows users use it?

On Oct 20, 7:57 pm, "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net>

wrote:

> "Alias" <iamal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:1192900657.070344.180430@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

>

>

>

> > On Oct 20, 5:50 pm, "Richard Urban"

> > <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >> You are so right.

>

> >> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

> >> (Linux)

> >> could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

> >> Microsoft does.

>

> >> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

> >> Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

> >> maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> >> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

> >> pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

> >> Windows - thank you).

>

> >> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

> >> --

>

> >> Regards,

>

> >> Richard Urban

> >> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

> >> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>

> > Most people don't need Auto Cad.

>

> That is a very poor argument.

> Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

 

LOL! People hate Vista and know that XP is on its last legs. Ubuntu is

an excellent alternative to the DRM riddled, WPA and WGA crippled POS

called Vista.

 

Alias

On Oct 20, 8:12 pm, "Richard Urban"

<richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>

> --

>

> Regards,

>

> Richard Urban

> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

The product is marketed to a very small part of Windows users that

have to use it for work. Repeat, very small.

 

Alias

>

> "Charlie Tame" <char...@tames.net> wrote in message

>

> news:u7cVy6zEIHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>

> > Richard Urban wrote:

> >> You are so right.

>

> >> I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

> >> (Linux) could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar

> >> to what Microsoft does.

>

> >> Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

> >> Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

> >> maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> >> Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

> >> pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

> >> Windows - thank you).

>

> >> The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

> > Why do you assume that AutoCAD is essential for everybody?

>

> > What percentage of Windows users use it?

Alias wrote:

> On Oct 20, 7:57 pm, "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net>

> wrote:

>

>>"Alias" <iamal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>

>>news:1192900657.070344.180430@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>>On Oct 20, 5:50 pm, "Richard Urban"

>>><richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>>You are so right.

>>

>>>>I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

>>>>(Linux)

>>>>could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

>>>>Microsoft does.

>>

>>>>Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

>>>>Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

>>>>maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>>

>>>>Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

>>>>pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

>>>>Windows - thank you).

>>

>>>>The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>>

>>>>--

>>

>>>>Regards,

>>

>>>>Richard Urban

>>>>Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

>>>>(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>>

>>>Most people don't need Auto Cad.

>>

>>That is a very poor argument.

>>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>

>

> LOL! People hate Vista and know that XP is on its last legs.

 

You must either be on drugs, extremely stupid, and/or one very confused

and naive person.

 

Ubuntu is

> an excellent alternative to the DRM riddled, WPA and WGA crippled POS

> called Vista.

 

Ubuntu is a toy POS os for children under the age of 3...or persons

mentally the same age.

Frank

Alias wrote:

> On Oct 20, 8:12 pm, "Richard Urban"

> <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>>Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>>

>>--

>>

>>Regards,

>>

>>Richard Urban

>>Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

>>(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>

>

> The product is marketed to a very small part of Windows users that

> have to use it for work. Repeat, very small.

>

> Alias

>

 

More people use it than use linux.

Frank

 

>>"Charlie Tame" <char...@tames.net> wrote in message

>>

>>news:u7cVy6zEIHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>

>>

>>>Richard Urban wrote:

>>>

>>>>You are so right.

>>

>>>>I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

>>>>(Linux) could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar

>>>>to what Microsoft does.

>>

>>>>Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

>>>>Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

>>>>maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>>

>>>>Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

>>>>pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

>>>>Windows - thank you).

>>

>>>>The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>>

>>>Why do you assume that AutoCAD is essential for everybody?

>>

>>>What percentage of Windows users use it?

>

>

>

Richard Urban wrote:

> Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>

 

 

I have never had any need to use AutoCad in my entire life, neither have

millions upon millions windows users. Those who do have probably done so

for years and likely their "Company" bought it together with the latest

fastest hardware / monitors etc.

 

So what?

 

Mack markets a vast range of big trucks - how many people use one of

those to go shopping?

 

If you must display your stupidity and ignorance you might at least try

to pick a subject that didn't make it quite so obvious...

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

news:uSu8c%230EIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Richard Urban wrote:

>> Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>>

>

>

> I have never had any need to use AutoCad in my entire life, neither have

> millions upon millions windows users. Those who do have probably done so

> for years and likely their "Company" bought it together with the latest

> fastest hardware / monitors etc.

 

billions of people have never needed linux.

(I wonder what that means?)

> So what?

>

> Mack markets a vast range of big trucks - how many people use one of those

> to go shopping?

>

> If you must display your stupidity and ignorance you might at least try to

> pick a subject that didn't make it quite so obvious...

Charlie

 

The point is that one runs the OS which best serves the user in terms of

what applications/programs are needed/wanted, basic facts that the Linux

trolls do not address as it doesn't matter to them so long as they get to

bash MS, Vista and XP.

 

--

Mike Hall - MVP

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Posting Productively.. http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

 

 

 

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

news:uSu8c%230EIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Richard Urban wrote:

>> Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>>

>

>

> I have never had any need to use AutoCad in my entire life, neither have

> millions upon millions windows users. Those who do have probably done so

> for years and likely their "Company" bought it together with the latest

> fastest hardware / monitors etc.

>

> So what?

>

> Mack markets a vast range of big trucks - how many people use one of those

> to go shopping?

>

> If you must display your stupidity and ignorance you might at least try to

> pick a subject that didn't make it quite so obvious...

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:57:34 +0100, "dennis@home"

<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

 

>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

 

What people need, more correctly will benefit from, is the right

operating system for the things they wish to do with their computers.

 

While Windows in one version or another is clearly the leader simply

judging by how many copies are installed, that doesn't make it the

right choice for everybody. In fact unless you use a lot of Windows

specific software that either won't run or doesn't run well on some

other platform or doesn't have a suitable substitute, Windows can

often be a poor choice.

 

That actually represents a sizeable number of people posting here.

Many use their computers only to write and read email, play games,

surf the web and maybe once in awhile use a word processor,

spreadsheet or maybe make some elementary adjustment to some graphic

or video. Well, you can do any of those things on Linux, Mac, UNIX,

BeOS and several other platforms as well as, sometimes better than you

can using Windows.

 

Windows remains the dominant operating system not because it is so

much better than the rest rather for the following reasons:

 

1. It comes preinstalled and most people don't build their own

systems preferring to get some pre build box from Dell, Gateway,

HP, Acer, etc..

 

2. Force of habit. Those that know how to install a different OS

or are willing to try often stick with Windows because they use

one or more favorite applications that only runs correctly under

Windows. While such people would like to change (include me) they

really can't without investing in a whole pile of new software at

considerable expense plus getting up to speed learning how to use

the replacement software efficiently.

 

3. Software developers often don't invest the necessary time or money

to write for other platforms. Again in my own situation Sony's

Vegas which I use constantly only runs under Windows. Asking their

program manager point blank if they would ever support Macs or

Linux or any platform besides Windows his response in their forum

was when hell freezes over.

 

So you have a catch 22. More developers would likely invest time in

writing for other platforms IF they see Linux or Mac gaining enough

market share. People aren't jumping to either Linux or Macs in mass

because there isn't a lot of top of the line software that runs on

them. In the case of Macs there is some good software, but the choices

are more limited, generally over priced and further limited in

hardware support. Linux has some quality software, GIMP for example

and a decent word processor but lags behind in many other areas and

installing drivers if you can find them, can be a pain. However if all

you use your computer for is basic things it is a good choice.

 

All of the above and more leads the typical Windows user to be

frustrated. Microsoft clearly doesn't care about or support their

customers. They view them as a captive audience, so would you if were

part of Microsoft's management team. Why try harder to write better

software when you don't really have to? The answer is as you see in

Vista, just another half-baked attempt rushed out the door crippled at

least for some until the first service pack arrives. So why shouldn't

people having problems show some frustration here? Fanboys and MVPs

don't like people pointing out flaws. Instead of helping the knee jerk

reaction is usually to belittle, ridicule and try to discredit anybody

reporting issues. That only leads to further frustration.

Alias wrote:

> On Oct 20, 1:54 pm, "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net>

> wrote:

>> "Alias" <iamal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>

>> news:1192874573.890952.172210@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

>>

>> 8<

>>

>>>>> viruses and malware that don't run on Linux. Oops.

>>>> They do, seehttp://secunia.com/search/?search=linux

>>>> Not too much, a mere 3667.

>>> Compared to Windows, Linux is bullet proof. If you only install

>>> programs from the repository with Ubuntu, your chances of getting

>>> malware are slim and none.

>> Compared to leaving your TV in the supermarket car park, leaving it on the

>> front lawn is bullet proof security.

>> Would you do either?

>> I thought you understood security by comparison is not security.

>

> It's obvious you misunderstood what I wrote but what else is new?

>

> Alias

>

 

<The bottom line is you don't know what you're talking about, and you

always got an excuse for your stupidity, you dumba$$ home user.>

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

news:smlkh3d8tig66k530nv1f0vppi87unlord@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:57:34 +0100, "dennis@home"

> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>

>

>>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>

> What people need, more correctly will benefit from, is the right

> operating system for the things they wish to do with their computers.

 

Thats odd.. when I said that a couple of weeks ago you accused me of being a

blow hard, ignorant, fake expert.

Except of course I said choose the application and then the OS and then the

hardware.

Adam Albright wrote:

 

<snipped the the Fruit Loop Albright never ending whine>

 

<Fruit Loop you are pathetic. Who asked you to write all of this BS? Do

you ever shut your stupid and I will add worthless mouth up? No cares

about what your commentary on anything. You don't carry any weight in

the NG. You have destroyed yourself in the NG with your constant crying

and your hollier than thou BS. You are no expert on anything. The only

thing you're an expert on is how to become addicted to the Internet. You

are an expert's expert on that Fruit Loop.>

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:16:37 +0100, "dennis@home"

<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>

>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

>news:smlkh3d8tig66k530nv1f0vppi87unlord@4ax.com...

>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:57:34 +0100, "dennis@home"

>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>>

>> What people need, more correctly will benefit from, is the right

>> operating system for the things they wish to do with their computers.

>

>Thats odd.. when I said that a couple of weeks ago you accused me of being a

>blow hard, ignorant, fake expert.

>Except of course I said choose the application and then the OS and then the

>hardware.

 

HUGE difference between you an me. I simply try to help people. You on

the other hand on always on a never ending trip to try to impress

people with how smart you think you are. Sorry, not impressed with

your constant pontificating or the other half dozen or so Bozo's that

always do it too.

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

news:s2pkh3dfccpnbr5h2do5tga2e7h7m3mha1@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:16:37 +0100, "dennis@home"

> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>

>>

>>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

>>news:smlkh3d8tig66k530nv1f0vppi87unlord@4ax.com...

>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:57:34 +0100, "dennis@home"

>>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>>>

>>> What people need, more correctly will benefit from, is the right

>>> operating system for the things they wish to do with their computers.

>>

>>Thats odd.. when I said that a couple of weeks ago you accused me of being

>>a

>>blow hard, ignorant, fake expert.

>>Except of course I said choose the application and then the OS and then

>>the

>>hardware.

>

> HUGE difference between you an me. I simply try to help people. You on

> the other hand on always on a never ending trip to try to impress

> people with how smart you think you are. Sorry, not impressed with

> your constant pontificating or the other half dozen or so Bozo's that

> always do it too.

>

 

Still crazy I see.

I thought the pills might have been working for a while.

dennis@home wrote:

>

> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

> news:s2pkh3dfccpnbr5h2do5tga2e7h7m3mha1@4ax.com...

>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:16:37 +0100, "dennis@home"

>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>>

>>>

>>> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

>>> news:smlkh3d8tig66k530nv1f0vppi87unlord@4ax.com...

>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:57:34 +0100, "dennis@home"

>>>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>> Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>>>>

>>>> What people need, more correctly will benefit from, is the right

>>>> operating system for the things they wish to do with their computers.

>>>

>>> Thats odd.. when I said that a couple of weeks ago you accused me of

>>> being a

>>> blow hard, ignorant, fake expert.

>>> Except of course I said choose the application and then the OS and

>>> then the

>>> hardware.

>>

>> HUGE difference between you an me. I simply try to help people. You on

>> the other hand on always on a never ending trip to try to impress

>> people with how smart you think you are. Sorry, not impressed with

>> your constant pontificating or the other half dozen or so Bozo's that

>> always do it too.

>>

>

> Still crazy I see.

> I thought the pills might have been working for a while.

 

<That's funny. Albright really doesn't know how others view his mental

state, which is he is a flat-out lunatic that needs to be locked-up. And

he is addicted to the Internet. <g>>

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> Charlie

>

> The point is that one runs the OS which best serves the user in terms of

> what applications/programs are needed/wanted, basic facts that the Linux

> trolls do not address as it doesn't matter to them so long as they get

> to bash MS, Vista and XP.

>

 

 

 

I agree, which means that "Not being able to run AutoCad" is an entirely

meaningless criticism for the vast majority of people.

 

From experience, XP is obviously best for games, in fact I'd say at

this time in terms of reliability in many ways it still is the best for

many other applications too, but it is NOT the only choice any more for

a very large number of other things.

 

If you are going to even try and influence someone's choice then you

have to supply some rational argument. Being Positive it's called.

 

As 64 bit becomes the hardware standard then Vista "Should" forge ahead,

but just as an example I have installed several 64 bit Linux with far

less issues than with 64 bit Vista and NO licensing / driver or

incompatible hardware problems, no nagging about legality, no constant

popups and no abuse from the Linux community when I've asked the

occasional question that to them probably is a "Newbie" issue.

Alias wrote:

> On Oct 20, 12:58 pm, cvp <goa...@nospam.com> wrote:

>> Alias wrote:

>>> On Oct 19, 7:24 pm, cvp <goa...@nospam.com> wrote:

>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>> <snip>

>>>> > No, Windows has to become 100% compatible with Linux if it plans to

>>>> > stay around.

>>>> <snip>

>>>> You jest! Why would Windows give up its device support interfaces just

>>>> to reduce the number of devices supported to the Linux level.

>>>> Now if Linux were to support the .inf and device driver interfaces of

>>>> Windows and accept that most IHVs don't want to give their proprietary

>>>> code to the Open Source community, Linux would remove a large inhibitor

>>>> to its adoption.

>>> Gutsy supports more hardware than Vista. Oops.

>> Not on my machines. 3 out of 4 printers not supported.

>

> Lexmark?

>

>> 3 scanners not

>> supported.

>

> Lexmark?

 

No 2 Canons (MF3110 and Mf4150( and Samsung SPP2040)

>

>> 2 modems integrated into MF printers not supported.

>

> Winmodem?

 

No - in the 2 Canons - Canon Fax software accesses them (in Windows)

>

>> 2 TV

>> Tuners not supported. RAID not supported. With 1440 x 900 monitor uses

>> up about 850 width.

>> The RAID support requires recompiling the kernel. The ATI provided

>> driver (not avail with restricted drivers) requires a convoluted series

>> of dowmload instructions be followed (which eventual ends up recompiling).

>

> The reason I use nVidia.

>

> It isn't Ubuntu's fault that Lexmark and ATI don't support Linux.

 

Who said anything about fault. I was merely observing the result.

>

>> Not all of these are natively available in Vista, but the add-on process

>> is trivial.

>>

>> If you don't see that as a problem, you've got your head firmly stuck in

>> the sand.

>

> I don't use that hardware so, no, it isn't a problem for me.

>>

>>

>>>> As far as applications go, there is no lack of Windows supported ones,

>>>> both proprietary and open source.

>>> Yeah, and you are blessed with the groovy WPA, WGA, stealth updates,

>>> viruses and malware that don't run on Linux. Oops.

>>> Alias

>> I have no liking for WPA, WGA and stealth upgrades. OTOH I haven't had

>> problems like some here. I always run antivirus sofware, and have never

>> had a virus get through.

>

> You are computer savvy. I repair computers sometimes and the people

> who use Live Messenger, surf, email and use eMule bring their

> computers to me chock full of viruses and malware. The don't update

> *anything*. Windows is OK for computer savvy people but Ubuntu is

> better for users who are not.

 

I do the same. Usually I get them after they "tried a few things to fix

it!" It is amazing what people can do, but independent of OS.

>

> Alias

>

>

We are not here to influence choice. The OP has already made the choice,

whether he/she likes to believe it or not.

 

--

Mike Hall - MVP

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Posting Productively.. http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

 

 

 

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

news:u2VlLr1EIHA.4628@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

>> Charlie

>>

>> The point is that one runs the OS which best serves the user in terms of

>> what applications/programs are needed/wanted, basic facts that the Linux

>> trolls do not address as it doesn't matter to them so long as they get to

>> bash MS, Vista and XP.

>>

>

>

>

> I agree, which means that "Not being able to run AutoCad" is an entirely

> meaningless criticism for the vast majority of people.

>

> From experience, XP is obviously best for games, in fact I'd say at this

> time in terms of reliability in many ways it still is the best for many

> other applications too, but it is NOT the only choice any more for a very

> large number of other things.

>

> If you are going to even try and influence someone's choice then you have

> to supply some rational argument. Being Positive it's called.

>

> As 64 bit becomes the hardware standard then Vista "Should" forge ahead,

> but just as an example I have installed several 64 bit Linux with far less

> issues than with 64 bit Vista and NO licensing / driver or incompatible

> hardware problems, no nagging about legality, no constant popups and no

> abuse from the Linux community when I've asked the occasional question

> that to them probably is a "Newbie" issue.

>

On Oct 20, 9:12 pm, Frank <f...@osspan.clm> wrote:

> Alias wrote:

> > On Oct 20, 7:57 pm, "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net>

> > wrote:

>

> >>"Alias" <iamal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> >>news:1192900657.070344.180430@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

>

> >>>On Oct 20, 5:50 pm, "Richard Urban"

> >>><richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

> >>>>You are so right.

>

> >>>>I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

> >>>>(Linux)

> >>>>could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar to what

> >>>>Microsoft does.

>

> >>>>Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

> >>>>Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

> >>>>maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> >>>>Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

> >>>>pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

> >>>>Windows - thank you).

>

> >>>>The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

> >>>>--

>

> >>>>Regards,

>

> >>>>Richard Urban

> >>>>Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

> >>>>(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>

> >>>Most people don't need Auto Cad.

>

> >>That is a very poor argument.

> >>Most people don't need Linux, especially those posting in this group.

>

> > LOL! People hate Vista and know that XP is on its last legs.

>

> You must either be on drugs, extremely stupid, and/or one very confused

> and naive person.

>

> Ubuntu is

>

> > an excellent alternative to the DRM riddled, WPA and WGA crippled POS

> > called Vista.

>

> Ubuntu is a toy POS os for children under the age of 3...or persons

> mentally the same age.

> Frank

 

Keep telling yourself that, Frank.

 

Alias

On Oct 20, 9:13 pm, Frank <f...@osspan.clm> wrote:

> Alias wrote:

> > On Oct 20, 8:12 pm, "Richard Urban"

> > <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

> >>Enough that the product is marketed for Windows - not Linux.

>

> >>--

>

> >>Regards,

>

> >>Richard Urban

> >>Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

> >>(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

>

> > The product is marketed to a very small part of Windows users that

> > have to use it for work. Repeat, very small.

>

> > Alias

>

> More people use it than use linux.

> Frank

 

Sure, Frank.

 

Alias

>

> >>"Charlie Tame" <char...@tames.net> wrote in message

>

> >>news:u7cVy6zEIHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>

> >>>Richard Urban wrote:

>

> >>>>You are so right.

>

> >>>>I am still waiting to install AutoCad under Linux. Gee, maybe they

> >>>>(Linux) could write a "shim" to allow it to install and operate - similar

> >>>>to what Microsoft does.

>

> >>>>Autodesk sure isn't going to re-engineer their very expensive program for

> >>>>Linux, when Linux has less that 3% of the desktop total. And, of that 3%,

> >>>>maybe 2% - will need to use AutoCad.

>

> >>>>Even if Autodesk came out with a Linux version (unlikely) I sure wouldn't

> >>>>pay an additional $3800 for what I already have (which works just fine in

> >>>>Windows - thank you).

>

> >>>>The fact remains that Linux still can't do it.

>

> >>>Why do you assume that AutoCAD is essential for everybody?

>

> >>>What percentage of Windows users use it?

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> We are not here to influence choice. The OP has already made the choice,

> whether he/she likes to believe it or not.

>

 

 

There is an obligation to point out what we see as "Bad" choices from

the point of view of a user endangering their system, with the caveat

that it's an opinion or else with some link to other evidence.

 

Stating the obvious, that some OS will not run a program not designed

for it and citing that as as reason to avoid that OS is not the same

thing at all. My truck won't run on diesel, does that mean I should

insist that diesel power is a bad thing?