Re: not genuine Windows

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

On Thursday 17 August 2006 09:12 pm, arachnid had this to say in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:03:11 +0000, Leythos wrote:

In article <pan.2006.08.17.13.29.08.328952@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:49:54 +0000, Leythos wrote:

In article <ec0jnr01sh9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, nostop@xxxxxxxxxx
says...
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.

Keep trying, you can't prove anything I've written is incorrect, in
fact, you can only keep ranting and trying to divert from the truth,
but it won't work.

The problem with that is that we have three Linux users here confirming
that Linux installs/updates aren't as slow as you claim.

No, you have three users that claim to have experience and only one of
them claims to have use FC, and it was FC3, which is not what I've said
I was using.

At least two of us have used FC and I never said which version I use. For
the record it's FC5.

Hop on over to comp.os.linux.misc and ask, and a whole newsgroup full
of linux users will confirm it. I don't know what you're doing wrong,
but I suspect you're updating a whole lot more than the core and one
office application.

No, as I've said several times, I did not install the entire package.

See below.

Just out of curiosity, what was your update command, what did you use
as your MS Office equivalent, is it running under gnome or KDE, and
what other applications were installed?

Gnome, Open Office, I just invoked the auto installed update tool that
scans the computer for installed apps and then selected to update them,
it YUM, it does not pull updates for apps not installed.

It was a trick question. Gnome and KDE both come with a whole lot of extra
applications baggage. If you do a general update then worst case could be
200-400 megabytes of downloads to bring them up to date. Since this
includes a lot of extra applications, some of which are quite large, this
is NOT the same as comparing to Windows core/office suite to Linux
core/office suite.

Now it wouldn't surprise me if OpenOffice pulled in dependencies that then
pulled in gnome or KDE. If so then it may be impossible to do a "fair"
comparison except by loading up Windows with an equivalent amount of
software. However, if it doesn't, then XFCE or Enlightenment would
avoid all that extra baggage and lead to a more even comparison.

Maybe instead of claiming you know a bunch of things, you might try
proving that you know a bunch of things by stating facts, so far I've
not seen you provide any technical facts on anything you've
suggested.

The only "technical fact" you've provided is a subjective claim that
three experienced Linux users don't find credible.

No, three users that have not used FC4 or 5, none have said they have
used Mandrake or SUSE, and all of them appear to be non-technical types.

I worked in Electronics R&D for 25 years before I turned to trucking to
escape the tech treadmill. My specialty during the latter half of my
electronics career was designing, building, and programming
micro-controller circuits. I started using Linux (somewhat) and FreeBSD
(a lot) around 2001, and later went 3 blissful years without
Windows. For the past few months I've been checking out most of the top
Linux distro's - Fedora FC4 and FC5, SuSE, SLED, Ubuntu, Debian,
PCLinuxOS, SimplyMEPIS, Knoppix, and Kanotix - and those are just the
ones I remember off the top of my head. Also I installed NetBSD and
OpenBSD just to see what they're doing nowadays. My goal in all this was
just to find the one OS that I want to stay with for the next 15 years. At
first it looked like Fedora, but when the smoke cleared Debian was
the only one left standing.

Is that technical enough for you?

Every install of FC4 or 5 has taken several hours for a based install
and then many hours to pull updates, every single time, period.

Two hours for a basic install minus downloading updates? Oh, please. I can
do that in a half hour. Here's someone who did it in under 20 minutes, not
counting partitioning time:

http://www.partha.com/installation.html

"Fedora told me that it would take 20 minutes to install. I was
impressed that it only took 19 minutes!"

Of course, you can probably also find someone who took a day or a week to
get Fedora "installed", but that just means they spent a lot of time
futzing with incompatible hardware or spinning their wheels because they
didn't know their way around yet. A half hour should be pretty typical for
an experienced user with compatible hardware.

Now, keep this in mind, I'm not here bashing Linux, I love it as much as
my Windows XP/2003 machines, and I'm also not here bashing Windows XP.

I might believe that if not for things like claiming that it takes
several hours to do a base install of Fedora.

I don't care if you believe the times - but it's kind of funny to watch
nostop claim Linux doesn't fragment, rant and rave that I don't have a

It's a common enough myth so I can forgive him. Linux docs are vague on
the subject and often say things like, "fragmentation isn't a problem with
Linux". People misunderstand that to mean that Linux filesystems don't
fragment. What it really means is that Linux filesystems fragment but are
designed in such a way that fragmentation isn't a problem. It does cause
some rather minor slowdown but not the serious degradation you get with
FAT32. If that's a problem for someone, they can always do
continuous background defragging.

I never said file fragmentation does not happen, I said it wasn't an issue
that most Linux users concern themselves with. Please read this section:

http://dataexpedition.com/~sbnoble/Tips/filesystems.html#Optimization

Please read this explanation:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.os.linux.mandrake/browse_frm/thread/dc38ddf88ac9c6f9/a8ffbfa656bdba5d?lnk=st&q=linux%2Bdefrag&rnum=36#a8ffbfa656bdba5d

"As to defraging a Linux filesystem (ext2fs), there are tools
available***, but (because of the design of the system) these tools are
rarely (if ever) needed or used. That's the impact of designing up
front the multi-processing/multi-tasking multi-user capacity of the OS
into it's facilities, rather than tacking
multi-processing/multi-tasking multi-user support on to an inherently
single-processing/single-tasking single-user system. "

*** Not for journaled filesystems that I'm aware of (NS)

From the Linux FAQ:

"Q: Is There a Defragmenter for Ext2fs?

A: Yes. There is defrag, a Linux file system defragmenter for ext2, Minix,
and old-style ext file systems. It is available at
ftp://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/filesystems/defrag-0.70.tar.gz.
Users of the ext2 file system can probably do without defrag, because ext2
contains extra code to keep fragmentation reduced even in very full file
systems. "

http://www.tldp.org/FAQ/Linux-FAQ/file-management.html#defragmenter-for-ext2fs-etc]]

The above hardly points to a "common myth". Please tell us where you get
your info from that dispells this myth?




clue, and then see qualified people in major linux sites talking about
how it DOES fragment files and how it can be a performance issue, etc...
But you never see him come back with anything to disprove what I've said
- he only makes suggestions and then runs away with his tail between his
legs to not bring it up again.

--
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/

.

Relevant Pages

  • >>>> INSTALL LINUX <<<<
    ... Linux Http Install Syntax ... Install Linux On Usb In Windows ...
    (comp.mail.sendmail)
  • Re: not genuine Windows
    ... The problem with that is that we have three Linux users here confirming ... No, as I've said several times, I did not install the entire package. ... nostop claim Linux doesn't fragment, rant and rave that I don't have a ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • [opensuse] Re: Suse 10.3 install - oh dear (rant only)
    ... when I share an opinion, I make an effort to do so in an unemotional way. ... Linux, and oftentimes suggest it to people who are willing to try ... is important to take into consideration not only the feedback that comes ... likely able to install the product on their own, ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: OpenQM vs. Everything Else
    ... people who "support" Linux really only install stock distros. ... Debian is simply not drama queen. ... Linux or that of people like Martin, Doug, or other "engineer" types ... U2, RedHat and SuSE: ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: fedora-list Digest, Vol 54, Issue 170
    ... I've never tried to install it with a disk ... Fedora 9 asking for disc 1 on dvd install ... Re: Linux Outlaws (Armin) ... Fedora 9 asking for disc 1 on dvd install ...
    (Fedora)