seems like you hate him more than you hate sco .
Not at all. Never met him personally and unlikely to in the forseeable future. so nothing personal about it.
we must thank him for proliferating computers and software to the masses.
Rubbish taiwanse cloners and chip fabs did that.
..snip...
it is our job to take this vision in a more cleaner way
Are u joking what vision - robbing other's software, writing illegal contracts, being the big bully, writing software with more holes than a sieve. And that is not my concotion - it's recorded in various court judgements across the world.
... to make computing more affordable and relilable ... to make lif e a lot more easir by improving the interfaces to computers an making them more useful to common man without putting any efforts in learning...
All of which would have been a lot cheaper and easier and reliable had it not been for the aforementioned Billybaba and his cohorts' methods.
First of all very well-written JTD!
Well let me narrate an incident, a real-life incident when I visited Microsoft Campus in Gachibowli, Hyderabad. It was part of our college tour, and was made possible by one of the seniors who is working in M$. I had a nice debate regarding FOSS, M$, ...., which was mainly initiated by the M$ fellas who could not stop asking which one among us though Billy to evil, thought M$ was bad, etc... During the couse of this debate, suddenly when they were pushed to a corner, they came up with the question: Why would you ever use Linux? Why would you ever use anything other than Winblows?
Now what about this? Is this how employees of a company, an American company owned by a good American citizen, behave? What about the philosophies of democracy that Mr. Bush and his cronies are trying to push forward? The whole point is that M$ is not as likeable as you think. Think of a world without Winblows and you would get the logic.
The whole idea of Windows making computing easy does not hold. Yeah they have definitely made it a idiot-friendly thing. But that is dangerous in the same way that driving would be a dangerous thing if you made licenses optional. The plethora of viruses and worms that we find everywhere would have been lesser if it was not for that Winblows user who so happily clicks on every mail in the mailbox, and every .exe on the floppy.
Cheerio, Debarshi
The whole idea of Windows making computing easy does not hold. Yeah
they have definitely made it a idiot-friendly thing. But that is dangerous in the same way that driving would be a dangerous thing if you made licenses optional. The plethora of viruses and worms that we find everywhere would have been lesser if it was not for that Winblows user who so happily clicks on every mail in the mailbox, and every .exe on the floppy.
Debarshi, The amount of energy you are expending in hating microsoft is so huge that if you'd have started writing some code instead of that, you'd have a OS much better than MS and Linux combined !!
However, you prefer the 'hate' way. Sad to see this.
Please stop this coz' its leading us nowhere.
Thanks and Regards, Harshal Vaidya. 832-230-9493 ------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.lakhpatipage.com Cheapest way to advertise on the internet -------------------------------------------------------------
<quote who="Harshal Vaidya">
Debarshi, The amount of energy you are expending in hating microsoft is so huge that if you'd have started writing some code instead of that, you'd have a OS much better than MS and Linux combined !!
However, you prefer the 'hate' way. Sad to see this.
:-) Harshal you took the words out of my mouth. There is no point in hating or under-estimating a giant like Microsoft. The reason why M$ OS is so popular is bcoz everyone (NOT all ;)) likes it, very easy to work with for an average user.
When i say about an average user, its abt a user whose main job is to get things done with a computer.
"They say that GNU/Linux is free & useful if your time is worth nothing".
regds
mifthas haris
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:08:13AM +0307, Mifthas Haris wrote:
The reason why M$ OS is so popular is bcoz everyone (NOT all ;)) likes it, very easy to work with for an average user.
I don't see any difference in user simplicity in Windows or Linux. Its all about getting famaliar with a system. If a child were to see only linux pcs around it, it would find them as simple as a child who grows up on windows.
MS is popular because of its marketing techniques and tie-ups with hardware manufacturers for drivers. Piracy too is responsible for customers demanding softwares they would never use if they had to pay for it.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
On Sunday 18 June 2006 10:28, Rony wrote:
I don't see any difference in user simplicity in Windows or Linux. Its all about getting famaliar with a system. If a child were to see only linux pcs around it, it would find them as simple as a child who grows up on windows.
This argument isn't true at all. What if the child wants to change the file associations? What if the child wants to draw a simple drawing? ( Paint brush kicks Kpaints a$$ ). What if the child wants to install a flash plugin? Firefox has issues installing plugins on my FC5 system. The fact is and will remain that Linux Desktop OE have a long way yet to catch up with XPs UI. Until the outlook of the Linux community changes and accepts the short comings of the UIs GNOME and KDE both, we wont see real progress.
MS is popular because of its marketing techniques and tie-ups with hardware manufacturers for drivers. Piracy too is responsible for customers demanding softwares they would never use if they had to pay for it.
Agreed.
On 18/06/06 21:40 +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Sunday 18 June 2006 10:28, Rony wrote:
I don't see any difference in user simplicity in Windows or Linux. Its all about getting famaliar with a system. If a child were to see only linux pcs around it, it would find them as simple as a child who grows up on windows.
This argument isn't true at all. What if the child wants to change the file associations? What if the child wants to draw a simple drawing?
Why would you want to change file associations?
( Paint brush kicks Kpaints a$$ ). What if the child wants to install a flash plugin? Firefox has issues installing plugins on my FC5 system.
And why would you want a _user_ installing anything? Please do not conflate administrative issues with use issues.
The fact is and will remain that Linux Desktop OE have a long way yet to catch up with XPs UI. Until the outlook of the Linux community changes and accepts the short comings of the UIs GNOME and KDE both, we wont see real progress.
Patch(es)?
Oh, and not all of us use bloatware. For one thing, I dislike the XP UI (and Mac OS X is cumbersome to use). You keep forgetting that all these are learned things.
Devdas Bhagat
On Sunday 18 June 2006 18:30, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
Why would you want to change file associations?
"Why" is a very irrelevant question.
( Paint brush kicks Kpaints a$$ ). What if the child wants to install a flash plugin? Firefox has issues installing plugins on my FC5 system.
And why would you want a _user_ installing anything? Please do not conflate administrative issues with use issues.
Right, so a regular user can't install a simple plugin lest a sysadmin comes running and does it for him? LOL
Oh, and not all of us use bloatware. For one thing, I dislike the XP UI (and Mac OS X is cumbersome to use). You keep forgetting that all these are learned things.
Excuse me for having an opinion but KDE / GNOME are not light at all either.
On 19/06/06 02:24 +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Sunday 18 June 2006 18:30, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
Why would you want to change file associations?
"Why" is a very irrelevant question.
You assume a certain pattern of usage that comes from the Windows world. Regular Mac users would have different usage patterns.
( Paint brush kicks Kpaints a$$ ). What if the child wants to install a flash plugin? Firefox has issues installing plugins on my FC5 system.
And why would you want a _user_ installing anything? Please do not conflate administrative issues with use issues.
Right, so a regular user can't install a simple plugin lest a sysadmin comes running and does it for him? LOL
Are we arguing about _use_, or about _administration_? Those are two entirely different issues, and warrant different threads.
Oh, and not all of us use bloatware. For one thing, I dislike the XP UI (and Mac OS X is cumbersome to use). You keep forgetting that all these are learned things.
Excuse me for having an opinion but KDE / GNOME are not light at all either.
You mentioned KDE and GNOME in terms of UI, and I happened to agree with you that they suck. On rereading what I wrote, I realise that this was unclear from the context, and I apologise for the confusion.
Devdas Bhagat
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 09:40:19PM +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
This argument isn't true at all. What if the child wants to change the file associations? What if the child wants to draw a simple drawing? ( Paint brush kicks Kpaints a$$ ). What if the child wants to install a flash plugin? Firefox has issues installing plugins on my FC5 system.
This is assuming that someone has already setup the system for the child and it is only using it.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
On Monday 19 June 2006 12:54, Rony wrote:
This is assuming that someone has already setup the system for the child and it is only using it.
That isn't always the ideal case isn't it? There are upgrades to plugins and stuff...
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 07:38:04PM +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Monday 19 June 2006 12:54, Rony wrote:
This is assuming that someone has already setup the system for the child and it is only using it.
That isn't always the ideal case isn't it? There are upgrades to plugins and stuff...
By and large, desktop environments tend to copy each other in order to have a smoother migration so it really does not matter so much to the general user. A linux user learns to get the job done in the linux environment just as the windows user learns his job in linux.
I have a client who had some idea of the M$ environment and would regularly call me up to clarify minor problems like how to save files, how to move them from the desktop, how to open pdf files, how to attach files. After I installed linux in his system, surprisingly he practically stopped calling. The only 2 times I have had to go to his place was when his cablewala changed his ip once and required pppoe later. His hp deskjet too prints excellently.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" � The Wall Street Journal http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
On 6/20/06, Rony ronbillypop@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
files. After I installed linux in his system, surprisingly he practically stopped calling. The only 2 times I have had to go to his
That's quite interesting. I noticed a similar behaviour with my mother in case of her quite successful) migration to GNU/Linux. The main reason for that seems to be buttons and dialogs actually explaining what it wants them to do. Anything kicks "OK/Cancel"'s a$$ ;-)
She doesn't have to set up printers, install applications, etc. I do that for her; just like any other household where the computer literate child "administers" her box for her family to use as is. And computer literates with even a slightly open mind can easily learn GNU/Linux, Mac OSX, etc. In the corporate scenario, this administration is done by the support team.
Siddhesh
On Tuesday 20 June 2006 10:31 pm, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
On 6/20/06, Rony ronbillypop@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
files. After I installed linux in his system, surprisingly he practically stopped calling. The only 2 times I have had to go to his
That's quite interesting. I noticed a similar behaviour with my
In the final analysis the real issue is one of habit AND the initial pain of switching over. This pain is typical of kicking a habit - any habit. And the longer u are habituated the more is the resistance, pain and cost. A wise organisation / individual will see this and change as quickly as possible. For the rest a Prayer and plenty of goodluck charms + $$.
On Sunday 18 June 2006 06:27, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote: *snip*
us though Billy to evil, thought M$ was bad, etc... During the couse of this debate, suddenly when they were pushed to a corner, they came up with the question: Why would you ever use Linux? Why would you ever use anything other than Winblows?
Now what about this? Is this how employees of a company, an American company owned by a good American citizen, behave? What about the philosophies of democracy that Mr. Bush and his cronies are trying to push forward? The whole point is that M$ is not as likeable as you think. Think of a world without Winblows and you would get the logic.
wait right there. Linus Torvalds isn't responsible for Linux fanatics, is he? So how can you hold Billy boi responsible for Windoze fanatics?
The whole idea of Windows making computing easy does not hold. Yeah they have definitely made it a idiot-friendly thing. But that is dangerous in the same way that driving would be a dangerous thing if you made licenses optional. The plethora of viruses and worms that we find everywhere would have been lesser if it was not for that Winblows user who so happily clicks on every mail in the mailbox, and every .exe on the floppy.
Umm...the problem here is that Windoze isn't idiot proof either. I remember a nice quote which says that:
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."
Microsoft's _major_ audience includes these "idiots" (no offense meant to windoze users) and I guess nobody, not even the F/OSS community can create idiot proof softwares. Micosoft can hardly keep up to these bigger and better "idiots". Hence the proliferation of worms, viruses, trojans, malware etc...
Basically *nix users aren't the average computer Joe or Jane. They are people with better understanding of wtf is going on with their computer so better security on the *nix platform. I must mention here that these people will always have better security on whatever platform they are working on. While Linux is inherently secure and Windows being relatively less secure, it isn't impossible to get your *nix box r00ted while your windoze box remains secure.
Disclaimer: I am neither in the M$ camp nor are they paying me to write this. This is my professional opinion. If someone disagrees they are free to criticse it. Personally, I hate Microsofties. They are all just the same - arrogant zealots trying to cram GBs of RAM in their boxes to get their vaporware servers working right.
Basically, Microsoft engineers wouldn't know what a good architecture is even if it came from behind and bit them in their a$$ and stuck there until eternity >:(
That cleared, I think we all should be sympathetic towards M$'s patrons, afterall handicaps need our kindness and help :P So, please dont get into these pointless and never ending Windoze vs Linux debates. You're giving Windoze, M$ and their patrons undue importance. It's not even worth mentioning, let alone discussing, on LUG lists.
On Sunday 18 June 2006 06:38 pm, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Microsoft's _major_ audience includes these "idiots" (no offense meant to windoze users) and I guess nobody, not even the F/OSS community can create idiot proof softwares. Micosoft can hardly keep up to these bigger and better "idiots". Hence the proliferation of worms, viruses, trojans, malware etc...
some Ammo for M$ FUD. Security is not about user idiocity. It Is about a sane architecture which will require substantial (complex) user intervention to make it less secure.
it isn't impossible to get your *nix box r00ted while your windoze box remains secure.
Really? What do you haveto do to get let say a Sarge (Kubuntu?) box rootkitable. What do you have to do to get a Win XP box to the same state. Nothing at all in the 2nd case. Secondly exploiting a vulnerability in a GNU distro requires substantial ability, whereas in the case of M$ it requires very little.
Disclaimer: I am neither in the M$ camp nor are they paying me to write this.
Actually u would be excused if they were paying you. You might have got a bonus for the abv ammo ;-). M$ could run an ad M$ is secure except for idiototic users. And since no user think he idiot security problem solveeed.
On Monday 19 June 2006 05:54, jtd wrote:
some Ammo for M$ FUD. Security is not about user idiocity. It Is about a sane architecture which will require substantial (complex) user intervention to make it less secure.
My point being user idiocity can bring down any system - be it Windows or Linux. The weakest link in security are humans. They can bring down a system with their foolishness.
Really? What do you haveto do to get let say a Sarge (Kubuntu?) box rootkitable. What do you have to do to get a Win XP box to the same state. Nothing at all in the 2nd case. Secondly exploiting a vulnerability in a GNU distro requires substantial ability, whereas in the case of M$ it requires very little.
Look at my above point. I am not at all talking about how easy / difficult it is to crack into Linux or Windows. Once a box is cracked its cracked. How easy or difficult it was doesnt matter...
Actually u would be excused if they were paying you. You might have got a bonus for the abv ammo ;-). M$ could run an ad M$ is secure except for idiototic users. And since no user think he idiot security problem solveeed.
You are basically trying to convey that Linux is uncrackable even when its being used by the stupidest user. But what I am conveying is that a Windoze box _can_ be secured well in the hands of a good sysadmin. Look, these two statements have very different meanings.
-
Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dinesh Joshi -
Harshal Vaidya -
jtd -
Mifthas Haris -
ronbillypop＠yahoo.co.uk -
Siddhesh Poyarekar