Re: not genuine Windows

On Wednesday 16 August 2006 06:11 pm, Leythos had this to say in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

In article <ec0dam01j7j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, nostop@xxxxxxxxxx says...
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 11:25 am, Leythos had this to say in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

In article <pan.2006.08.16.16.11.56.87431@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:10:54 +0000, Leythos wrote:

In article <pan.2006.08.16.03.44.22.28537@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 02:57:01 +0000, Leythos wrote:

In article <ebtql65hnn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, nostop@xxxxxxxxxx
says...
More FUD from Fanboy. Tell us what CPUs Windoze runs on and
compare that with Linux. "Best desktop OS" my ass. You sure do
live a sheltered life, don't you? Totally clueless about what's
out there now.

You remind me of another it10t that was banned from these groups
under a specific NIC, in fact you could be his twin.

If you want to see for yourself, take Mandrake, Suse, Fedora, and
Windows XP, put 4 computers side by side, same hardware/firmware
on each, make sure that you have a good video card for games/cad,
a big drive, a nice GB eithernet adapter, a Video Capture device,
a Color Laser Printer, a nice sound card, and 2GB RAM. Now start
your install, side by side, and then start testing applications
with the same type of documents - you can even export your Word
documents to RTF and your Power Point slides to PDF.....

Funny thing is that you'll have the XP box and MS Office
installed with all patches before Fedora even finishes updating
from yum..... The others are a crapshoot as to how long they will
take, but in testing, over a couple different instances, it takes
longer to load/setup/patch the three Linux distros than the XP +
Office 2003 + Upates.

Have you ever actually *installed* Fedora? I'd like to see you try
to install 100 commercial applications under Windows before I could
install 2,000 under Fedora.

However it's not about speed of installation. In designing Windows,
Microsoft sacrificed long-term stability and security for an
immediate flattening of the learning curve. Windows *is* easier up
front, but you pay down the road in maintenance time and lessened
security. Linux takes more work to get set up but once you have it
configured it'll sit there for years with very little maintenance.

Yes, have it running on 3 workstations - and if you notice, I said +
Updates. Why can't you comprehend all of what is written?

I comprehend fine. You just don't know as much as you think you do
about Linux. See my note at the bottom about Fedora being a
development distribution.

Seem every post where I mention Fedora, Mandrake, Suse.

I clearly was able to install XP Prof, MS Office Prof, and all
service packs from the net in much less time than it took to
complete the same on any of the Fedora boxes (or Mandrake/Suse
either).

Then your comparison is strongly biased in some way. I just installed
Debian-based Ubuntu on another HD. It took 30 minutes and included
about a thousand popular applications and utilities, including
OpenOffice. Updating all those applications was a single command:
"sudo apt-get update". The updates took about 15 minutes.

Again, see where I've clearly stated Fedora, Mandrake and Suse. Oh, and
I installed as many applications that I wanted, including OO, and even
CrossOver with Office 2000/XP.

Before that I was playing with Novell's SLED, which is based on SuSE.
It comes with OpenOffice and many other office tools bundled in.
Installation took about an hour including grabbing the latest security
updates.

My experience has been different, in one install, about the 8th time I
did Fedora Core 4, it took 5 hours to download the updates. With FC5 it
took more than 3 hours. With Mandrake 10, again, just updating what was
installed, it took more than 3 hours.

The killer was the udpates, they took hours to pull down.

I've seen individual Windows updates that were larger than the Linux
kernel and core utilities. You were probably updating all the
applications that come with Fedora but not Windows.

No, I was updating what was installed, the same as doing a Microsoft
Update, which includes XP and Office updates.

Updates are a weekly thing on Fedora, at least if you check.

Of course. Fedora is a testing distribution designed to try new ideas
and work the bugs out of bleeding-edge code. You get a lot of updates
when you use a development distro. If you want less updating then you
need to use a distribution designed for stability rather than to test
code. That would be Debian, Slackware, Redhat Enterprise Linux,
CentOS, or Novell's new SLED, among others.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but the updates, at least every two weeks, was
the same for Mandrake 10 and for Suse at the time. I only use FC5
currently.

So, you can comment about all the OTHER distros you want, but I've
clearly stated that FC4/5, Mandrake, Suse took several hours MORE than
Windows XP + Office 2003 + Updates, and until you do it yourself you
can't tell me that it's not true.

Well, I've updated Mandrake and the speed of downloads will depend on
what mirror you've pointed urpmi to use, you idiot. So you picked a slow
(probably university) server that is throttled down and dishes out
downloads at 56KB/sec. That's only because you're so damn stupid. Don't
blame the o/s, as they like to say around this newsgroup.

And no, you can't compare "Windows XP + Office 2003 + Updates" with a
distro like Mandrake/iva and it's 18,000 software packages when it comes
to updates. I know that XP+Mickeyware is bloated, but it still doesn't
come close to filling your computer up with the functionality one gets
from a typical Linux distro.

It's nice to see that you missed my statement where I said ONLY
INSTALLED OS/APPS, and that ALL MACHINES WERE SETUP AS CLOSE TO THE SAME
AS POSSIBLE.

What do you mean by APPS? *** man, there are thousands of "apps". How the
hell do I know what you did or didn't install? But out of the box, had you
installed Mandrake/iva and chosen say Workstation as the collection of
"apps" you wanted to install, there would have been far more apps than the
1 you mention installing with XP (Office). Did you install any Internet
apps/utilities? Did you install any of the development tools? What servers
did you install - mail, mysql, apache, printer? Did you install any
multimedia apps? I'm sure that you would have installed more than just Open
Office to keep the installation similar to Windoze. Did you install the
Gimp and now compare that to having Paint on your Windoze box? :-)

What you're suggesting just makes no sense - as so much of what you say
around here, is just unbelievable, even if you decide to shout it out in
caps.

Just what do you use those FC5 boxes for? That would at least tell us what
you probably installed.

There was no 18,000 packages installed on any of them. Keep trolling.

I never suggested you installed all available packages. But I'm sure your
FC5 system has alot more apps/servers installed on it than you would
install on XP, simply because XP provides squat all. Unless you consider
the toys like Paint, IE, OE and it's poor excuse for a CD burning app,
applications".


--
WGA is the best thing that has happened for Linux in a while.

The ULTIMATE Windoze Fanboy:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2370205018226686613

Is this a modern day equivalent of a Nazi youth rally?:

http://www.ntk.net/media/developers.mpg

A 3D Linux Desktop (video) ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUSn-jBA3CE

View Some Common Linux Desktops ...
http://shots.osdir.com/

.