NationStates Jolt Archive

Suddenly I don’t have to enter source code in an outdated editor and compile the code to make things works.

I just point and click, if something goes wrong, I just read the instructions on the screen.

There’s something weird. I have some exotic hardware, but it is finding and installing the drivers automatically. They are even configured at the same time.

Ok, the OS is in installed, let’s see, what can I do now? Install some software?

Btw, till now, I’m satisfied with the usability.

I’m checking the internet and I’m amazed by the amazing amount of titles that’s available. I can even play games. Go figure!

The fun part is that I don’t have to add code to get it working. It is working! Even with my exotic hardware.

I notice some differences between the past and now.

In the past I discovered sometimes nice software that was and looked promising.
But once installed I noticed that the software was not finished, that the needed and promised features were not there. With a smile I called that kind of tools, promisware.

On Windows it’s different. Everything is there. And if it isn’t the case, they will add it to the next version. And they really do it. They don’t moan about ‘no time or changing moods and interests’. They just do it! What a dream!

Sorry guys but I’ll never return from where I came.

As a nice sidekick: my social life is changing as well.
In the past all my friends were nerdy ugly nerds that stay in single modus for ages.
Nobody was interested in me. They pointed at me like I was some f*cking Trekkie. Ok, my own fault I used an obscure OS.

But now, my friends are all beautiful women. I have even sex with them. Eat your heart out, nerds!

Nice strawman! I wonder if you ever used anything else than the Vista which came with your PC.

Software for Windows is often in a horrible shape and translated in a way which wants to make you puke,

Drivers for anything exotic which is older than a year? Forget it!

Installing software under Windows? a chore! Compared to that emerge is user-friendly and I say that after having had to reinstall KDE.

Usability? Sorry, the function I need are lacking!

Promisware (the term is vaporware)? Well, Windows promised since 1.0 to be stable and since '98 to be secure... Word promised to be able to be usable for texts longer than a page...

And fyi: you normally do not need to program to be able to use Linux - unless you want to.

I doubt that you even saw a woman until now other than your Ma. Or did she buy you a Barbie?

Too bad your computer now believes you are a retard [1];)

Hail Haiku - the stylish OS :P

[1] Note: Your computer. Not someone posting here ;)

[insert obligatory Star Wars quote here]

Installing software under Windows? a chore!
Yeah, double clicking on the executable and then clicking on all the options I want really tired out my mouse hand.

Usability? Sorry, the function I need are lacking!
Which function is that? The one that makes you code all your own programs?

Promisware (the term is vaporware)? Well, Windows promised since 1.0 to be stable and since '98 to be secure... Word promised to be able to be usable for texts longer than a page...
My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.

Yeah, double clicking on the executable and then clicking on all the options I want really tired out my mouse hand.
Indeed, all that clicking. if I want an office program, I type "emerge koffice" as root, and sleep for the night with my computer compiling it. Under Windows, I click my hand sore until it even starts downloading.


Which function is that? The one that makes you code all your own programs?
Focus-follows mouse. virtual desktops, assignable hotkeys, a powerful commandline, moving buttons on the windows, assigning windows automatically to virtual desktops,...


My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.

Again you need to buy this, download that, install this-here, update thatoverthere where Linux has everything in its normal installation and you just need to config it. Also Windows used to be very buggy with 16-bit software... it could kill your entire operating system.

The_pantless_hero;13051952]Yeah, double clicking on the executable and then clicking on all the options I want really tired out my mouse hand.

Really? I just insert a DVD and click a few times on 'Next'. In the past an entire teame of some obscure nerds stayed the entire weekend at my homeplace, drinking all my beer, just to install something like...notepad.

And they came back the following weekend, cause they had to code some more promised aka vapor functions. Things like saving a file...


Which function is that? The one that makes you code all your own programs?

I think he's talking about that one promised aka vapor function to emulate Windows...

My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.

Yes, my real Windows is running stable as well. My 'Windows' on my Flintstone OS was...promising and very unstable.

Really? I just insert a DVD and click a few times on 'Next'. In the past an entire teame of some obscure nerds stayed the entire weekend at my homeplace, drinking all my beer, just to install something like...notepad.
"emerge joe"...



And they came back the following weekend, cause they had to code some more promised aka vapor functions. Things like saving a file...
Crtl+K, Crtl+D

I think he's talking about that one promised aka vapor function to emulate Windows...
if Windows could emulate itself, it would be a big step ahead... but Windows remains more unusable than fvwm2! At least IMHO



Yes, my real Windows is running stable as well. My 'Windows' on my Flintstone OS was...promising and very unstable.
Who installed you FreeDOS?

Rejistania, just ignore him. He's a troll trying to goad you for reactions.

Operating systems fulfill the needs of those who use them. Windows currently fulfills all of my needs because I mainly use my computer for gaming.

Which reminds me...is there a Macintosh emulator for Windows? And what versions of Macintosh are available?

And why exactly couldn't all this have gone in the linux thread?

Oh that's right, trolls are basically after attention, and making a copy cat thread garners more attention than just trolling the existing thread.

*Various anti Windows claims*
Aye, but Linux is actually piss poor at games, and people who say things like "get WinE" are being extra ludicrous.

Why need I get WinE, when I can just have compatability with any program that anyone cares about right off the bat?

[snipped]
Assimulation complete. Microsoft's bid to take over teh world has advanced by one more person. :cool:

Aye, but Linux is actually piss poor at games, and people who say things like "get WinE" are being extra ludicrous.

Why need I get WinE, when I can just have compatability with any program that anyone cares about right off the bat?

I'd say something like "You do realize that Linux is poor with games because games are very rarely made for the various Linux operating systems, right?" but you probably already know that and would make fun of me for saying it.

Indeed, all that clicking. if I want an office program, I type "emerge koffice" as root, and sleep for the night with my computer compiling it. Under Windows, I click my hand sore until it even starts downloading.
I just clicked "Download OpenOffice." Then I double-clicked in and picked where I wanted it installed and what I wanted installed and it was done.

a powerful commandline,
DOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.



Again you need to buy this, download that, install this-here, update thatoverthere where Linux has everything in its normal installation and you just need to config it. Also Windows used to be very buggy with 16-bit software... it could kill your entire operating system.
Oh no, you have to buy and download stuff! Doooooom!

[insert obligatory Star Wars quote here]

which quote...

"I got a bad feeling about this"

"Laugh it up furball"

"everyone's suffering from Delusions of Grandure"


oh wait... I know...


"Arn't you a little short to be a Stormtrooper?"

I'd say something like "You do realize that Linux is poor with games because games are very rarely made for the various Linux operating systems, right?" but you probably already know that and would make fun of me for saying it.
*makes fun of you for even considering saying this* :p

DOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.

Yeah, you know what, Pantless? I am really getting sick and tired of your constant idiotic dipshit pretend attempts at understanding things you don't. You're far worse than any troll I've ever seen here--fuck, you're worse than Remote Observer--because you never, NEVER let up on this "I know what I'm talking about when I really don't" bullshit and shout people down. I'm sick of it, we're all sick of it, so just stop and try learning things for once. FUCK!

DOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.

Eeehm, no. Really, no. Dos and the bat system are pathetic.
And yes, I can use it.

Otherwise windows indeed is not a piece of crap or whatever some zealots claim.

*makes fun of you for even considering saying this* :p

See? I know you so well already.

See? I know you so well already.
Erm aye, s'true. Although you probably did back when I was regular Yootopia. So there we go.

IDOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.

I'm pretty sure that DOS isn't use for programming.

Windows really is the best operating system. Most compatible, most simple.

And no, don't you dare tell me that Linux is simple. Fuck that command line bullshit; it's a graphical OS for people who never moved beyond command line.

I'm pretty sure that DOS isn't use for programming.

You can create basic scripts with the built-in batch language.

I just clicked "Download OpenOffice." Then I double-clicked in and picked where I wanted it installed and what I wanted installed and it was done.
Well, you have to go to the website, download the program, wait for it to download, then go through the installation. One command and you're done with linux.


DOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.
ROFLMAO. That's almost sig worthy.



Oh no, you have to buy and download stuff! Doooooom!
As opposed to getting it for free and skipping several steps.

Who in their right mind would use Basic anymore?

Pantsless?

Who in their right mind would use Basic anymore?

People that still want to play the games in the back of the Discovery Kids magazine.




Oh.

You can create basic scripts with the built-in batch language.

Who in their right mind would use Basic anymore?

Who in their right mind would use Basic anymore?

No, "basic", not "BASIC". DOS batch scripts aren't written in BASIC :p

And Visual BASIC programmers are, sadly, lumbered with BASIC. Surprisingly...

Windows really is the best operating system. Most compatible, most simple.

And no, don't you dare tell me that Linux is simple. Fuck that command line bullshit; it's a graphical OS for people who never moved beyond command line.

I was a DOS baby, so it doesn't bother me. It's actually nice to use command line again, it feels natural. I can see where someone that didn't grow up pre-windows might not like it.

I like OS X. :)


And Windows is not secure. Because of what I do I have to subscribe to the US-CERT alerts and a new one comes out multiple times a week for Windows and Windows programs. I can count on one hand the number of CERT alerts for OS X in the last few years.

Yeah, you know what, Pantless? I am really getting sick and tired of your constant idiotic dipshit pretend attempts at understanding things you don't. You're far worse than any troll I've ever seen here--fuck, you're worse than Remote Observer--because you never, NEVER let up on this "I know what I'm talking about when I really don't" bullshit and shout people down. I'm sick of it, we're all sick of it, so just stop and try learning things for once. FUCK!
Speaking of black kettles...
If you want to be a command line elitist asshat, go sit down and make shit in DOS that does the same god damned thing you would be doing in Linux which you don't have to do at all because GUI programs do the shit fine. Or, better yet, go learn a real god damn coding language and stop bitching that you can't play around in command line in Windows.

I like OS X. :)


And Windows is not secure. Because of what I do I have to subscribe to the US-CERT alerts and a new one comes out multiple times a week for Windows and Windows programs. I can count on one hand the number of CERT alerts for OS X in the last few years.
Imagine how fucked up Apple OS and Linux would be if they controlled the market share and were used by complete idiots, this is of course assuming they arn't which is a dubious assumption.

Speaking of black kettles...
If you want to be a command line elitist asshat, go sit down and make shit in DOS that does the same god damned thing you would be doing in Linux which you don't have to do at all because GUI programs do the shit fine. Or, better yet, go learn a real god damn coding language and stop bitching that you can't play around in command line in Windows.

So are you saying Linux isn't GUI or are you saying he should use DOS as his OS?

So are you saying Linux isn't GUI or are you saying he should use DOS as his OS?
I'm saying if he doesn't like the perfectly fine ease of use of Windows, he can type up commands in the DOS prompt, they work there too.

Speaking of black kettles...
If you want to be a command line elitist asshat, go sit down and make shit in DOS that does the same god damned thing you would be doing in Linux which you don't have to do at all because GUI programs do the shit fine. Or, better yet, go learn a real god damn coding language and stop bitching that you can't play around in command line in Windows.

Yes, because clearly I am bitching about not being able to play around with a command line in Windows.

Oh, wait? What's that? I didn't say that anywhere at all? Oh that's right! You're making stuff up again!

I said that not because I knew anything about command lines--I'm horrible with programming, so I don't--but because I know you don't either and that you were once again bullshitting and shouting down your opposition just to make yourself look better. We're all sick of it Pantless. Lots of us have been wanting to say it for a long time, and I finally said it. If you can't deal with it, that's not my problem.

I said that not because I knew anything about command lines--I'm horrible with programming, so I don't--but because I know you don't either
And you would be wrong. Good day, sirrah.

Imagine how fucked up Apple OS and Linux would be if they controlled the market share and were used by complete idiots, this is of course assuming they arn't which is a dubious assumption.

Apple is made for idiots. Ubuntu is idiot friendly too, not everyone has to use some obscure linux flavor.

Apple is made for idiots. Ubuntu is idiot friendly too, not everyone has to use some obscure linux flavor.
But they are always the ones bitching the loudest about this or that.

I'm saying if he doesn't like the perfectly fine ease of use of Windows, he can type up commands in the DOS prompt, they work there too.

But one command in DOS doesn't download and install a program.

Imagine how fucked up Apple OS and Linux would be if they controlled the market share and were used by complete idiots, this is of course assuming they arn't which is a dubious assumption.

You can come up with whatever reasons you want for why OS X is more secure than Windows. Even if it is because they don't have the market share, that doesn't change the fact that in order to keep your computer secure in Windows you need to be a security expert while in OS X all you have to do is, well, nothing really.

I'm sitting here at my desk and I have four systems I'm running. Two Windows servers - one for internal TPN transfers between our Technicolor facilities and one for transfers out to studios which, of course, haveto go through the internet. I am also running a Windows workstation which I am typing on now. The fourth computer is a G5 mac running OS X that I use for all my heavy lifting - digitizing, rendering, etc... and for sending our very large files like HD Mpegs, DPX files etc... That station is open to both the internet and internal transfers between facilities.

The Mac just works. No problems, no viruses, no adware, malware or trojans. The other three are a constant struggle to keep secure and to just keep working right. Bugs here, bugs there. We got a drive full of viruses two weeks ago from Dreamworks that shut down all te workstations - I shouls say Windows workstations - in teh building for two hours. The Macs still worked, though.

Windows is not secure for whatever reason you want to believe.

But they are always the ones bitching the loudest about this or that.

And that's the OS's fault how?

And that's the OS's fault how?

Didn't you know? Using an obscure kind of Linux turns you into one of these loud bitching people Pantsless is on about. It's devil magic you see.

And you would be wrong. Good day, sirrah.

Really? Considering that many programmers here who do know what they're talking about backed me up on my calling your bullshit, I daresay you're lying yet again.

Dan: Don't forget, though, that part of the reason DOES have to do with market share, indirectly. OS X isn't anywhere near as widely used, so not anywhere near as many hackers and whatnot are trying to find security holes. It's probably still more secure overall, I'll grant you that, but there is the effort due to widespread usage versus limited usage that cannot be ignored.

You can come up with whatever reasons you want for why OS X is more secure than Windows. Even if it is because they don't have the market share, that doesn't change the fact that in order to keep your computer secure in Windows you need to be a security expert while in OS X all you have to do is, well, nothing really.
You don't have to be a security expert to grab a handful of free programs and not go looking around sketchy websites.

which quote...

"I got a bad feeling about this"

"Laugh it up furball"

"everyone's suffering from Delusions of Grandure"


oh wait... I know...


"Arn't you a little short to be a Stormtrooper?"

I think 'Execute Order...Sixty Six." would be best.

But one command in DOS doesn't download and install a program.
I'll give you that :rolleyes:
Not that you couldn't rig it to do that, but whatever.

Didn't you know? Using an obscure kind of Linux turns you into one of these loud bitching people Pantsless is on about. It's devil magic you see.

Ah, okay. Are those also the folks bringing forth the Apoloclyse?

I'll give you that :rolleyes:
Not that you couldn't rig it to do that, but whatever.

If that were true, I'd imagine there's be a cool little drop down menu on windows with thousands of programs that would automatically download and compile (kind of like the one that Knoppix has). Hell, the automatic updates take more steps than installing a program in Linux.

I dislike Linux because of pretty terrible driver support for my hardware, terrible out-of-box workability, and standard open-source UI design (i.e., the worst there is).

I like Windows because of fantastic driver support, decent out-of-box workability, and fantastic UI design. Before you fantits whinge about the UI in Windows being inferior because it caters by default to the inexperienced, this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

I sort of like OS X because of decent driver support, good out-of-box workability and decent UI design. OS X looks pretty, but is pretty badly designed by ideal human-computer graphical interface standards (e.g., clicking the "close" button minimises the window rather than ends the program).

Can I just point out that the Windows NT command line isn't DOS? It has a similar syntax and appearance, but it's quite a different animal.

If that were true, I'd imagine there's be a cool little drop down menu on windows with thousands of programs that would automatically download and compile (kind of like the one that Knoppix has). Hell, the automatic updates take more steps than installing a program in Linux.
It's called redundancy. Some level of it is necessary for a safe and secure environment.

And you don't need to compile things on Windows, though you could. Everything comes pre-compiled and packed in a nice, neat executable.


I had to use Wireshark at work. I used both the pre-compiled and the compile it on your own versions. Taking out all the time it took to download the extras needed to compile it on Windows, but not taking out the libraries you need to download to make Wireshark compile, it took about, oh, 500x longer to compile Wireshark than it did to run the executable. Running the executable - a couple minutes, at most. Compiling the program (without downloading the extra libraries that are separate but still necessary), it took half an hour.

Ah, okay. Are those also the folks bringing forth the Apoloclyse?
I believe so. I think Microsoft is suing them though. Something about the prophecy refferring to them.
It's called redundancy. Some level of it is necessary for a safe and secure environment.

Windows not having a list of programs you can tell to download and install themselves is because of redundancy?

Can I just point out that the Windows NT command line isn't DOS? It has a similar syntax and appearance, but it's quite a different animal.

No worries. Just program it to work like DOS.:P

Windows not having a list of programs you can tell to download and install themselves is because of redundancy?
No, but, this is
Hell, the automatic updates take more steps than installing a program in Linux.

No worries. Just program it to work like DOS.:P

Who needs networking anyway?

It's called redundancy. Some level of it is necessary for a safe and secure environment.
So Linux isn't secure?

And you don't need to compile things on Windows, though you could. Everything comes pre-compiled and packed in a nice, neat executable.
Not that it's any hassle at all to compile things with Linux. In fact, it does it for me.

I had to use Wireshark at work. I used both the pre-compiled and the compile it on your own versions. Taking out all the time it took to download the extras needed to compile it on Windows, but not taking out the libraries you need to download to make Wireshark compile, it took about, oh, 500x longer to compile Wireshark than it did to run the executable. Running the executable - a couple minutes, at most. Compiling the program (without downloading the extra libraries that are separate but still necessary), it took half an hour.
Once again. You don't have to go through all that hassle with Linux. One command. ONE and you can leave it be and let it do it's thing.

You don't have to be a security expert to grab a handful of free programs and not go looking around sketchy websites.

Funny, but on a Mac you can go wherever you want and not download anything at all and sleep tight knowing no one's hacking your shit.

Dan: Don't forget, though, that part of the reason DOES have to do with market share, indirectly. OS X isn't anywhere near as widely used, so not anywhere near as many hackers and whatnot are trying to find security holes. It's probably still more secure overall, I'll grant you that, but there is the effort due to widespread usage versus limited usage that cannot be ignored.

I understand. My point is that it doesn't matter why. The fact is I've been using Macs since they were called Apple II+ and I have never, not one single time ever had a virus, malware, adware or whatever kind of ware ever show up on my computer. I am unaware of anyone who uses Windows that doesn't have regular security breaches or has to limit what they do in regards to email and web browsing or have to lockup their comp with all kinds of security programs. Usually it's a combination of all three. They have all this security software, they are careful about what the open in email and where they browse and they still get hacked.

Funny, but on a Mac you can go wherever you want and not download anything at all and sleep tight knowing no one's hacking your shit.
See "market share" statement.

No, but, this is

Ah.
*needs moar reading comprehensions*

Once again. You don't have to go through all that hassle with Linux. One command. ONE and you can leave it be and let it do it's thing.
No thanks, I rather click "next" 3 or 4 times and be finished in under 2 minutes than type a command and be done more than half an hour later.

Who needs networking anyway?

Networking is for losers.

See "market share" statement.

See the "it doesn't matter why" statement.

No thanks, I rather click "next" 3 or 4 times and be finished in under 2 minutes than type a command and be done more than half an hour later.

Odd. Never taken me a half hour unless the site I'm downloading from has a slow server or the program is particularly large. Oh wait, you have that problem too. Only you also have to download then start the install instead of having it be one nice neat step. Actually you have to go to the website, download the software, then you can install it. You see, I don't have to do that.

I understand. My point is that it doesn't matter why. The fact is I've been using Macs since they were called Apple II+ and I have never, not one single time ever had a virus, malware, adware or whatever kind of ware ever show up on my computer. I am unaware of anyone who uses Windows that doesn't have regular security breaches or has to limit what they do in regards to email and web browsing or have to lockup their comp with all kinds of security programs. Usually it's a combination of all three. They have all this security software, they are careful about what the open in email and where they browse and they still get hacked.

Oh, fair enough then. (Though I've had very few problems...one time because I downloaded a virus, the other time because I (knowingly to satisfy my curiosity) accessed a virus-filled site. Both times easily dealt with thanks to my nice antivirus software. If anything, any problems I do have are with my firewall overreacting to the DSL router and occasionally shutting off all access to the internet for no reason.)

sudo apt-get install whatever > google, download, virus scan, run, next, next, next etc. , find other thing needed and repeat process.

:)

Suddenly I don’t have to enter source code in an outdated editor and compile the code to make things works.

I just point and click, if something goes wrong, I just read the instructions on the screen.

There’s something weird. I have some exotic hardware, but it is finding and installing the drivers automatically. They are even configured at the same time.

Ok, the OS is in installed, let’s see, what can I do now? Install some software?

Btw, till now, I’m satisfied with the usability.

I’m checking the internet and I’m amazed by the amazing amount of titles that’s available. I can even play games. Go figure!

The fun part is that I don’t have to add code to get it working. It is working! Even with my exotic hardware.

I notice some differences between the past and now.

In the past I discovered sometimes nice software that was and looked promising.
But once installed I noticed that the software was not finished, that the needed and promised features were not there. With a smile I called that kind of tools, promisware.

On Windows it’s different. Everything is there. And if it isn’t the case, they will add it to the next version. And they really do it. They don’t moan about ‘no time or changing moods and interests’. They just do it! What a dream!

Sorry guys but I’ll never return from where I came.

As a nice sidekick: my social life is changing as well.
In the past all my friends were nerdy ugly nerds that stay in single modus for ages.
Nobody was interested in me. They pointed at me like I was some f*cking Trekkie. Ok, my own fault I used an obscure OS.

But now, my friends are all beautiful women. I have even sex with them. Eat your heart out, nerds!

Another score for team windows! ;)

Wow, it was a while since I saw so many worthless false arguments from trolls who don't know what they are talking about. Let's look at some actual comparisons...

Install an application on Windows:
1. Go to a torrent site and search for the application.
2. Download the torrent you want.
2. Mount the CD image.
3. Enter a 16 digit nuke launch code and click next.
4. Choose where to install the program and other options, click next between each option.
5. Maybe you'll have to restart (and maybe apply a crack).

Install an application on Linux:
1. Open the package manager and type in a search keyword.
2. Mark checkboxes next to the search results you want and click apply.

By the time you've downloaded the application on Windows it's already installed on Linux. You don't have to compile anything unless you use one of those obscure geek versions.



Most of the time you are using applications. You don't actually use Windows or Linux. You use Firefox, Thunderbird and so on. So the real user friendliness question is not how easy the OS is to use, it's how easy the applications are to use.

Let's compare Windows applications to Linux applications, these for example:
Firefox web browser
Thunderbird email
Pidgin instant messenger
XChat internet relay chat
Open Office office suite
Gimp image editor
VLC video player
Songbird music player
...oh wait all of those work on both OSes so I guess it's a tie here.

It doesn't matter which OS you use, you are doing the same tasks either way and you can even use the same applications. The difference during everyday usage is minimal and really not worth getting worked up over. It isn't harder to use Firefox on one OS then on another.


It's when you do more advanced things like install the OS that the difference becomes noticeable. But non geeks never install an OS from a generic install CD. They buy a computer with the OS preinstalled and easy to use restore disks. And even geeks don't install OSes every day so it's really not that important for the overall user friendliness compared to tasks you do every day. If you want user friendliness even in this one time ordeal buy a computer with an OS preinstalled or get a geek to install the OS for you. Then you have someone to complain to if everything isn't set up properly.

See the "it doesn't matter why" statement.
It does if you keep harping on how Mac doesn't have viruses or malware or anything.

Odd. Never taken me a half hour unless the site I'm downloading from has a slow server or the program is particularly large. Oh wait, you have that problem too. Only you also have to download then start the install instead of having it be one nice neat step. Actually you have to go to the website, download the software, then you can install it. You see, I don't have to do that.

I'm talking about the compilation alone.

I'm talking about the compilation alone.

So you are going to nitpick one little step instead of talking about the ease and time of installation overall? It's the entire installation process that matters. From the moment your brain says "hey, I need X program to the time you are starting X program"

It's inane to focus on one step of the process, especially since I have only one step where you have many. It's not like I have to compile anything manually. I enter my command, it find me the program, downloads and installs it.

It does if you keep harping on how Mac doesn't have viruses or malware or anything.


Okay. You're right. I'll make a deal with you. You disable your security software on your Windows machine and start surfing like crazy and open up all those wierd emails and everytime you get a virus you tell yourself its because Windows has all the market share. I'll leave my computer as it is now with no security software, surf like crazy and open up any email I want and everytime I don't get a virus I'll remind myself that it's because OS X doesn't have all the market share. ;)

The fact is it doesn't matter at all why it's that way. Do I get zero security breaches on my Mac because it has less market share? Is it because it's a better OS? Is it because Steve Jobs farts pixie dust? I don't give a rat's ass why, all I know is that I can do whatever I want, open whatever I want, surf to any site I want and nothing will happen.

Okay. You're right. I'll make a deal with you. You disable your security software on your Windows machine and start surfing like crazy and open up all those wierd emails and everytime you get a virus you tell yourself its because Windows has all the market share. I'll leave my computer as it is now with no security software, surf like crazy and open up any email I want and everytime I don't get a virus I'll remind myself that it's because OS X doesn't have all the market share. ;)

The fact is it doesn't matter at all why it's that way. Do I get zero security breaches on my Mac because it has less market share? Is it because it's a better OS? Is it because Steve Jobs farts pixie dust? I don't give a rat's ass why, all I know is that I can do whatever I want, open whatever I want, surf to any site I want and nothing will happen.

But ultimately, whether it is easier to get virus's or not doesn't matter at all, since if you are competant you probably wont get one anyway.

So you are going to nitpick one little step instead of talking about the ease and time of installation overall?
The time overall is half an hour to compile it as opposed to using an executable. Geez, listen already.

But ultimately, whether it is easier to get virus's or not doesn't matter at all, since if you are competant you probably wont get one anyway.

Oh, I disagree. Our IT guys here are top notch and our company spends enormous amounts of money on security and we still get them from time to time. Admittedly we are a huge operation, but even home users of Windows are going to get them now and again and in the process of preventing them they have to watch everything they do. It's the equivalent of going through life with gloves and a sterile mask on all the time.

Mac users live in a world of wide open skies where they can look at anything and open anything with little fear. Windows users live in a world rife with disease where they have to watch everything they do and get innoculated against the latest disease evry week or so and still occasionally get the sniffles. Will this change as OS X continues to grab more and more market share? Maybe - even probably. But for right now I'll take worry free environment of OS X over Windose any day.

The time overall is half an hour to compile it as opposed to using an executable. Geez, listen already.

Have you even passed fourth grade reading? Pull your head out of your ass.

It took you a half an hour because you had to manually compile.

It takes me less time and less steps than it takes you to install something. From the moment I decide I want a program to the time I'm happily using said program is less time. End of story.

Oh, I disagree. Our IT guys here are top notch and our company spends enormous amounts of money on security and we still get them from time to time. Admittedly we are a huge operation, but even home users of Windows are going to get them now and again and in the process of preventing them they have to watch everything they do. It's the equivalent of going through life with gloves and a sterile mask on all the time.


Well it is a little different for companies.


Mac users live in a world of wide open skies where they can look at anything and open anything with little fear. Windows users live in a world rife with disease where they have to watch everything they do and get innoculated against the latest disease evry week or so and still occasionally get the sniffles. Will this change as OS X continues to grab more and more market share? Maybe - even probably. But for right now I'll take worry free environment of OS X over Windose any day.

As long as I have AVG, which auto starts, I can open anything I want. If there is a virus (which I haven't gotten for around 6 months), it will detect and delete or heal it. No extra work needs to be done.

Can I just point out that the Windows NT command line isn't DOS? It has a similar syntax and appearance, but it's quite a different animal.
It however still is very limited even if you install the GNU tools...

The time overall is half an hour to compile it as opposed to using an executable. Geez, listen already.
I challenge you to a duel. A software installation/emerging duel! At midnight CEST, only our personal computers as weapons, you can choose the program (provided it is OSS and available under both OSes).

I challenge you to a duel. A software installation/emerging duel! At midnight CEST, only our personal computers as weapons, you can choose the program (provided it is OSS and available under both OSes).
Again, it's Pantless we're talking about here. He'll lie all day about because that's what he does.

If you really wanted to compete, I'd do it with someone like The Mindless if I were you.

Well it is a little different for companies.



As long as I have AVG, which auto starts, I can open anything I want. If there is a virus (which I haven't gotten for around 6 months), it will detect and delete or heal it. No extra work needs to be done.

Just keep on top of those virus definitions. There are a myriad of new ones all the time.

Just keep on top of those virus definitions. There are a myriad of new ones all the time.

Yeah, because it really takes a huge amount of time to update the program...

Come on, Dan, now you're just being an ass about this. Are you just trying to promote being lazy? I thought you were against that, that it was part of your whole Peak Oil bit, about how being lazy and free and everything is part of the problem.

Just keep on top of those virus definitions. There are a myriad of new ones all the time.

I don't need to worry, it auto updates.

Just keep on top of those virus definitions. There are a myriad of new ones all the time.

That's OK, most anti-virus software updates automatically.

Yeah, because it really takes a huge amount of time to update the program...

Come on, Dan, now you're just being an ass about this. Are you just trying to promote being lazy? I thought you were against that, that it was part of your whole Peak Oil bit, about how being lazy and free and everything is part of the problem.

hahaha...

I'm not trying to be an ass. Pantless's sarcasm can bring that out. Though in response to your post I'll say that just because I don't have to download virus definitions doesn't mean I'm lazy, it just means I can spend my time more productively searching for more and more porn.

hahaha...

I'm not trying to be an ass. Pantless's sarcasm can bring that out. Though in response to your post I'll say that just because I don't have to download virus definitions doesn't mean I'm lazy, it just means I can spend my time more productively searching for more and more porn.

Ah, yes, of course. That explains everything.

you can choose the program (provided it is OSS and available under both OSes).
This is why Windows wins.

We have everything cool that Linux has, like GIMP, OpenOffice, IrfanView, VLC Media Player etc., and we can also download and play just about any file we like after that, too!

OS X looks pretty, but is pretty badly designed by ideal human-computer graphical interface standards (e.g., clicking the "close" button minimises the window rather than ends the program).

Wait… what? The minimize button minimizes the window. The close button closes the window. The close button does not minimize the window, and the minimize button does not close the window.

In the not too distant future
Next Sunday A.D.
There was a guy named Joel,
Not too different from you or me.
He worked at Gizmonic Institute,
Just another face in a red jumpsuit.
He did a good job cleaning up the place,
But his bosses didn't like him
So they shot him into space.

We'll send him cheesy movies,
The worst we can find (la-la-la).
He'll have to sit and watch them all,
And we'll monitor his mind (la-la-la).
Now keep in mind Joel can't control
Where the movies begin or end (la-la-la)
Because he used those special parts
To make his robot friends.

Robot Roll Call: (All right, let's go!)
Cambot! (Pan left!)
Gypsy! (Hi, girl!)
Tom Servo! (What a cool guy!)
Croooow! (He's a wisecracker.)

If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
and other science facts (la-la-la),
Then repeat to yourself, "It's just a show,
I should really just relax."
For Mystery Science Theater 3000!

(Guitar twang)

[Door sequence]
[Door 6: A black knight who stands in the way. He is cut in half]
[Door 5: Gandalf, who stands in the way. He is scooped up by a demonic hand]
[Door 4: It's a door that opens both ways diagonally]
[Door 3: A beaded rice curtain]
[Door 2: It's a door that opens sideways]
[Door 1: It's a bulkhead door that opens]

[Satellite of Love]

JOEL: Hey, I'm Joel Robinson, and welcome to the Satellite of Love. We finally got a computer here, and the bots love it.
TOM SERVO: HAHA! Look, Joel, I'm mindlessly writing on the screen!
CROW: Is XOSD really a laughing matter?
TOM SERVO: Of course it is! (Writes "Lolz I pwnt j00 n00b" on the screen. Crow cracks up.)

(Mads light flashes)

JOEL: Quiet down now, Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman are calling.

[Deep 13]

Dr. Forrester: Ah, Joel. Finally got a computer, did you? (Joel nods) Linux? Distasteful system. Works too well. Anyway, let's see your invention exchange.

[Satellite of Love]

JOEL: Okay. One Famous Person Generator coming up. (Pulls out blank cardboard cutout) Pull a tab on its back, and it changes into a certain person. Poke it on the shoulder and it speaks. Crow?

(Crow pulls tab on its hip with his beak. Cutout changes into Ozzy Osbourne. Joel pokes it on the shoulder)

OZZY: What the fuck do you fucking want, you fucker?

TOM SERVO: Wow...even sounds like him.

JOEL: Well, whatdaya think, sirs?

DR. FORRESTER: Hmph. My shrink told me not to do these exchanges. It wears me out. So...anyway, in honor of your using Linux, here's a little piece called "I'm ready to switch to Windows now..."

[Movie sign flashes, general panic ensues, etc.]

ALL: WE'VE GOT MOVIE SIGN!!!!

[Door sequence]

Suddenly I don’t have to enter source code in an outdated editor and compile the code to make things works.

TOM SERVO: You're kidding! Windows can make C/C++ work without compilation??
CROW [under his breath]: C nerd.

I just point and click, if something goes wrong, I just read the instructions on the screen.

JOEL: Point...click. Point...click. Point...click. Wow. I'm bored.

There’s something weird. I have some exotic hardware, but it is finding and installing the drivers automatically.

They are even configured at the same time.

JOEL: Whoooa, oooh, ooooh, it's magic!
CROW/TOM: La la la la la....
JOEL: You know...
CROW/TOM: Never believe it's not so.

Ok, the OS is in installed, let’s see, what can I do now? Install some software?

CROW: No duh.
TOM SERVO: Isn't that kind of a given?

Btw, till now, I’m satisfied with the usability.

I’m checking the internet and I’m amazed by the amazing amount of titles that’s available. I can even play games. Go figure!



TOM SERVO: I play games too.
CROW: Even Deus Ex?
(Servo nods)
CROW: No kidding!

The fun part is that I don’t have to add code to get it working. It is working! Even with my exotic hardware.

CROW [Caveman]: Huhuhuhuh. Me no like code.
JOEL: Did Eegah ever speak?

I notice some differences between the past and now.

TOM SERVO: I've always heard things changed over time, but never believed it until now.

In the past I discovered sometimes nice software that was and looked promising.
But once installed I noticed that the software was not finished, that the needed and promised features were not there. With a

smile I called that kind of tools, promisware.

CROW: *Cough*opensource*Cough*
TOM SERVO: And you say I'm a nerd.

On Windows it’s different. Everything is there. And if it isn’t the case, they will add it to the next version. And

they really do it. They don’t moan about ‘no time or changing moods and interests’. They just do it! What a dream!



JOEL [Mystic]: It was all a dream. All a dream. Alllll aaaa dreeeaaam...

[Door sequence]

[Satellite of Love]

JOEL [high voice]: I love Windows...it's so pretty!!!

(Tom comes in with fake beard)

TOM SERVO: It's no match for LINUX!
JOEL: Promisware user!
TOM SERVO: Loser user!
CROW: Great. See what you've done, Dr. Forrester!

(Gypsy comes in and seems Joel and Tom arguing)

GYPSY: Richard Basehart.
CROW: Uhhh...Gyps?
GYPSY: I mean...Stop it! Stop it this instant!
JOEL: Relax, Gypsy, we were just doing parody.
GYPSY: Richard Basehart would never stand for this.
CROW: Gypsy!

(A loud argument starts with everyone talking over each other. Unbeknownst to them, Dr. Forrester is watching all this from Deep 13.)

DR. FORRESTER: I think you've found it, Clayton. (Laughs) Now, to send them the last piece.

Sorry guys but I’ll never return from where I came.

CROW: Your mother's womb?
TOM SERVO: I'm starting to wish he did.

As a nice sidekick:

CROW: Robin?
JOEL: Nahhh. Marvel, Jr.?

my social life is changing as well.
In the past all my friends were nerdy ugly nerds

JOEL: Nerdy ugly nerds?
CROW: Laying it on a little thick isn't he?

that stay in single modus for ages.

CROW: Modus ponens? Modus tollens?
TOM SERVO: Modus operandi?
JOEL: Modus vivendi?

Nobody was interested in me. They pointed at me like I was some f*cking Trekkie. Ok, my own fault I used an obscure

OS.

TOM SERVO: I'm glad I have my dynamic MIGHTY VOICE!

But now, my friends are all beautiful women.

CROW: Does Gypsy count?

I have even sex with them. Eat your heart out, nerds!

CROW [beautiful women]: Ohhh, yesss, give it to me, you big bearded former Linux user!
JOEL/TOM SERVO: CROW!
CROW: Sorry.

[Door sequence]

[Satellite of Love]

JOEL: Well, that was bad.
CROW: Not as bad as Monster-A-Go-Go.
TOM SERVO: Or...
CROW: Don't say it...don't say it...
TOM SERVO: Manos: The Hands of Fate:
CROW/TOM SERVO: AAAAHHH! (Jump into each other's arms)
JOEL [Humphrey Bogart]: We're all old soldiers, we'll survive this.

[Deep 13]

DR. FORRESTER: My work here is done. Push the button, Frank.
FRANK: Got it, Steve. (Pushes button as credits roll)

I probably could've given Frank a larger role, but I'm just beginning.

Yeah, double clicking on the executable and then clicking on all the options I want really tired out my mouse hand.

You haven't checked out advanced options yet,I was in the hospital for a week.*end of sarcasm* Windows is uber easy.The worst part about the Mac is the system tends to black out.Yeah it turns of without turning off and returns to where you left off.At least I've had that experience.

Which function is that? The one that makes you code all your own programs?

How?Thers not even Dos(well Unix,I guess,but you know what I mean).At least no where I've seen.Probably buryed in the finder.

My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.


Yeah,he probably installs a ton of addware/spywhere without knowing it and never even bothered to check his very simple Norton anit-virus. He's got more cookies on his computer then the Nabisco factory.

Yeah, double clicking on the executable and then clicking on all the options I want really tired out my mouse hand.

Well compared to something like apt-get or other package managers ... hell I do not even have to know the program website or location to get it installed

Which function is that? The one that makes you code all your own programs?

If you wanted to ... I never have to get it to work right. But I have the power to easily automate things

The features I am looking for are
1) Free
2) Stable (or give you the tools to make it really stable)
3) Secure (and or the tools to make it secure)
4) Network modeling applications such as NS2
5) In some cases ultra light on resources (specifically memory also disk space size depending on the system)
6) Remote cli interface
7) Ease of handling Apache Mysql and PHP
8) Concurrent network thread handling without performance lag
9) Ease of task automation
10) Advanced firewall capabilities
11) Often support of grid computing (Depending for ESX or for SGE)
12) Network tools

Some of them are more useful for my server deployment some (Specially the network modeling applications and some automation tasks as well as general networking tools are requirements for my workstation)


My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.

Depends on the use for the standard desktop sure for my workstation or some of my servers no it does not stack up

Wait… what? The minimize button minimizes the window. The close button closes the window. The close button does not minimize the window, and the minimize button does not close the window.

But the close button does not close the application just the window ... why?

That's OK, most anti-virus software updates automatically.

Symantec and Mcafee are usually 2- 8 days behind the viral releases and most of the smaller ones (such as Grisoft) are right behind them (amazingly close actually and every once and a while even first) ... if the user pays for anti-virus subscriptions which sadly seems not to be the case so god damn often

Well it is a little different for companies.



As long as I have AVG, which auto starts, I can open anything I want. If there is a virus (which I haven't gotten for around 6 months), it will detect and delete or heal it. No extra work needs to be done.

You keep telling yourself that ... AVG is just fine but there is very often a multiple day lag between virus release and definition release by most of the AV carriers

I know sure as hell we have submitted a tone before they were ever released

Suddenly I don’t have to enter source code in an outdated editor and compile the code to make things works.

I just point and click, if something goes wrong, I just read the instructions on the screen.

There’s something weird. I have some exotic hardware, but it is finding and installing the drivers automatically. They are even configured at the same time.

Ok, the OS is in installed, let’s see, what can I do now? Install some software?

Btw, till now, I’m satisfied with the usability.

I’m checking the internet and I’m amazed by the amazing amount of titles that’s available. I can even play games. Go figure!

The fun part is that I don’t have to add code to get it working. It is working! Even with my exotic hardware.

I notice some differences between the past and now.

In the past I discovered sometimes nice software that was and looked promising.
But once installed I noticed that the software was not finished, that the needed and promised features were not there. With a smile I called that kind of tools, promisware.

On Windows it’s different. Everything is there. And if it isn’t the case, they will add it to the next version. And they really do it. They don’t moan about ‘no time or changing moods and interests’. They just do it! What a dream!

Sorry guys but I’ll never return from where I came.

Lol.

As a nice sidekick: my social life is changing as well.
In the past all my friends were nerdy ugly nerds that stay in single modus for ages.
Nobody was interested in me. They pointed at me like I was some f*cking Trekkie. Ok, my own fault I used an obscure OS.

But now, my friends are all beautiful women. I have even sex with them. Eat your heart out, nerds!

snip

DOS is perfectly fine, go learn to program DOS stuff.




snip
WTF
The CLI interface to windows product SUCKS there is not even a contest. The only way you can get it CLOSE is with something like cygwin then what you are really doing is trying to emulate Linux and get it about 1/2 of the way there.

Dos and Linux CLI's are worlds apart.

It's called redundancy. Some level of it is necessary for a safe and secure environment.

And you don't need to compile things on Windows, though you could. Everything comes pre-compiled and packed in a nice, neat executable.


I had to use Wireshark at work. I used both the pre-compiled and the compile it on your own versions. Taking out all the time it took to download the extras needed to compile it on Windows, but not taking out the libraries you need to download to make Wireshark compile, it took about, oh, 500x longer to compile Wireshark than it did to run the executable. Running the executable - a couple minutes, at most. Compiling the program (without downloading the extra libraries that are separate but still necessary), it took half an hour.

Correct binaries are faster then compilation ... most of your standard package managers (that were discussed here anyways) actually use binaries. But you have the option for direct compilation (which is FreeBSD's standard BTW)

Longer to support but depending on the need and the app the performance usually goes up

Personally for most things the binary is fine ... for some things that require top level performance I have the choice ... and personally the compilation for source in something like freeBSD is ALMOST as easy in the amount of steps you have to do as the one line install from package managers (I usually do it in two lines)

But if you spend a bit of time setting up a script you can easily have a 15 line script that installs like 13 applications with a single call

Usful for virtuals

Rejistania, just ignore him. He's a troll trying to goad you for reactions.

Operating systems fulfill the needs of those who use them. Windows currently fulfills all of my needs because I mainly use my computer for gaming.

Which reminds me...is there a Macintosh emulator for Windows? And what versions of Macintosh are available?Why in gods name would you want to emulate a Mac?

I doubt that there is a project like Wine that emulates the OS X's api, but if you get a copy of OS X you can install it on a Virtual Machine.

Rejistania, just ignore him. He's a troll trying to goad you for reactions.

Operating systems fulfill the needs of those who use them. Windows currently fulfills all of my needs because I mainly use my computer for gaming.

Which reminds me...is there a Macintosh emulator for Windows? And what versions of Macintosh are available?

Use PearPC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PearPC), but you gotta buy a Mac OS X CD.

Use PearPC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PearPC), but you gotta buy a Mac OS X CD.PearPC emulates a PowerPC system, which OSX sadly no longer supports.

Where'd you get that idea?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard#Compatibility

I'm using a PowerPC processor right now, and I fully intend to upgrade my OS in October.Last I heard, Leopard was supposed to drop the PowerPC architecture.

PearPC emulates a PowerPC system, which OSX sadly no longer supports.

Where'd you get that idea?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard#Compatibility

I'm using a PowerPC processor right now, and I fully intend to upgrade my OS in October.

I do recall rumours of that (unfounded ones, of course)…
I would have been so pissed. ;)
Well to be fair, when I last heard, it wasn't called Leopard yet. It was just 10.5.

Last I heard, Leopard was supposed to drop the PowerPC architecture.

I do recall rumours of that (unfounded ones, of course)…
I would have been so pissed. ;)

Well to be fair, when I last heard, it wasn't called Leopard yet. It was just 10.5.

I might buy it, but the idea of having proprietary hardware grates on my open-source sensibilities.

I might buy it, but the idea of having proprietary hardware grates on my open-source sensibilities.Most hardware is proprietary.

Why in gods name would you want to emulate a Mac?

I doubt that there is a project like Wine that emulates the OS X's api, but if you get a copy of OS X you can install it on a Virtual Machine.

Why? I want to be able to play Avernum V when it comes out for Macintosh. There will be a Windows version, of course, but that'll be a couple months later and I really want to play Avernum V as soon as it comes out.

Most hardware is proprietary.

Yes… quite hard to find a computer that isn't, really…
*begins assembly of Paperclip Computer*

Yes… quite hard to find a computer that isn't, really…
*begins assembly of Paperclip Computer*Very much so.

Why? I want to be able to play Avernum V when it comes out for Macintosh. There will be a Windows version, of course, but that'll be a couple months later and I really want to play Avernum V as soon as it comes out.
OTOH World In Conflict, which is the best thing since Ground Control dipped in Swiss chocolate, is coming out for the PC and not the Mac for the foreseeable future.

Sad times, Mac users, sad times.

Most hardware is proprietary.

Proprietary hardware as in owned by Apple.

Why? I want to be able to play Avernum V when it comes out for Macintosh. There will be a Windows version, of course, but that'll be a couple months later and I really want to play Avernum V as soon as it comes out.OK, running OSX in a virtual machine is not going to work. You will either have to buy a Mac, or use a modded version of OSX to run it on your PC and then hope you can get some drivers going.

OK, running OSX in a virtual machine is not going to work. You will either have to buy a Mac, or use a modded version of OSX to run it on your PC and then hope you can get some drivers going.

It probably won't even need OSX though. More like OS 9 or some older version.

http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/

See?

It probably won't even need OSX though. More like OS 9 or some older version.

http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/

See?

http://www.avernum.com/avernum5/index.html

At the bottom: Windows 2000 or later or Macintosh running System 10.3.9 or later.

Besides, it is probably easier to get OSX going than OS9.

This is why Windows wins.

We have everything cool that Linux has, like GIMP, OpenOffice, IrfanView, VLC Media Player etc., and we can also download and play just about any file we like after that, too!

You lack the really cool stuff like KDE, konqueror, irssi, bash, ...

Eeehm, no. Really, no. Dos and the bat system are pathetic.
And yes, I can use it.

Otherwise windows indeed is not a piece of crap or whatever some zealots claim.

Windows OS supports VBS scripts, as in you can create & run them in and out of command line.

Besides, there are command shell extensions available (like the 4DOS/NT I so love) that enhance the actual command shell.

Besides, there are command shell extensions available (like the 4DOS/NT I so love) that enhance the actual command shell.

True. But 4dos is a console replacement, not an extenison ;) Hell, you can also install cygwin and have a bash commandprompt under windows.

IME, the biggest problem with Linux is installation. If you're lucky an installation of Fedora or Ubuntu can be easier than Windows, but if you're not lucky, it can be a total PITA!

Nice strawman! I wonder if you ever used anything else than the Vista which came with your PC.

Software for Windows is often in a horrible shape and translated in a way which wants to make you puke,

Drivers for anything exotic which is older than a year? Forget it!

Installing software under Windows? a chore! Compared to that emerge is user-friendly and I say that after having had to reinstall KDE.

Usability? Sorry, the function I need are lacking!

Promisware (the term is vaporware)? Well, Windows promised since 1.0 to be stable and since '98 to be secure... Word promised to be able to be usable for texts longer than a page...

And fyi: you normally do not need to program to be able to use Linux - unless you want to.

I doubt that you even saw a woman until now other than your Ma. Or did she buy you a Barbie?One large problem I'm have with Ubuntu at the moment is that I can't get it to use WPA encryption for my wireless network - if I want to run a linux laptop for uni I will need to get it using WPA. :(

Speaking of black kettles...
If you want to be a command line elitist asshat, go sit down and make shit in DOS that does the same god damned thing you would be doing in Linux which you don't have to do at all because GUI programs do the shit fine. Or, better yet, go learn a real god damn coding language and stop bitching that you can't play around in command line in Windows.

Yawn. So much idiocy.

Okay, to begin. On Linux, there's this thing called X. You might not have heard of it, it's only older than Windows. This is a windowing system. There are also a number of window managers. You can get any flavour you like - Windows like, Mac like, more interesting. These are all graphical, all easy to use and customize, without ever touching the command line. For instance, I'm currently using aewm, which has a two minute learning curve, and easily beats out Windows. If you don't want this, you can get something else - there are a variety of options.

I never have to touch a command line if I don't want to. Just fire up the package manager, type in what I want or select the right category, and click. It downloads the precompiled program, and installs it. I guarantee that both of us installing the same program, I will be faster. And the installation time will naturally include downloading the installer on your part.

The DOS command line is not equivalent to the Linux one, and I have used both. For a start, Linux shells are 'a real god damn coding language'.

At the person suprised at how the Mac works - you're thinking like a Windows person. Think about the window on the screen - you can minimize it or close it. Closing the window, especially on a UNIX based OS, does not necessarily close the application. Similar things happen on Windows, say you have two Word windows open. Closing one does not close the other, does it?

Windows OS supports VBS scripts, as in you can create & run them in and out of command line.
Anything related to Basic is a mess to work with. Python scripts are more clear to read and thus easier to understand and handle correctly.
IME, the biggest problem with Linux is installation. If you're lucky an installation of Fedora or Ubuntu can be easier than Windows, but if you're not lucky, it can be a total PITA!
You don't have to rely on luck. It's risk free to try it out, get comfortable and make sure everything works in Live CD mode before you let it do any changes on your hard disk. Then you know. If everything works (just much slower since CDs as snails compared to hard disks) when ran as a Live CD it'll be a breeze to install for anyone who knows what a hard disk partition is. If something isn't working right away then it'll be a PITA to fix it for anyone who doesn't have much previous experience with the OS.

The exceptions are codecs, flash and 3D drivers, those aren't included out of the box but are easy to install with the package manager. It might be a good idea to go for Mepis as it comes with more codecs preinstalled then Ubuntu and Fedora.
One large problem I'm have with Ubuntu at the moment is that I can't get it to use WPA encryption for my wireless network - if I want to run a linux laptop for uni I will need to get it using WPA. :(
Did you try the WPA HowTo (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/WPAHowTo) I mentioned in the original thread this thread is a spin off of?

If that didn't help then search on Ubuntu Forums (http://ubuntuforums.org/), someone has surely already asked for and received help with the same problem there.

http://www.avernum.com/avernum5/index.html

At the bottom: Windows 2000 or later or Macintosh running System 10.3.9 or later.

Besides, it is probably easier to get OSX going than OS9.

Ah crap.

So much for that idea...guess if I really want to play it that badly I'll submit an application to beta-test the Windows version...

Ah crap.

So much for that idea...guess if I really want to play it that badly I'll submit an application to beta-test the Windows version...Its weird. The Windows API has been ported (poorly, but it works) to Linux, the Linux api to Windows (again, poorly), but the OSX api to neither (afaik).

Its weird. The Windows API has been ported (poorly, but it works) to Linux, the Linux api to Windows (again, poorly), but the OSX api to neither (afaik).

Why is that? Do Apple and Microsoft try to block porting to preserve the market image of competition or something?

Why is that? Do Apple and Microsoft try to block porting to preserve the market image of competition or something?
Probably, Apple doesn't get any more sales if people can run all their apps on Windows (but it does port a few apps to give people a taste of what they can expect on OSX), and the same is true for Windows. Neither company is going to port their API to another system, so if it is going to happen it is going to have to be reverse engineered. Above that, there are system differences which make things difficult.

At the person suprised at how the Mac works - you're thinking like a Windows person. Think about the window on the screen - you can minimize it or close it. Closing the window, especially on a UNIX based OS, does not necessarily close the application. Similar things happen on Windows, say you have two Word windows open. Closing one does not close the other, does it?

I never once claimed that I wasn't "thinking like a Windows person". I'm saying that Windows gets it right, whereas OSX (and Unix, if it does it similarly) gets it wrong.

Differences in UI does not mean all UIs are equal. Almost universally, open source user interfaces are badly designed and counterintuitive.

Probably, Apple doesn't get any more sales if people can run all their apps on Windows (but it does port a few apps to give people a taste of what they can expect on OSX), and the same is true for Windows. Neither company is going to port their API to another system, so if it is going to happen it is going to have to be reverse engineered. Above that, there are system differences which make things difficult.

That sounds fair enough. Sure, it makes a few things difficult, but they do have to protect their intellectual property.

That sounds fair enough. Sure, it makes a few things difficult, but they do have to protect their intellectual property.Really they are trying to leverage their IP into making you use their products.

Really they are trying to leverage their IP into making you use their products.

Well, I can't do anything about it, and I'm not too bothered by it either.

I never once claimed that I wasn't "thinking like a Windows person". I'm saying that Windows gets it right, whereas OSX (and Unix, if it does it similarly) gets it wrong.

Differences in UI does not mean all UIs are equal. Almost universally, open source user interfaces are badly designed and counterintuitive.

No, you're saying that Windows does it the way you're used to. But nevermind that, everybody else must be wrong, right?

You want to see a good way of handling windows? aewm. There are two parts on a window titlebar. The main part, and a single button. If you left click the main part, brings to front. Middle click, you can drag it around, just let go when you're done. Right click, pushes to back. On the button, left click minimizes, middle click makes it resizeable, right click closes it. Scroll wheel down on the main part unshades, scroll wheel up shades.

That's it. Simple, very easy to get used to, and a darn sight easier to work with than anything else I've found, where you click in different places for different things.

The "I'm over Windows because of the latest MSN" thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=538129) was short because almost every post contained useful information, and covered every issue the OP had with their messenger. When there wasn't anything more to say, the thread tailed off. Problem solved in seventeen posts.

Whereas this thread goes and goes and goes, because it is a dick-waving contest between people who mistake their preferred tool for their own dicks.

No, you're saying that Windows does it the way you're used to. But nevermind that, everybody else must be wrong, right?

You want to see a good way of handling windows? aewm. There are two parts on a window titlebar. The main part, and a single button. If you left click the main part, brings to front. Middle click, you can drag it around, just let go when you're done. Right click, pushes to back. On the button, left click minimizes, middle click makes it resizeable, right click closes it. Scroll wheel down on the main part unshades, scroll wheel up shades.

That's it. Simple, very easy to get used to, and a darn sight easier to work with than anything else I've found, where you click in different places for different things.

No, you, like many others, confuse functionality with good user interface design.

If clicking a button labelled "close" doesn't close the program, but merely hides it, then it's bad interface design. A good user interface should be completely self-explainitory. A user with absolutely no experience with UIs of any kind should be able to sit down and use it, because the UI should explain what to do intuitively. A button marked "close" should close the program, and nothing else. It shouldn't hide it, it shouldn't minimise it, it shouldn't put it in standby, it should close the program or it's badly designed.

See these silly minimalist UIs that people often tout as superior to Windows (or any other) UIs? They're functionally efficient, perhaps, but badly designed from a user-interface perspective, because they are not intuitive. That one you describe is a terrible design from a good UI perspective (not from a good functionality perspective), because none of the things you describe are self-evident to a new user. The user would have to go read a manual or intructions on how to use it, and that makes it a bad UI design.

The "I'm over Windows because of the latest MSN" thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=538129) was short because almost every post contained useful information, and covered every issue the OP had with their messenger. When there wasn't anything more to say, the thread tailed off. Problem solved in seventeen posts.

Whereas this thread goes and goes and goes, because it is a dick-waving contest between people who mistake their preferred tool for their own dicks.Well the two threads have two very different OPs. The first one asked for technical assistance, the second (this) was a flamewar from the start, with a few side discussions were people got help.

Aye, but Linux is actually piss poor at games, and people who say things like "get WinE" are being extra ludicrous.

Why need I get WinE, when I can just have compatability with any program that anyone cares about right off the bat?

I know I'm pages behind in this thread... but meh... almost all of my favourite games need emulation on windows. My favourite game of all time is completely unable to run on windows xp unless I get dosbox and spend a week editing the code so it doesn't try to access the hard drive without saying "pretty pretty pleeeeaaaaase" to windows.
It's fine for my more modern games though. When they don't crash 10 minutes into loading because I didn't update my graphics card this year...

Well the two threads have two very different OPs. The first one asked for technical assistance, the second (this) was a flamewar from the start, with a few side discussions were people got help.

Well, since you contributed positively to both threads, I'll take your counsel and back off ... while suggesting that 'format wars' really just entrench people in the arbitrary choice they already made, and diminish their ability to choose what best suits their needs.

No, you, like many others, confuse functionality with good user interface design.

If clicking a button labelled "close" doesn't close the program, but merely hides it, then it's bad interface design. A good user interface should be completely self-explainitory. A user with absolutely no experience with UIs of any kind should be able to sit down and use it, because the UI should explain what to do intuitively. A button marked "close" should close the program, and nothing else. It shouldn't hide it, it shouldn't minimise it, it shouldn't put it in standby, it should close the program or it's badly designed.
On Apple, pressing the close windows closes the window. On Windows/Linux, it closes the window then it closes the application. Apple, for whatever reason, still makes this distinction.
See these silly minimalist UIs that people often tout as superior to Windows (or any other) UIs? They're functionally efficient, perhaps, but badly designed from a user-interface perspective, because they are not intuitive. That one you describe is a terrible design from a good UI perspective (not from a good functionality perspective), because none of the things you describe are self-evident to a new user. The user would have to go read a manual or intructions on how to use it, and that makes it a bad UI design.
Very few people use the minimalist DEs. KDE and Gnome have between 70% and 90% market share, with XFCE (it is light, but not minimalist. It tries to bring a full DE to those with old hardware) having the vast majority of what is left over.

Also there is more than one criteria for good UI design. Making it easy for someone with no experience is only one of those. There are also things like execution speed, making it easy for experienced users, looks, resource usage which all matter.

Well, since you contributed positively to both threads, I'll take your counsel and back off ... while suggesting that 'format wars' really just entrench people in the arbitrary choice they already made, and diminish their ability to choose what best suits their needs.True, but I am sure that someone will argue about that.

I dislike Linux because of pretty terrible driver support for my hardware, terrible out-of-box workability, and standard open-source UI design (i.e., the worst there is).

I like Windows because of fantastic driver support, decent out-of-box workability, and fantastic UI design. Before you fantits whinge about the UI in Windows being inferior because it caters by default to the inexperienced, this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

I sort of like OS X because of decent driver support, good out-of-box workability and decent UI design. OS X looks pretty, but is pretty badly designed by ideal human-computer graphical interface standards (e.g., clicking the "close" button minimises the window rather than ends the program).

The driver support problem for linux is because a ridiculous number of manufacturers refuse to make drivers compatible with linux or make the required code available for programmers to patch together their own without a ridiculous amount of trouble.
There are ways around this though, yes I know this is extra awkwardness but the only real problem I have with linux is internet access because my computer uses a wireless card (damnit)

As long as I have AVG, which auto starts, I can open anything I want. If there is a virus (which I haven't gotten for around 6 months), it will detect and delete or heal it. No extra work needs to be done.

I love AVG ^_^
It's not the holy grail though. You still get viruses even with it, something to do with anti-virus programs running a catch-up race while the viruses are sprinting ahead because the new ones are... new (and different)

On Apple, pressing the close windows closes the window. On Windows/Linux, it closes the window then it closes the application. Apple, for whatever reason, still makes this distinction.

Very few people use the minimalist DEs. KDE and Gnome have between 70% and 90% market share, with XFCE (it is light, but not minimalist. It tries to bring a full DE to those with old hardware) having the vast majority of what is left over.

Also there is more than one criteria for good UI design. Making it easy for someone with no experience is only one of those. There are also things like execution speed, making it easy for experienced users, looks, resource usage which all matter.

Well, it often closes the application. Depends on how the app is written. I would guess that Apple makes the distinction because it seems to be a sensible way of thinking about it - need to close the window, click the close button. Need to quit the application, click quit.

I agree with you on most of the rest. Designing to the absolute lowest common denominator is one way, but will often alienate users who don't like the conventions that forces.

The Mindset. Ever tried showing Windows to someone absolutely new to computers? Clicking on a text window moves the cursor to that point - except when you don't already have the window selected. You have to single click to activate a button, but double click for an icon. You click at the top to move the window, but on the sides to resize it. Things like that, inconsistencies. aewm doesn't do much fancy, but it is very consistent in how it behaves, and very very good at getting out of your way when you want to do something. Not good for eyecandy, but excellent if you want things out of your way. As the author said:


aewm is not meant to be make pretty screenshots, impress your friends, etc, nor does it promise increased productivity if you spend time learning it (there isn’t, actually, much of anything to learn). It's a beautiful day outside, and you can hack better if you take some time to clear your mind.

If most serious Windows users end up using third party apps to make their computer use more efficient (launchy or whatever it is for a start), then what does that say about Windows? It's okay if you aren't looking for much power, but when you start to need it, you've got to add kludgy third-pary hacks. Why not pick something flexible by design?

Teriyakinae. I was lucky with my wireless card. Try googling ndiswrapper.

As long as I have AVG, which auto starts, I can open anything I want. If there is a virus (which I haven't gotten for around 6 months), it will detect and delete or heal it. No extra work needs to be done.That is a rather poor strategy. What if you get something before a virus definition is made available? It usually takes a few hours to do, then you have to wait for your client to check for it. It is better to just be safe in the first part. AV should be a last line of defense, not your entire defense.

OK, running OSX in a virtual machine is not going to work. You will either have to buy a Mac, or use a modded version of OSX to run it on your PC and then hope you can get some drivers going.

I have got that hacked version working in a virtual for work ... the one with the hacked FreeBSD installer

I just clicked "Download OpenOffice." Then I double-clicked in and picked where I wanted it installed and what I wanted installed and it was done.

And going pkgadd -d [packagename] so much more difficult. Or running ./installer.sh

I have got that hacked version working in a virtual for work ... the one with the hacked FreeBSD installerlol, I'm surprised that they allowed it.

On Apple, pressing the close windows closes the window. On Windows/Linux, it closes the window then it closes the application. Apple, for whatever reason, still makes this distinction.

Very few people use the minimalist DEs. KDE and Gnome have between 70% and 90% market share, with XFCE (it is light, but not minimalist. It tries to bring a full DE to those with old hardware) having the vast majority of what is left over.

Also there is more than one criteria for good UI design. Making it easy for someone with no experience is only one of those. There are also things like execution speed, making it easy for experienced users, looks, resource usage which all matter.

And thats exactly part of the power of being able to CHOSE your DE as your usage or circumstances change you can choose a well fitting DE that gives you the tools YOU need to work more efficent

They even make mods to the windows explorer to help with that (though not nearly as extensive)
For example here is one ran for a bit its called SharpE
http://www.youdontevenrealize.com/pictures/computers/windows.jpg

And going pkgadd -d [packagename] so much more difficult. Or running ./installer.shOr ticking the box beside OpenOffice and clicking install.

lol, I'm surprised that they allowed it.

Shhhhhh lol my boss was like "Not even going to ask what YOU are doing today"

Lol we needed a virtual for our helpdesk to be able to remote into while doing phone support. We did not do anything outlandish with it other than just get it working lol. They just needed the ability to have it "in front" of them while walking a user through something

And thats exactly part of the power of being able to CHOSE your DE as your usage or circumstances change you can choose a well fitting DE that gives you the tools YOU need to work more efficent

They even make mods to the windows explorer to help with that (though not nearly as extensive)
For example here is one ran for a bit its called SharpE
http://www.youdontevenrealize.com/pictures/computers/windows.jpg
Since we are posting pictures, I am back in dual screen bliss (http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/7177/screenshotvr8.png).

I dislike Linux because of pretty terrible driver support for my hardware, terrible out-of-box workability, and standard open-source UI design (i.e., the worst there is).

What desktop are you crapping on about? KDE? GNOME? XFCE? CDE? what? which one?

I like Windows because of fantastic driver support, decent out-of-box workability, and fantastic UI design. Before you fantits whinge about the UI in Windows being inferior because it caters by default to the inexperienced, this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Pardon? people don't hate it because of the defaults, people hate it because it is pig ugly, inconsistant. I mean, f*cking hell, in a space of 1 hour I counted 6 DIFFERENT WIDGET KITS used by Windows bundled applications! SIX WIDGET KITS! Christ all mighty, can't Microsoft just stick to one damn, consistant standard through their operating system? I mean, sure, they can't control third parties but could they atleast provide an operating systems bundled applications are actually designed to some sort of UI guideline standard?

I sort of like OS X because of decent driver support, good out-of-box workability and decent UI design. OS X looks pretty, but is pretty badly designed by ideal human-computer graphical interface standards (e.g., clicking the "close" button minimises the window rather than ends the program).

Mate, what the f*ck are you crapping on about; all computers before 'Windows' operated that way; Amiga and Atari did the same thing; its hardly a 'MacOS' thing, its a standard computer thing which Microsoft chose not to follow.

It makes perfect sense, you close a window or you close the whole application - how is that so damn complex?

Or ticking the box beside OpenOffice and clicking install.

How is pkgadd -d so much harder?

Or is this more 'commandline is more difficult' bullshit being spread?

Shhhhhh lol my boss was like "Not even going to ask what YOU are doing today"

Lol we needed a virtual for our helpdesk to be able to remote into while doing phone support. We did not do anything outlandish with it other than just get it working lol. They just needed the ability to have it "in front" of them while walking a user through somethingYeah, it is hard to remember exactly what you need to click. Especially since some people can't figure out to click Regional and Language Preferences, when I say click Language and Region Settings.

How is pkgadd -d so much harder?

Or is this more 'commandline is more difficult' bullshit being spread?

Doubtful from posi I have a feeling he was just demonstrating the simplicity of multipul different ways

And why the CLI may not be more difficult (in fact that is my primary form of interaction with the OS) it does have a tendency to make some peoples brain just shut down reguardless of ease.

How is pkgadd -d so much harder?

Or is this more 'commandline is more difficult' bullshit being spread?Because the CLI makes people cry.

Since we are posting pictures, I am back in dual screen bliss (http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/7177/screenshotvr8.png).

Here I am in dual wide screen with cube bliss
http://www.youdontevenrealize.com/pictures/computers/cube.jpg :P

Here I am in dual wide screen with cube bliss
http://www.youdontevenrealize.com/pictures/computers/cube.jpg :PAMD says I will be able to do that next month.

EDIT: Are you still using the Human theme?

AMD says I will be able to do that next month.

EDIT: Are you still using the Human theme?

In that pic I think I kicked it over to modified black in emerald but I did not actually play with the GTK theme yet that was the same night of the install with that picture and had not yet "made" it mine

How is pkgadd -d so much harder?

Or is this more 'commandline is more difficult' bullshit being spread?

It must be. I've used a command line before, and been fairly good at it.

In that pic I think I kicked it over to modified black in emerald but I did not actually play with the GTK theme yet that was the same night of the install with that picture and had not yet "made" it mineok, because the general consensus of the Ubuntu community is that you change the theme right away. They are quick to defend it, even though they do not use it.

Ubuntu is weird.

Doubtful from posi I have a feeling he was just demonstrating the simplicity of multipul different ways

And why the CLI may not be more difficult (in fact that is my primary form of interaction with the OS) it does have a tendency to make some peoples brain just shut down reguardless of ease.

For me, I find most of my work is done GUI but there are alot of things which are just easier to do via command line; load up a terminal and start using vi.

The issue I have is when people make instant assumptions that GUI = easier; People made the same thing about Linux when there was ncurses installer - and yet, when the GUI installer came along a whole new set of problems erupted; namely Xserver and detecting peoples hardware configurations properly.

I've seen some truly horrid stories with GUI applications, errors occuring leaving the end user dumb founded as to the problem; and worse, when someone tries to diagnose the problem since everything is hidden, its next to impossible to track it down.

Also, another reason why I question; people happily learned computers, learn commands, learn how to copy things from the hard disk to a floppy; all of this was hardly 'technical' - it was expected. It wouldn't be a huge leap to expect people to do the same sorts of things again - its not as though one is asking people to do something that has never been done by the average person before.

ok, because the general consensus of the Ubuntu community is that you change the theme right away. They are quick to defend it, even though they do not use it.

Ubuntu is weird.

Meh, when I experimented around with Ubuntu for a while, I never changed the GUI colours; I tend to leave things as they are - personally, I think Ubuntu has alot more problems than just the GUI IMHO.

Meh, when I experimented around with Ubuntu for a while, I never changed the GUI colours; I tend to leave things as they are - personally, I think Ubuntu has alot more problems than just the GUI IMHO.So do allot of people. I find UbuntuForums good as every problem has been found, and asked about already.

For me, I find most of my work is done GUI but there are alot of things which are just easier to do via command line; load up a terminal and start using vi.

The issue I have is when people make instant assumptions that GUI = easier; People made the same thing about Linux when there was ncurses installer - and yet, when the GUI installer came along a whole new set of problems erupted; namely Xserver and detecting peoples hardware configurations properly.

I've seen some truly horrid stories with GUI applications, errors occuring leaving the end user dumb founded as to the problem; and worse, when someone tries to diagnose the problem since everything is hidden, its next to impossible to track it down.

Also, another reason why I question; people happily learned computers, learn commands, learn how to copy things from the hard disk to a floppy; all of this was hardly 'technical' - it was expected. It wouldn't be a huge leap to expect people to do the same sorts of things again - its not as though one is asking people to do something that has never been done by the average person before.
And yet when you have to support the 80 year old user that just wants to type a paper you do things as simply in THEIR eyes as you can.

I agree the GUI brings about problems sure but weather we like it or not the standard user shuts down CLI they just do OVER AND OVER people like interacting with things they can see.

As for ubuntu's problems I agree my attempt with this one was simply a gui beryl/compiz build and it was one of the easiest installs. My normal OS of choice is debian/FreeBSD

So do allot of people. I find UbuntuForums good as every problem has been found, and asked about already.

No kidding I had not done an install in a while and wanted to know about driver install. They do a flipping awsome job of documentation

(though FreeBSD has a fairly extensive manual it is just not QUITE as clear and strait forward)

More along the lines of, "I'm ripping a cd and my whole internet speed comes to a grinding hault' - due to crappy process management by Linux; something I've never experienced running Solaris or FreeBSD.

Hmmm never experienced that in any OS

So do allot of people. I find UbuntuForums good as every problem has been found, and asked about already.

More along the lines of, "I'm ripping a cd and my whole internet speed comes to a grinding hault' - due to crappy process management by Linux; something I've never experienced running Solaris or FreeBSD.

The 80 year old scenario is actually a true situation, a family friend, second hand PC and I loaded it up with Novell SLED 10 SP1; has an ADSL connection and is very happy. With a little TLC things can be done. Then again, this 80 year old is as keen as mustard to pick up a book and learn everything there is to the technology.

Some yes but I have over 1200 users that are "Retired" faculty alone and I have never in the hundreds of phone calls with them experienced more then one or two like you are describing.

And yet when you have to support the 80 year old user that just wants to type a paper you do things as simply in THEIR eyes as you can.

I agree the GUI brings about problems sure but weather we like it or not the standard user shuts down CLI they just do OVER AND OVER people like interacting with things they can see.

As for ubuntu's problems I agree my attempt with this one was simply a gui beryl/compiz build and it was one of the easiest installs. My normal OS of choice is debian/FreeBSD

The 80 year old scenario is actually a true situation, a family friend, second hand PC and I loaded it up with Novell SLED 10 SP1; has an ADSL connection and is very happy. With a little TLC things can be done. Then again, this 80 year old is as keen as mustard to pick up a book and learn everything there is to the technology.

Experienced it on both Fedora 6 and 7, and Ubuntu 7.04 (and prior release) - wireless internet connection, Intel 3945 A/B/G - load up, rip a cd and find the computer slows down big time.

This isn't on a slouch of a computer, its a 1.83Ghz Core 2 laptop with 2gigs of memory, nvidia graphics card and 160gig hdd. So it isn't as though I was putting much stress on it.
Interesting ... I am much more of a debian man then ubuntu personally either way

Hmmm never experienced that in any OS

Experienced it on both Fedora 6 and 7, and Ubuntu 7.04 (and prior release) - wireless internet connection, Intel 3945 A/B/G - load up, rip a cd and find the computer slows down big time.

This isn't on a slouch of a computer, its a 1.83Ghz Core 2 laptop with 2gigs of memory, nvidia graphics card and 160gig hdd. So it isn't as though I was putting much stress on it.

More along the lines of, "I'm ripping a cd and my whole internet speed comes to a grinding hault' - due to crappy process management by Linux; something I've never experienced running Solaris or FreeBSD.I got that from openSuse, but it is notorious for being slow.

I haven't tried Solaris or FreeBSD yet, because I would be stuck with the vesa driver.

What type of video card do you have? ATI? Nvidia or Intel? Intel and Nvidia both have accelerated drivers for FreeBSD.ATI.

I got that from openSuse, but it is notorious for being slow.

I haven't tried Solaris or FreeBSD yet, because I would be stuck with the vesa driver.

What type of video card do you have? ATI? Nvidia or Intel? Intel and Nvidia both have accelerated drivers for FreeBSD.

ATI.

Ahhhh, ewwww *hugs Posi* I my condolences; I deliberately avoided ATI for the very reason they demonstrate a complete lack of support for their customers.

Maybe the 'opensource drivers' will result in a level playing field between operating systems.

Ahhhh, ewwww *hugs Posi* I my condolences; I deliberately avoided ATI for the very reason they demonstrate a complete lack of support for their customers.

Maybe the 'opensource drivers' will result in a level playing field between operating systems.I had used Linux maybe two months when I bought my PC last year.

I love how Mac advertises itself to be better protected against viruses than Windows. By that logic, you could also say that California is better prepared for a hurricane than Florida. After all, look at how many more hurricanes go through Florida than California. But it's cool, 'cause Florida's more prepared for a major earthquake. Proof: You never hear of an earthquake in Florida.
Windows is far better protected against viruses, it's just no one bothers to make viruses for Macs and hackers are always looking for ways to break through Windows defenses.

Did you try the WPA HowTo (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/WPAHowTo) I mentioned in the original thread this thread is a spin off of?

If that didn't help then search on Ubuntu Forums (http://ubuntuforums.org/), someone has surely already asked for and received help with the same problem there.Whoops, missed that the first time around.

Anyway, I eventually find out that there have been driver issues with my wifi card since Edgy was introduced. Ubuntu can get the card to work and detect networks, but it cannot connect to them. Luckily I'm just mucking about with Ubuntu on my desktop that has a wired connection.

I'll just have to make sure when I buy a laptop it comes with wireless that is supported by Ubuntu.

I'll just have to make sure when I buy a laptop it comes with wireless that is supported by Ubuntu.Intel.

I love how Mac advertises itself to be better protected against viruses than Windows. By that logic, you could also say that California is better prepared for a hurricane than Florida. After all, look at how many more hurricanes go through Florida than California. But it's cool, 'cause Florida's more prepared for a major earthquake. Proof: You never hear of an earthquake in Florida.
Windows is far better protected against viruses, it's just no one bothers to make viruses for Macs and hackers are always looking for ways to break through Windows defenses.I'm not so sure. OSX is based off Unix, therefore most people aren't logged on as the administrator, let alone the root user. Ergo, programs don't have permission to alter any critical files.

I love how Mac advertises itself to be better protected against viruses than Windows. By that logic, you could also say that California is better prepared for a hurricane than Florida. After all, look at how many more hurricanes go through Florida than California. But it's cool, 'cause Florida's more prepared for a major earthquake. Proof: You never hear of an earthquake in Florida.
Windows is far better protected against viruses, it's just no one bothers to make viruses for Macs and hackers are always looking for ways to break through Windows defenses.Vista had more viruses than OSX before it was legal for non-Microsoft users to use it.

Intel.Thank you. :)

So true, Charlen... by that logic, Germany has a great elephant-attack prevention. But then, Darwin is designed better than Windows and there is a certain security, which a good design can guarantee. Darwin here has the experience of Mach and Unix behind it.

"There is no patch for human stupidity."

My [Windows] computer has run perfectly fine for the last two years, without hardly a hiccup. That's without a firewall even. I don't really see how tech guys who purportedly know their stuff can complain that Windows is unsecure. It this a case of YMMV, or have any of you had a similar experience?

Say that to the millions of people who got welchia/blaster for simply having their computer on a network.

Virus infections can be curbed by good usage policies (if the standard user is capable of following a reasonable one ... doubtful from what I have seen) but network aware worms are a different beast it was a pure system vulnerability the users did absolutely nothing wrong

My Windows is perfectly stable and secure. If you are stupid, nothing is secure.

"There is no patch for human stupidity."

My [Windows] computer has run perfectly fine for the last two years, without hardly a hiccup. That's without a firewall even. I don't really see how tech guys who purportedly know their stuff can complain that Windows is unsecure. It this a case of YMMV, or have any of you had a similar experience?

"There is no patch for human stupidity."

My [Windows] computer has run perfectly fine for the last two years, without hardly a hiccup. That's without a firewall even. I don't really see how tech guys who purportedly know their stuff can complain that Windows is unsecure. It this a case of YMMV, or have any of you had a similar experience?An isolated Windows XP, would still BSOD on me while doing stuff memory intensive. Vista has been much better, but then I am allot more cautious using it than Linux (ie no P2P, no porn, etc).

Say that to the millions of people who got welchia/blaster for simply having their computer on a network.

Virus infections can be curbed by good usage policies (if the standard user is capable of following a reasonable one ... doubtful from what I have seen) but network aware worms are a different beast it was a pure system vulnerability the users did absolutely nothing wrong

Can't we say though that vulerabilities like that are no worse than that on other systems, save for the fact that there are so many more Windows computers out there? A virus/worm/whatever coded for Linux just wouldn't reach anyone, and that's why we don't see them.

Thank you. :)If it is Intel, it will have good Linux support.

Microsoft did some pretty dumb things security-wise, and it's not so easy to fix the security holes without breaking existing programs. In fact, I read that SP2 broke quite a few programs (I had no problem, but YMMV). That doesn't mean Mac/Linux users can get too complacent.

I have a bad analogy about Windows vs Mac/Linux security. I live in a house with decent security. My neighbor leaves his Windows (sorry) open. Who do you think the average burglar will target? However, if the neighbor upgrades his security, then the burglar might target my house, and he might even get in. But it would still be worse if I left my Windows open.

Can't we say though that vulerabilities like that are no worse than that on other systems, save for the fact that there are so many more Windows computers out there? A virus/worm/whatever coded for Linux just wouldn't reach anyone, and that's why we don't see them.

Not really, I have not seen anything quite that bad out of other operating systems in quite a while. Either way unlike MS at least with *nix derivatives you have the tools to fix any of the problems if you have the knowhow

I have a bad analogy about Windows vs Mac/Linux security. I live in a house with decent security. My neighbor leaves his Windows (sorry) open. Who do you think the average burglar will target? However, if the neighbor upgrades his security, then the burglar might target my house, and he might even get in. But it would still be worse if I left my Windows open.

It would have been better to continue with Rejistania's analogy. Germany may be secure from an Elephant attack due to there not being many elephants in the region, but it has an army of ivory hunters at the boarder just in case.

Either way, security through obscurity is still much better than the situation that Windows is currently in.

Not really, I have not seen anything quite that bad out of other operating systems in quite a while. Either way unlike MS at least with *nix derivatives you have the tools to fix any of the problems if you have the knowhow

That's what the OS debate boils down to: If you can fix it yourself, Linux (etc.) is superior. Otherwise, your best bet is probably Windows.

That's what the OS debate boils down to: If you can fix it yourself, Linux (etc.) is superior. Otherwise, your best bet is probably Windows.
Default *nix security design is also better then windows
From a security perspective *nix wins every time even in "default" mode.

If it is Intel, it will have good Linux support.Oooh, I just managed to find out the chipset of the card - RT61 made by Ralink. Found a possible to solution to the driver problems on the Ubuntu forums.

Oooh, I just managed to find out the chipset of the card - RT61 made by Ralink. Found a possible to solution to the driver problems on the Ubuntu forums.If it is Railink, you'll have to sacrifice a goat in order to get it to work.

If it is Railink, you'll have to sacrifice a goat in order to get it to work.Definitely a Ralink. D-Link airplus DWL-G510 revision C. Had I revision D it would have had an Atheros chipset, which seems to work fine for other people.

Oh well, I'll try seeing if I can get it to work tomorrow.

Definitely a Ralink. D-Link airplus DWL-G510 revision C. Had I revision D it would have had an Atheros chipset, which seems to work fine for other people.I have a DWL-G520 which is Atheros. It works well with the madwifi driver.

It would have been better to continue with Rejistania's analogy. Germany may be secure from an Elephant attack due to there not being many elephants in the region, but it has an army of ivory hunters at the boarder just in case.

Either way, security through obscurity is still much better than the situation that Windows is currently in.

The situation Microsoft is in, they put backwards compatibility above security; you fix a security problem, you have to provide 'compatibility' for those applications which relies on that call which the application assumes a certain result but due to changes, now has a different one.

Generally speaking, when *NIX people fix things; it is actually fixed - with no backwards compatibility. Thats how it should he rather than compromising with the whingers and whiners complaining their 25 year old DOS or Windows 3.11 application isn't working perfectly.

The situation Microsoft is in, they put backwards compatibility above security; you fix a security problem, you have to provide 'compatibility' for those applications which relies on that call which the application assumes a certain result but due to changes, now has a different one.

Generally speaking, when *NIX people fix things; it is actually fixed - with no backwards compatibility. Thats how it should he rather than compromising with the whingers and whiners complaining their 25 year old DOS or Windows 3.11 application isn't working perfectly.I remember showing off that they got a spreadsheet app from 1984 to work on Vista, and was like "Who the fuck would need an app that old?"

I remember showing off that they got a spreadsheet app from 1984 to work on Vista, and was like "Who the fuck would need an app that old?"
You'd be fucking surprised apparently. No backwards compatibility would be the death of the tech industry. Stupid, lazy, or penny-pinching folks are still using ass old technology to get shit done, or at least for stuff it would take alot of money and time to update. Shit like the space station program is still on the same programs and programming they were using when the project started - 20 years ago. No backwards compatibility in *NIX? Either the tech industry stops advancing, or it is completely destroyed. I'm not saying it's smart, but them's the breaks.

"There is no patch for human stupidity."

My [Windows] computer has run perfectly fine for the last two years, without hardly a hiccup. That's without a firewall even. I don't really see how tech guys who purportedly know their stuff can complain that Windows is unsecure. It this a case of YMMV, or have any of you had a similar experience?

Your computer is being kept clean by the real owner, a Russian cracker who uses it to relay spam. If it's been fine for two years, chances are you are fine. Your "network administrator" must be pretty good, so don't worry about getting caught ...

:p

You'd be fucking surprised apparently. No backwards compatibility would be the death of the tech industry. Stupid, lazy, or penny-pinching folks are still using ass old technology to get shit done, or at least for stuff it would take alot of money and time to update. Shit like the space station program is still on the same programs and programming they were using when the project started - 20 years ago. No backwards compatibility in *NIX? Either the tech industry stops advancing, or it is completely destroyed. I'm not saying it's smart, but them's the breaks.

I should have rephrased what I said - no backwards compatibility for dumbass stuff; sure, change something to improve, provide compatibility but in terms of security, there should be no compromises, same goes for stability.

If it is Railink, you'll have to sacrifice a goat in order to get it to work.

I thought the goat was what you used for SCSI.

I thought the goat was what you used for SCSI.

Really? I have never EVER had a SCSI problem with Linux.

I should have rephrased what I said - no backwards compatibility for dumbass stuff; sure, change something to improve, provide compatibility but in terms of security, there should be no compromises, same goes for stability.
Ok, you release a new program. It doesn't have backwards compatibility for a specific file format because that format has insecurities. Woops, there goes everything created in that format. Same goes for programs. Requiring security to the detriment of backwards compatibility would bring the tech industry to a screeching halt one way or other.

Ok, you release a new program. It doesn't have backwards compatibility for a specific file format because that format has insecurities. Woops, there goes everything created in that format. Same goes for programs. Requiring security to the detriment of backwards compatibility would bring the tech industry to a screeching halt one way or other.

If there was a security vulnerability, the company would release a patch for the old version thus allowing importing but when saved, the new format would take precedent and replace it.

Let this thread die. You're torturing Joel and the bots!