Re: [News] [Rival] People So Furious Over Vista That Rusty XP Lives for 10 Years

On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:14:41 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

____/ Kelsey Bjarnason on Sunday 12 April 2009 23:48 : \____

> [snips]
>
> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:15:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> When I asked about the high points, he said "Windows 95 was a nice
>> milestone." He also spoke highly of Microsoft SharePoint Server
>> software, but didn't mention Vista.
>
> There was another interview, a talk show IIRC, where he was asked "What's
> the worst product Microsoft ever made?"
>
> The response was some hemming and hawing and "Ask me after the next
> version of Windows comes out."
>
> Kinda sums it up nicely.

>Here. There it is:

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6qIETRCxbw

>'Bill Gates says "Vista Sucks"' -- uploaded by [H]omer.



- --
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz | HTML is for page layout, not for textual messages
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 4088500k total, 417880k used, 3670620k free, 264040k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAknikgEACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6qqQCfWci3BNqRUz zk4j8sWhZ4qU2P
lGYAn27fZwbJv9Byz3a+a7gY9anlAYnr
=L8NG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


The same Vista that surpassed the market share of Linux in a matter of
months even though Linux has been around for 17 years and free?

As for XP, so you are sayoong that Linux, free Linux, is unable to compete
with a 10 year old operating system?
That is pathetic.

So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?

"Doctor Smith" <> wrote in message
news:5yzpys49gnv9$....
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:14:41 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> ____/ Kelsey Bjarnason on Sunday 12 April 2009 23:48 : \____
>
>> [snips]
>>
>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:15:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> When I asked about the high points, he said "Windows 95 was a nice
>>> milestone." He also spoke highly of Microsoft SharePoint Server
>>> software, but didn't mention Vista.
>>
>> There was another interview, a talk show IIRC, where he was asked "What's
>> the worst product Microsoft ever made?"
>>
>> The response was some hemming and hawing and "Ask me after the next
>> version of Windows comes out."
>>
>> Kinda sums it up nicely.
>
>>Here. There it is:
>
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6qIETRCxbw
>
>>'Bill Gates says "Vista Sucks"' -- uploaded by [H]omer.
>
>
>
> - --
> ~~ Best of wishes
>
> Roy S. Schestowitz | HTML is for page layout, not for textual
> messages
> http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
> Swap: 4088500k total, 417880k used, 3670620k free, 264040k cached
> http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAknikgEACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6qqQCfWci3BNqRUz zk4j8sWhZ4qU2P
> lGYAn27fZwbJv9Byz3a+a7gY9anlAYnr
> =L8NG
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> The same Vista that surpassed the market share of Linux in a matter of
> months even though Linux has been around for 17 years and free?
>
> As for XP, so you are sayoong that Linux, free Linux, is unable to compete
> with a 10 year old operating system?
> That is pathetic.
>
> So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?

For one thing, they don't have drivers for a lot of popular printer models,
in my case, Lexmark X2600 and, more importantly, not all network connections
work with Linux either, as my a dial-up modem for instance. I would have to
go through a risky procedure, placing a 'scanmodem.gz' in my modem file.
There may be other issues as well and that's why.

Harry.

Just why should people switch you any version of Linux? about 99% of the
free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to an
OS that doesn't support windows programs. And please don't say use Wine,that
project have been in the works for how many years? 10 + and it only supports
10 programs that run without a problem.
Not only do people have to worry about loosing there warranties for running
programs or hardware that's not supported,but that loose the paid support
too that they paid for. "Our product is not supported on Linux so we do not
provide support"
Face it Linux may be a great geek OS but that's it,Linux on the desktop will
be unless it is supported by that 1000,s of paid for programs and hardware
products and they will not do that because Linux has less then 1% market
share. So since just about every free program OSS has can run on windows
there no compelling reason to switch. Windows just does it all and that's a
fact.





"Kelsey Bjarnason" <> wrote in message
news:j53cb6-...
> [snips]
>
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 23:07:20 -0400, webster72n wrote:
>
>>> So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?
>>
>> For one thing, they don't have drivers for a lot of popular printer
>> models, in my case, Lexmark X2600 and, more importantly, not all network
>> connections work with Linux either, as my a dial-up modem for instance.
>> I would have to go through a risky procedure, placing a 'scanmodem.gz'
>> in my modem file. There may be other issues as well and that's why.
>
> Really? Hmm. Last I checked, Windows _still_ needed third-party drivers
> for all sorts of hardware, including printers, network cards, video
> cards, sound cards, video capture cards, various modems, etc, etc, etc,
> etc, etc.
>
> So, since you appear to dislike Linux due to lack of hardware support,
> and Windows generally has *worse* support, one must conclude you're
> running a Mac. You certainly can't be using Windows, not with your
> argument against Linux.
>
> Unless... oh, wait, let's see, you actually installed a mess of third-
> party drivers for Windows, just as you can do for Linux - when it's
> required at all - in which case your argument against Linux fails for the
> same reason it fails in Windows, namely, the lack of support is more a
> fiction than a reality.
>
> Sorry, *what* was your issue with Linux again? It obviously wasn't the
> driver problem. Anything else you'd care to make up so you can look even
> more foolish?
>

"Kelsey Bjarnason" <> wrote in message
news:j53cb6-...
> [snips]
>
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 23:07:20 -0400, webster72n wrote:
>
>>> So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?
>>
>> For one thing, they don't have drivers for a lot of popular printer
>> models, in my case, Lexmark X2600 and, more importantly, not all network
>> connections work with Linux either, as my a dial-up modem for instance.
>> I would have to go through a risky procedure, placing a 'scanmodem.gz'
>> in my modem file. There may be other issues as well and that's why.
>
> Really? Hmm. Last I checked, Windows _still_ needed third-party drivers
> for all sorts of hardware, including printers, network cards, video
> cards, sound cards, video capture cards, various modems, etc, etc, etc,
> etc, etc.
>
> So, since you appear to dislike Linux due to lack of hardware support,
> and Windows generally has *worse* support, one must conclude you're
> running a Mac. You certainly can't be using Windows, not with your
> argument against Linux.
>
> Unless... oh, wait, let's see, you actually installed a mess of third-
> party drivers for Windows, just as you can do for Linux - when it's
> required at all - in which case your argument against Linux fails for the
> same reason it fails in Windows, namely, the lack of support is more a
> fiction than a reality.
>
> Sorry, *what* was your issue with Linux again? It obviously wasn't the
> driver problem. Anything else you'd care to make up so you can look even
> more foolish?

I leave the foolish up to you, since I don't have any connection or driver
problems with Windows whatsoever. The only reason for my disappointment with
Linux are the issues I mentioned. After having everything in place, I am
unable to use the system because of it and didn't get any help from the
forum either, they simply didn't reply to my queries. And telling me to
upgrade to broadband and get a different printer isn't really helping me
either. So much for Linux & the smart*****.

<H>.
>

Stan wrote:
> Just why should people switch you any version of Linux? about 99% of the
> free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to
> an OS that doesn't support windows programs. And please don't say use
> Wine,that project have been in the works for how many years? 10 + and it
> only supports 10 programs that run without a problem.
> Not only do people have to worry about loosing there warranties for
> running programs or hardware that's not supported,but that loose the
> paid support too that they paid for. "Our product is not supported on
> Linux so we do not provide support"
> Face it Linux may be a great geek OS but that's it,Linux on the desktop
> will be unless it is supported by that 1000,s of paid for programs and
> hardware products and they will not do that because Linux has less then
> 1% market share. So since just about every free program OSS has can run
> on windows there no compelling reason to switch. Windows just does it
> all and that's a fact.

Yeah, it sure does including, but not limited to, being corralled into a
net bot, viruses, adware, spyware and malware. It's really good at that
along with being able to frustrate users with false positives from WGA,
a program that does *nothing* to improve Windows but can lead to hours
and hours trying to fix the false positive.

So, shouldn't you being doing something useful with your Windows install
like running anti virus scans and anti malware scans?

Alias
>
>
>
>
>
> "Kelsey Bjarnason" <> wrote in message
> news:j53cb6-...
>> [snips]
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 23:07:20 -0400, webster72n wrote:
>>
>>>> So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?
>>>
>>> For one thing, they don't have drivers for a lot of popular printer
>>> models, in my case, Lexmark X2600 and, more importantly, not all network
>>> connections work with Linux either, as my a dial-up modem for instance.
>>> I would have to go through a risky procedure, placing a 'scanmodem.gz'
>>> in my modem file. There may be other issues as well and that's why.
>>
>> Really? Hmm. Last I checked, Windows _still_ needed third-party drivers
>> for all sorts of hardware, including printers, network cards, video
>> cards, sound cards, video capture cards, various modems, etc, etc, etc,
>> etc, etc.
>>
>> So, since you appear to dislike Linux due to lack of hardware support,
>> and Windows generally has *worse* support, one must conclude you're
>> running a Mac. You certainly can't be using Windows, not with your
>> argument against Linux.
>>
>> Unless... oh, wait, let's see, you actually installed a mess of third-
>> party drivers for Windows, just as you can do for Linux - when it's
>> required at all - in which case your argument against Linux fails for the
>> same reason it fails in Windows, namely, the lack of support is more a
>> fiction than a reality.
>>
>> Sorry, *what* was your issue with Linux again? It obviously wasn't the
>> driver problem. Anything else you'd care to make up so you can look even
>> more foolish?
>>
>

webster72n wrote:
>
>
> "Kelsey Bjarnason" <> wrote in message
> news:j53cb6-...
>> [snips]
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 23:07:20 -0400, webster72n wrote:
>>
>>>> So what is wrong with Linux that people hate it so much?
>>>
>>> For one thing, they don't have drivers for a lot of popular printer
>>> models, in my case, Lexmark X2600 and, more importantly, not all network
>>> connections work with Linux either, as my a dial-up modem for instance.
>>> I would have to go through a risky procedure, placing a 'scanmodem.gz'
>>> in my modem file. There may be other issues as well and that's why.
>>
>> Really? Hmm. Last I checked, Windows _still_ needed third-party drivers
>> for all sorts of hardware, including printers, network cards, video
>> cards, sound cards, video capture cards, various modems, etc, etc, etc,
>> etc, etc.
>>
>> So, since you appear to dislike Linux due to lack of hardware support,
>> and Windows generally has *worse* support, one must conclude you're
>> running a Mac. You certainly can't be using Windows, not with your
>> argument against Linux.
>>
>> Unless... oh, wait, let's see, you actually installed a mess of third-
>> party drivers for Windows, just as you can do for Linux - when it's
>> required at all - in which case your argument against Linux fails for the
>> same reason it fails in Windows, namely, the lack of support is more a
>> fiction than a reality.
>>
>> Sorry, *what* was your issue with Linux again? It obviously wasn't the
>> driver problem. Anything else you'd care to make up so you can look even
>> more foolish?
>
> I leave the foolish up to you, since I don't have any connection or
> driver problems with Windows whatsoever. The only reason for my
> disappointment with Linux are the issues I mentioned. After having
> everything in place, I am unable to use the system because of it and
> didn't get any help from the forum either, they simply didn't reply to
> my queries. And telling me to upgrade to broadband and get a different
> printer isn't really helping me either. So much for Linux & the smart*****.
>
> <H>.
>>

You can't afford broadband or a $40 HP printer?

Alias

What you have said has no meaning to anyone except OSS fans,which is a very
small segment of the desktop computing world. And will not give anyone a
reason to switch. Just how is MS immoral? what does that mean? OSS world
reverse engineers 99% of what they make so how is that moral?stealing others
ideas. Another very large reason Linux will never be able to provide the
quality programs and support is because they will not buy linancing which is
needed to support many programs and functions. We in the MS world don't have
to worry if something is going to work or be supported because we pay for
theses great programs,they just work out of the box. Still,,no reason to
switch. So the so called superior OS and price has no relevance to use
Windows users,we have Superior performance and a reasonable price,and
superior support and no wories about losing our warrantees,something that is
a very real concern. What we want to do just gets done so how can you fight
that. Inorder to make people change you have to give us something that is
better then what we have and OSS doesnt do that,you cant argue the numbers
after how many years?10-17? You make a product that people just dont want,
no matter what you say. Like i said before its a great geek OS and nothing
more so have fun with it. People are not going to throw away all the money
that have invested in Windows for an OS that doesnt or poorly supports many
many features Windows has legally




"chrisv" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Stan wrote:
>
>>Just why should people switch you any version of Linux?
>
> Because it is the superior OS, in terms of price and performance.
>
> For some, there's a bonus of not using products from the immoral
> monopolizers.
>
>>about 99% of the
>>free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to
>>an
>>OS that doesn't support windows programs.
>
> Not everyone needs those Windows-only programs.
>

After takin' a swig o' grog, chrisv belched out
this bit o' wisdom:

> Stan wrote:
>
>>Just why should people switch you any version of Linux?
>
> Because it is the superior OS, in terms of price and performance.
>
> For some, there's a bonus of not using products from the immoral
> monopolizers.
>
>>about 99% of the
>>free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to an
>>OS that doesn't support windows programs.
>
> Not everyone needs those Windows-only programs.

Sure a lot of hit-n-run trolls today!

--
Lord, what fools these mortals be!
-- William Shakespeare, "A Midsummer-Night's Dream"

"Stan" <> wrote in message
news:...
> What you have said has no meaning to anyone except OSS fans,which is a
> very small segment of the desktop computing world. And will not give
> anyone a reason to switch. Just how is MS immoral? what does that mean?
> OSS world reverse engineers 99% of what they make so how is that
> moral?stealing others ideas. Another very large reason Linux will never be
> able to provide the quality programs and support is because they will not
> buy linancing which is needed to support many programs and functions. We
> in the MS world don't have to worry if something is going to work or be
> supported because we pay for theses great programs,they just work out of
> the box. Still,,no reason to switch. So the so called superior OS and
> price has no relevance to use Windows users,we have Superior performance
> and a reasonable price,and superior support and no wories about losing our
> warrantees,something that is a very real concern. What we want to do just
> gets done so how can you fight that. Inorder to make people change you
> have to give us something that is better then what we have and OSS doesnt
> do that,you cant argue the numbers after how many years?10-17? You make a
> product that people just dont want, no matter what you say. Like i said
> before its a great geek OS and nothing more so have fun with it. People
> are not going to throw away all the money that have invested in Windows
> for an OS that doesnt or poorly supports many many features Windows has
> legally

These people promoting Linux and condemning MS Windows are simply brain
dead, no use trying to revive them. That's my final conclusion.

Harry.

>
>
>
>
> "chrisv" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Stan wrote:
>>
>>>Just why should people switch you any version of Linux?
>>
>> Because it is the superior OS, in terms of price and performance.
>>
>> For some, there's a bonus of not using products from the immoral
>> monopolizers.
>>
>>>about 99% of the
>>>free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to
>>>an
>>>OS that doesn't support windows programs.
>>
>> Not everyone needs those Windows-only programs.
>>
>

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 07:10:17 -0700, Kelsey Bjarnason
<> wrote:

>[snips]
>
>On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:40:51 -0400, Stan wrote:
>
>> Just why should people switch you any version of Linux? about 99% of the
>> free OSS programs have a windows version,so just why should we switch to
>> an OS that doesn't support windows programs.
>
>Well, for one thing, you might be able to find a news client that doesn't
>force you to top-post.

It's not MS Windows per se that causes them to top post. It's
ignorance, or arrogance, or sometimes arrogant ignorance. But, it's
not MS Windows that's to blame.