# Gates Downplays Chrome OS



## btarunr (Jul 15, 2009)

Google's recent announcement of the Chrome OS, a web-oriented operating system that aims to use practicality and speed as its USPs, created more than just a few waves in the IT world. The firm later added that Chrome was going to be a free software, and has the support of some of the biggest names in the industry. At the receiving end of a potential competitor both in the operating system and cloud computing businesses, undoubtedly is Microsoft. 

In an interview with CNet's Ina Fried, Bill Gates took the liberty of commenting on this development and implied that the waves Chrome OS created, are but in a teacup. "There's many, many forms of Linux operating systems out there and packaged in different ways and booted in different ways," Gates said, "In some ways I am surprised people are acting like there's something new. I mean, you've got Android running on Netbooks. It's got a browser in it," he added.



Gates further went on to downplay Chrome OS saying that there's nothing much left to talk about it, since Google kept such a low profile on how it's going to implement the idea. "The more vague they are, the more interesting it is," he said. Google earlier announced that it wants its developer community to focus on web-based applications, rather than Linux-based ones, so the application has the broadest compatible platform base. Perhaps Chrome OS will then serve as the best client platform for these applications.

A similar statement came from Microsoft's CEO, Steve Ballmer, during Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference in New Orleans, who said that the Windows is the right approach, rather than a browser-centric OS such as Chrome. "We don't need a new operating system," said Ballmer. "What we do need to do is to continue to evolve Windows, Windows Applications, IE (Internet Explorer), the way IE works in totality with Windows and how we build applications like Office...and we need to make sure we can bring our customers and partners with us," he added. Both Ballmer and Gates stressed that having two major client operating systems isn't necessarily a positive thing. Google maintains that its Chrome OS will be consumer-ready by the second half of 2010.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## erocker (Jul 15, 2009)

Bill Gates said:
			
		

> There's many, many forms of Linux operating systems out there and packaged in different ways and booted in different ways. In some ways I am surprised people are acting like there's something new.



Indeed, but the majority of end-users have no idea what Linux is. When it comes to the masses things like brand familiarity come heavily into play. Many people don't know what the abbreviation O/S even stands for yet they've seen Google before. For the sheeple of the world it's all about hype, marketing and saturation. After that the product has to be simple and work, then everyone will jump on board. If it doesn't work people will go back to Windows whatever they were using previously.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 15, 2009)

Well, I actually agree with what Bill G. is saying -- Steve Ballmer, as usual, doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about.  IE's integration with the OS is a _liability_ as far as I'm concerned.



erocker said:


> Indeed, but the majority of end-users have no idea what Linux is. When it comes to the masses things like brand familiarity come heavily into play. Many people don't know what the abbreviation O/S even stands for yet they've seen Google before.



You have NO idea.  Watch this -- it's a video Google made a while back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3vv0_RNTM8




erocker said:


> For the sheeple of the world it's all about hype, marketing and saturation. After that the product has to be simple and work, then everyone will jump on board. If it doesn't work people will go back to Windows whatever they were using previously.



I really don't think Google is going to compete with Windows directly.  If so, it'll be one of the first mistakes they've made.


----------



## erocker (Jul 15, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Well, I actually agree with what Bill G. is saying -- Steve Ballmer, as usual, doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about.  IE's integration with the OS is a _liability_ as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Mr. Ballmer is just being the company man. I don't see Google's O/S competing either, I'm just referring to the hype.


----------



## HellasVagabond (Jul 15, 2009)

It can't compete, but it will boost up Googles shares when it comes out for sure......


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 15, 2009)

erocker said:


> Mr. Ballmer is just being the company man. I don't see Google's O/S competing either, I'm just referring to the hype.



Now, don't get me wrong -- it's going to be competing, it's just not going to be competing directly.

For instance, you're not going to see this thing targeted towards desktops or even mainstream laptops. Hell, maybe not even netbooks.


----------



## a_ump (Jul 15, 2009)

so what is the target? cell phones? pocket pc's?


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 15, 2009)

a_ump said:


> so what is the target? cell phones? pocket pc's?



Pocket PC's is pretty close -- either that or a new generation of pure-tablet PC's, like the rumored Apple Tablet or the Crunchpad or something.  It has to be a market in which people don't _expect_ Windows programs to work.  (Basically, anything with a keyboard.)







I mean -- has to be, or else it's going to fail.  Google seems like they know what they're doing, though.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 15, 2009)

a_ump said:


> so what is the target? cell phones? pocket pc's?



x86 and ARM netbooks, which means any PC can run it.


----------



## DrPepper (Jul 16, 2009)

It's hardly an OS lol all it's supposed to have on it is google chrome. Asus Express gate will have more functionality than this os.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> It's hardly an OS lol all it's supposed to have on it is google chrome. Asus Express gate will have more functionality than this os.



not quite, google wants apps to beable to be run using the browser as the portal as it where, that dosnt mean that it cant have apps installed onboard, I would be willing to bet that google plans to allow/support most linux apps for example since the os will be based off a linux kernal.

as to most users not knowing what linux is, thats true, but they dont really know what windows is either, my own mother  use to refer to office and windows as "windows" this isnt uncommon, most people just want it to work they really couldnt care less what OS or browser or wtfe is on the system, all they care about is that they can download porn, email, facebook, myspace, exct.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 16, 2009)

Gates needs to worry about his own OS...

Just today, the Autotrader rep for my dad's carlot came in and told us that Autotrader.com is backtracking... What do I mean by this? They are switching all of their computers/laptops back to XP from Vista. This isn't some article I'm reading on the internet, this is first hand real life.

What's more, this same trend is starting to become prevalent with Windows 7... Business is looking away from Microsoft's new releases.


----------



## denice25 (Jul 16, 2009)

thanks for the share btarunr...


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Jul 16, 2009)

Just because it uses a version of Linux kernel doesn't mean it will run apps out there....


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 16, 2009)

pr0n Inspector said:


> Just because it uses a version of Linux kernel doesn't mean it will run apps out there....



Hackers are extremely creative. Especially when the FULL source is available.


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Jul 16, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Hackers are extremely creative. Especially when the FULL source is available.



OpenSolaris have a different kernel and it can still run many programs that also runs on Linux, BSD or whatever. It's things on top of the kernel that matter the most. A similar kernel doesn't magically make things work if ChromeOS greatly differs from the norm(like "a new windowing system").


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 16, 2009)

pr0n Inspector said:


> OpenSolaris have a different kernel and it can still run many programs that also runs on Linux, BSD or whatever. It's things on top of the kernel that matter the most. A similar kernel doesn't magically make things work if ChromeOS greatly differs from the norm(like "a new windowing system").



Doesn't stop people from running Linux on Gameboys, Phones, Nintendo DS, Random Misc. Electronics, Toasters, refridgerators, cars, Xboxes, Playstations....

Since it'll be open source it'll either be easy to develop for, or google will release an SDK.

Have you ever jailbroken an iPhone, or modded an xbox?

Hackers are AMAZING. There are whole suites and repositorys dedicated to simple installation.

Use Cydia, Icy, or even Installous for iPhone. the iPhone has better package management tools than most Linux distros.

Chrome OS won't be an exception.


----------



## a_ump (Jul 16, 2009)

^ +1

though technically "crackers" , there's very little that can't be hacked software wise, and if it has a linux kernal you can bet money if google doesn't officially provide support for linux apps, which would be retarded as supporting them would further support their OS even more, that there will be something on the net to run apps on it. I mean shoot developers try to keep came encrypted to stop pirating but no success yet to stop it.


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Jul 16, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Doesn't stop people from running Linux on Gameboys, Phones, Nintendo DS, Random Misc. Electronics, Toasters, refridgerators, cars, Xboxes, Playstations....
> 
> Since it'll be open source it'll either be easy to develop for, or google will release an SDK.
> 
> ...




What the hell are you on about? Did you even read my post?


----------



## Solaris17 (Jul 16, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Doesn't stop people from running Linux on Gameboys, Phones, Nintendo DS, Random Misc. Electronics, Toasters, refridgerators, cars, Xboxes, Playstations....
> 
> Since it'll be open source it'll either be easy to develop for, or google will release an SDK.
> 
> ...



I highely disagree package managment on linux OS's depending on what your using may suck but on better or more worked on distrobutions package managment is incredably easy and imo exactly the same as the iphone package managment system..the UI is pretty much the same some pretty effects but at the end of the day their is still a list of repositories you may need to edit...for linux maybe to get better apps same for iphone youve used Ultrasn0w im sure so you get it...but at the end of everything its a list of repo's and a big list of


games
educational
multimedia
video
music
etc...

just because the iphone and OSX dont really show you a cmd prompt or a scrolling list of what is happening (think cydia install screen) and instead using pretty loading bars and blinking icons doesnt mean its that much diffirent than linux mac products are closer to their linux cousins than windows is.


----------



## El_Mayo (Jul 16, 2009)

if this chrome OS is free.. wouldn't that be a good thing for people who use computers in developing countries and can't afford windows?


----------



## kylzer (Jul 16, 2009)

I use linux (slax) but i wonder why people think its gonna be different from any other linux distro.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jul 16, 2009)

El_Mayo said:


> if this chrome OS is free.. wouldn't that be a good thing for people who use computers in developing countries and can't afford windows?



Computers and developing, I find that rather conflicting in the first place. Often they are in need of clean water and food instead of computers. Other than that Microsoft pumps quite some money in such areas themselves. Besides, they'd require decent internet connections to use applications, I think that if they want a free OS they should go for Linux.


----------



## El_Mayo (Jul 16, 2009)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Computers and developing, I find that rather conflicting in the first place. Often they are in need of clean water and food instead of computers. Other than that Microsoft pumps quite some money in such areas themselves. Besides, they'd require decent internet connections to use applications, I think that if they want a free OS they should go for Linux.



aye.. aye.. good point


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 16, 2009)

El_Mayo said:


> if this chrome OS is free.. wouldn't that be a good thing for people who use computers in developing countries and can't afford windows?





DanTheBanjoman said:


> Computers and developing, I find that rather conflicting in the first place. Often they are in need of clean water and food instead of computers. Other than that Microsoft pumps quite some money in such areas themselves. Besides, they'd require decent internet connections to use applications, I think that if they want a free OS they should go for Linux.



I do know that Microsoft loves to give away tons of free copies of Windows in these countries and then claim it back as "charity" -- funny, since it's hardly costing them anything...


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

Ravenas said:


> Gates needs to worry about his own OS...
> 
> Just today, the Autotrader rep for my dad's carlot came in and told us that Autotrader.com is backtracking... What do I mean by this? They are switching all of their computers/laptops back to XP from Vista. This isn't some article I'm reading on the internet, this is first hand real life.
> 
> What's more, this same trend is starting to become prevalent with Windows 7... Business is looking away from Microsoft's new releases.



yeah, BUT alot of why many companies go back to XP is due to them not knowing enough about windows in the first place.

You can make vista look and feel like XP if you want, SO that cuts the learning curve down, the other main issue is the fact alot of companies dont update to current service packs, I saw a bank wipe their new vista laptops due 100% to the fact that they had vista pre-sp1 issues, had they updated to sp1/sp2 they wouldnt have had the issues they where running into(one of the issues was that adobe reader wouldnt work properly, and adobe+ms patches fixed that long ago)


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 16, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> yeah, BUT alot of why many companies go back to XP is due to them not knowing enough about windows in the first place.




.... And stuff just straight up not working in vista.

Thats why we never switched... It's a full time job supporting Windows XP as it is.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

i havent found many apps that just wont work in vista, i have found a few, but they where mostly OLD ASS apps I kept around and was just to lazy to replace with newer apps.

you do gotta admit, even the "IT" guys at alot of large companies dont really know their way around windows other then the limited stuff they deal with day to day, I tend to try and learn all i can about getting stuff working/managing stuff in any new windows version, I may HATE that version(vista pre-sp1) but I still do at least the minimum work needed to know how to get around most common bugs.

I have friends/acquaintances that work in IT locally, and alot of them have only used vista when they have been FORCED to, They badmouth it constantly despite the fact that when you question them they clearly have NO experience dealing with it themselves.

the funny part is that they all LOVE XP now, despite the fact that they hated it for years due to little bugs XP has that SHOULDN'T BE THERE(it rotts over time for example) 

they complained about SP1 breaking things, and SP2, I spent weeks listening to them complain how it broke this and that(it broke ALOT of wireless drivers, causing them to have to update each laptop manually to newer drivers) 

Alot of companies around here still use windows 2000, cant really blame them, it works, its stable and reliable and will run pretty much everything the company would want to toss at it(other then maby office 2007) 

Enlarge the complaints/attacks against Vista are now based on old information(pre sp1/2) and those that aren't enlarge are due to people not knowing the tricks needed to get around some minor quirks with various software.

some common quirks.

App wont show text/images in places where it should. FIX: disable visual themes in compatibility settings, also may need to disable desktop composition (same place) this is due to the way areo works, You can just disable theme's and set everything to classic windows and that will avoid alot of problems with older apps.

App install gives an error about not being able to reg a file or the like: easy fix, rclick the installer, run as administrator.

App wont/cant do what its ment to do, but gives no error message or the error message makes no sense, Try the same rout as above, run the app as administrator, THIS IS VERY COMMON, cant tell you how many times I myself have run into this with older apps, and even some website based programs(run the browser as administrator) 

Those are the most common, there are more of course, but enlarge as long as the app isn't tied to IE5 or 6 you shouldn't run into any critical problems.

One tip I have for anybody dealing with vista having bugs that make no bloody sence, start>run>cmd  chkdsk /f to your boot drive and apps drive, let it do the check on restart, I cant tell you how many times i have recovered a system that seemed borked beyond all logical sence by simply running a full chkdsk, Hell a few weeks ago my buddys netbook couldn't install drivers for any usb drives(mass storage controller drvices) kept saying windows didnt have a driver for them, well I was close to wiping it, but decided to run a chkdsk on it, it found 2 errors, fixed them, and BAM everything worked again(this can happen on XP as well, its just not as common) 

What makes me laugh is when I see people buying win7 thinking it will fix all the problems they hear about with Vista, when win7 isnt really that different from vista at the core, its been tweaked and the gui's been changed, but at the core its not a new os, its effectively Vista SE.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 16, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> i havent found many apps that just wont work in vista, i have found a few, but they where mostly OLD ASS apps I kept around and was just to lazy to replace with newer apps.



A lot of large businesses have specialty apps, not ones that are open for public consumption daily, or even in production anymore, and these computers have very unique configurations.

Downtime of even less than a day is costly for these systems. Many of these like to panic when confronted with windows XP, even. It doesn't sound like you've ever faced these scenarios.


> some common quirks.
> 
> App wont show text/images in places where it should. FIX: disable visual themes in compatibility settings, also may need to disable desktop composition (same place) this is due to the way areo works, You can just disable theme's and set everything to classic windows and that will avoid alot of problems with older apps.
> 
> ...




You sound as if you were an IT guy for somewhere...

But it's not exactly advanced IT management to realize users can't just "Run as admin". Their accounts are disabled for a reason. This is retarded to have to do things like this to run simple programs. Hence the hate.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

you can use group policys to do the "run as admin" crap network wide or just for the groups that need it.

and the same apps that do not like running without "run as admin" tend to not like running on a restricted user account on XP(poor programing)

I have run into those proprietary apps more then once, most are build on a specific version of IE as their core/gui, making it really hard to upgrade/update systems since even a minor security update could break the apps, companies really should spend the money to have those apps updated to being .net based(most of this kind of app are written in VB in my exp)  rather then 
rely on a specific IE version or OS version for them to work, they could even have it done in silverlight (could be used on windows and osx and linux!!) 

I had a client at one point who was owner of one of the local branches of a very large realistate firm, they where still using telnet apps and in some cases vb based apps that use IE as the gui to link some newer apps to the old ass telnet system, the problem they ran into was that ie4 had to be updated and ANY update broke their system, I helped them find a person who was going to the local community college to re-write the app using .net as a STANDALONE PROGRAM, they also got the source incase the need for more updates came along, they ended up paying him $750, then paid him another 750 to do a slew of updates when the head office wanted everybody to start using the new app.

Now the apps not perfect, but it wasn't that costly to replace it, it could cost alot more for a more complex app, but honestly in the end it would save alot of $ and headakes if companies would stop trying to hang onto ANCIENT apps that require a specific windows version.

Hell I have seen companies who have apps that REQUIER windows 9x, who have been FORCED to use virtualpc/vmware/exct to run those apps because corporate doesn't want to pay somebody to update the apps or buy new ones, sad part is they waste alot of money and time by using virtual machien software(it dosnt load instantly after all) in man hours spent waiting for them to load/restart, not counting the cost of buying vmware(vpc dosnt work properly for some uses....) 

blah, at least neither of us are saying they should go linux with wine


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 16, 2009)

btarunr said:


> A similar statement came from Microsoft's CEO, Steve Ballmer, during Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference in New Orleans, who said that the Windows is the right approach, rather than a browser-centric OS such as Chrome


Ballmer is right.  They tried browser-centric with Windows 98.  The "browser-centric" bit never really caught on in it nor Windows ME.  Windows 2000 pretty much scraped it.

Let's wait and see though...


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ballmer is right.  They tried browser-centric with Windows 98.  The "browser-centric" bit never really caught on in it nor Windows ME.  Windows 2000 pretty much scraped it.
> 
> Let's wait and see though...



yeah, but ms's browser team=fail, hell even IE8 tho a large improvement is still CRAP compared to most 3rd party browsers.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 16, 2009)

That is your opinion.  Over 60% of people disagree with you:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10279900-16.html

It was IE5 (which premiered with Windows 98 SE) that started Microsoft's Internet browser dominance.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 16, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> That is your opinion.  Over 60% of people disagree with you:
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10279900-16.html
> 
> It was IE5 (which premiered with Windows 98 SE) that started Microsoft's Internet browser dominance.



60% of people are to be frank "fucking morons" they dont know the diffrance between office and windows for christs sake.

the only reasion IE even has the market share it has is because it COME WITH WINDOWS, and most people are to GD stupid and lazy to grab another browser(my pairnts are like that...)


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 17, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ballmer is right.  They tried browser-centric with Windows 98.  The "browser-centric" bit never really caught on in it nor Windows ME.  Windows 2000 pretty much scraped it.
> 
> Let's wait and see though...



Microsoft probably had their ducks in line to do this.Problem is, technology was not even remotely ready for this transition. Not to mention horribly insecure. Things are getting closer, but we aren't there yet still.

Just because Microsoft screwed the pooch once doesn't mean someone else can't do it properly. cough hotmail cough. Almost everything Microsoft does, failbombs the first time.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 17, 2009)

or the last time *coughMEcough*


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Microsoft probably had their ducks in line to do this.Problem is, technology was not even remotely ready for this transition. Not to mention horribly insecure. Things are getting closer, but we aren't there yet still.
> 
> Just because Microsoft screwed the pooch once doesn't mean someone else can't do it properly. cough hotmail cough. Almost everything Microsoft does, failbombs the first time.


What Windows 98 proved is that a web-centric OS isn't practical (nothing more annoying than seeing a big "Web Access Not Available" for your desktop wallpaper).  Some people don't have Internet (temporarily or permanently) and some people want to be able to operate free of the Internet at times (for me, that is at least once a week).  Internet is provided through an application for a reason--it is an optional tool and not a required basis to launch tools from.

Netbooks may have changed the demographics but I doubt it.  We'll have to wait and see.  Seeing how unsuccessful Unix-based operating systems have been in the past, I don't see this changing the trend (to paraphase what Gates said).


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 17, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Netbooks may have changed the demographics but I doubt it.  We'll have to wait and see.  Seeing how unsuccessful Unix-based operating systems have been in the past, I don't see this changing the trend (to paraphase what Gates said).



If theres one thing you should have learned from the internet by now, is the past is not always relevant when it comes to what can be successful in the future..

Unux has never been successful.... until now.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> If theres one thing you should have learned from the internet by now, is the past is not always relevant when it comes to what can be successful in the future..
> 
> Unux has never been successful.... until now.


<10% total market share isn't successful--it is gasping for breath.

*nix failed back then for the same reasons it fails now--it isn't well established (limited manufacturer support, limited technical support, and limited hardware support).  Mac OS X arguably deals with the GUI issues well and Google's expertise is usability.  As such I think there are many parrallels between Chrome OS and Mac OS X.  The only way Chrome OS could succeed where Mac OS X didn't is in licensing.  That is, if Google manages to get Dell, HP, Asus, and other netbook manufacturers to ship their units with Chrome OS, it could very well succeed in that market so long as the hardware support is there.

Businesses won't use Chrome OS because it is incompatible with their domain servers.  Libraries/internet cafes won't use it because it isn't compatible with their existing software.


The past is always relevant to today and tomorrow.  Without yesterday, today and tomorrow wouldn't exist.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 17, 2009)

how would u know its incompatible?  google aren stupid, they are targeting netbooks and other devices first, but that dosnt mean they wont add support for windows network features.

and *nix's far from "gasping for breath" as you you put it, Its main use roll just isnt in homes and desktops/workstations, its mostly used in servers(you know, those things the internet runs off of)  

as to the past being relevant, your taking a time when the best net most people could get was 56k, today thats pretty irrelevant since most people have cable/dsl/wireless/exct that is FAR FAR faster(hundreds or thousands of times faster then 56k) and alwase on.

and i have yet to see any hard proof that chrome OS wont have apps available off-line, just speculation and assumption that it wont. 

one more note about *nix, the main reason u dont see it more today is that windows has all the OEM's in their pockets, the fact is that a good distro(no ubuntu) setup properly can be very easy for even the noobies to use and lacks alot of the problems windows has for those same noobies(viruses from all the porn they download for starters) 

Linux COULD take off, it just needs a good easy to use distro thats runs fast and looks decent, I cant tell you how many older systems I personaly have installed VectorLinux on for people who just want to surf the net and do some light office/school work, on systems where XP ran like shit vector runs VERY smooth, and offers a freedom that windows cant offer, lack of malware/viruses that can infect it 

my advice Ford is to WAIT AND SEE, ms is loosing market share slowly but surely mostly because people dont want to buy a new os every couple years then have to deal with buggs and updates constantly, and companies are even considering alternative os's these days.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> how would u know its incompatible?  google aren stupid, they are targeting netbooks and other devices first, but that dosnt mean they wont add support for windows network features.


a) Few professional applications support Linux.
b) These applications cost in excess of $10,000.
c) There's no way Google could code support for applications meant to work on Windows without violating copyrights Microsoft holds.

*nix can't do much more networking with Windows Domains than file shares.  It can't be made a a puppet computer like Windows 2000 and newer can.  At least not without resource costly virtual machines.




Meecrob said:


> and *nix's far from "gasping for breath" as you you put it, Its main use roll just isnt in homes and desktops/workstations, its mostly used in servers(you know, those things the internet runs off of)


Only because it is cheap.  Server standard costs $600 by itself.  Most distros of Linux are free.  If Server was free, I doubt anyone would use Linux anymore.  It has more features, better application support, and a much larger selection of supported hardware.  The only reason not to get it is the price.




Meecrob said:


> as to the past being relevant, your taking a time when the best net most people could get was 56k, today thats pretty irrelevant since most people have cable/dsl/wireless/exct that is FAR FAR faster(hundreds or thousands of times faster then 56k) and alwase on.


Internet infrastructure in the USA is still struggling.  Even those that do have highspeed internet often get disconnected.  Cloud computing makes sense on intranets where you can quickly fix your own problems.  Cloud computing on internet is begging for trouble.  Not to mention, it is only a matter of time before ISPs start implementing bandwidth restrictions which will turn your power-only cost netbook into a pay-by-minute netbook.  Effectively, that means for the life time of the machine, it is cheaper to own a laptop dispite the innitial purchase cost difference.




Meecrob said:


> and i have yet to see any hard proof that chrome OS wont have apps available off-line, just speculation and assumption that it wont.


Cloud computing is its mainstay.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if, without an internet connection, it is about as useful as a brick.  Sure, it will surely have other bundled software on it like Google Earth but that still doesn't make it useful.  When I don't have Internet, I game, for instance.




Meecrob said:


> Linux COULD take off...


It had two decades to do so and still hasn't.  If a technology doesn't catch on immediately upon release (within the first year), it never will.




Meecrob said:


> my advice Ford is to WAIT AND SEE, ms is loosing market share slowly but surely mostly because people dont want to buy a new os every couple years then have to deal with buggs and updates constantly, and companies are even considering alternative os's these days.


That was my advice.  I side with Gates and Ballmer: Google doesn't have a winning equation.

Windows was losing market share due to lack of confidence in Windows Vista.  Windows 7 could entirely reverse that trend or renew it.  Consumers demand Windows so they have no reason to look elsewhere.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 17, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> a) Few professional applications support Linux.
> b) These applications cost in excess of $10,000.
> c) There's no way Google could code support for applications meant to work on Windows without violating copyrights Microsoft holds.



http://www.winehq.org/

http://www.codeweavers.com/

proof your wrong about windows app compatibility.



> *nix can't do much more networking with Windows Domains than file shares.  It can't be made a a puppet computer like Windows 2000 and newer can.  At least not without resource costly virtual machines.



funny since there are a couple projects working to allow linux to be part of active directory networks.

oh on top of that, they have their own active directory equivalents one being OpenLDAP






> Only because it is cheap.  Server standard costs $600 by itself.  Most distros of Linux are free.  If Server was free, I doubt anyone would use Linux anymore.  It has more features, better application support, and a much larger selection of supported hardware.  The only reason not to get it is the price.



wrong again, Most webservers run linux because, the fact is its harder to hack a default server linux distro then a default windows install, Also there are things about using linux for a webserver that make it easier then dealing with the same job on windows, I have done it, and honestly, If I had to choose I would go with linux for a webserver, you can run the linux webserver on hardware that would chug with any modern windows and have it perform very well.






> Internet infrastructure in the USA is still struggling.  Even those that do have highspeed internet often get disconnected.  Cloud computing makes sense on intranets where you can quickly fix your own problems.  Cloud computing on internet is begging for trouble.  Not to mention, it is only a matter of time before ISPs start implementing bandwidth restrictions which will turn your power-only cost netbook into a pay-by-minute netbook.  Effectively, that means for the life time of the machine, it is cheaper to own a laptop dispite the innitial purchase cost difference.



again wheres your proof that these apps wont be installable localy if the user chooses(like office 2010 will have a free web ver and a retail installable ver) 




> Cloud computing is its mainstay.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if, without an internet connection, it is about as useful as a brick.  Sure, it will surely have other bundled software on it like Google Earth but that still doesn't make it useful.  When I don't have Internet, I game, for instance.



any proof that google is so stupid they wouldnt allow you to have apps of your choice localy? if you have any please show us.




> It had two decades to do so and still hasn't.  If a technology doesn't catch on immediately upon release (within the first year), it never will.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> http://www.winehq.org/
> 
> http://www.codeweavers.com/
> 
> proof your wrong about windows app compatibility.


Wine won't run most of these older business applications.  Hell, a good lot of them won't work without IE6; moreover, emulation is not practical in a work environment.  Troubleshooting one OS taxes IT enough as is.




Meecrob said:


> funny since there are a couple projects working to allow linux to be part of active directory networks.
> 
> oh on top of that, they have their own active directory equivalents one being OpenLDAP


Sure, they can but it will never become commonplace.  Kind of like Mono...  They are only created to give Linux users and excuse to stay on Linux.  They don't provide conversions from other OSs.  Emulation never does.




Meecrob said:


> wrong again, Most webservers run linux because...


Most webservers run linux because buying Server would take years to pay off.  Businesses that aren't selling cheap webspace use Server + IIS + ASPX.  Every server is prone to DoS attacks and they are by far the most common.  Linux doesn't make you immune.




Meecrob said:


> again wheres your proof that these apps wont be installable localy if the user chooses(like office 2010 will have a free web ver and a retail installable ver)
> 
> any proof that google is so stupid they wouldnt allow you to have apps of your choice localy? if you have any please show us.


http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/08/google-chrome-redefining-the-operating-system/
_The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, *the web is the platform*._




Meecrob said:


> hate to tell you this, but ms's half-ass attempt to put web into your desktop under 98/ME was not even close to the same thing we are talking about here, MS screwed up, we agree on that, it was just a bad implementation/execution of an idea that had some Marat, back then MS knew they couldnt really serve apps or anything truely usefull over the net, 56k CANT SUPPORT IT, hell even updates where kept as small and few as possible due to the state of the internet back then.


IE5 and IE6 was a local, intranet and internet browser.  You could enter paths like C:\, \\SERVER, http://, https, and ftp://.  It could run web applications (Java, JavaScript, Flash) and it was intregal to Windows 98 SE and up.  The only difference between Chrome OS and it is instead of IE running on Windows, it will just be IE.  It is a step backwards, not fowards.

Oh, and it is also important to mention that since IE7, IE is restricted to just internet use.  Microsoft got sued by the EU mandating that IE not be included with the OS so Microsoft had to dumb it down and separate it.  If the EU sues Google for the same reason, Chrome OS will be shot dead because there is no separating the browser from the UI in that case.

And no, we don't agree.  IE6 was brilliant and the EU killed it.




Meecrob said:


> no windows is loosing market share due to the fact that people dont give a shit what the OS is called now, as long a they can do the tasks they want on the system with as little hassle and as much speed as possible, If they get an easy to use linux that lets them do their thing, they are just as happy as if they got windows, possibly more so since they wont need to buy an antivirus and other security software to protect the linux based setup from malware/spyware/adware/viruses/exct.


I've been using Windows XP for three years now with no anti-anything.




Meecrob said:


> I am no *nux lover mind you, I only use it for specific tasks/purposes but the fact is all your current points are either personal opinion or just crap your spewing trying to convince the uninformed that *nix/anything not windows is crap, when in reality most people just dont know or care what os they are running, if it works to do their common tasks, they are happy period.


If that is the attitude you are going to have, then I'm done with this discussion.


----------



## Frick (Jul 17, 2009)

Hah, meecrob kinda reminds me of Alecstaar. 

Anyway, I think it will be interesting too see what this could do. It's not revolutionary, but as Google has done some neat things before it might be pretty darn cool.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 17, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Wine won't run most of these older business applications.  Hell, a good lot of them won't work without IE6; moreover, emulation is not practical in a work environment.  Troubleshooting one OS taxes IT enough as is.


http://www.virtualbox.org/
then they could run 9x apps on 9x, nt apps on nt, 2k apps on 2k, xp apps on xp, and still run whatever host os they like.

oh yeah, and its 100% free and works very well(thanks SUN) 




> Most webservers run linux because buying Server would take years to pay off.  Businesses that aren't selling cheap webspace use Server + IIS + ASPX.  Every server is prone to DoS attacks and they are by far the most common.  Linux doesn't make you immune.


DoS/DDoS is something ANY ipv4 connection is susceptible to windows is far from immune or better and dealing with it. and no, expensive hosts tend to offer a mix allowing the client to choose linux or windows hosting for the same price, windows is no better for web hosting then linux, infact the server running linux tends to give you a better value because the OS isnt eating up as many resources.

linux/bsd(unix) are less prone to being hacked and remote exploited when compaired to the common windows server, this isnt because windows itself is any less secure, its because by default windows(till server 2008) wasnt properly locked down, where linux by design is far more restrictive, anybody whos used linux as a user rather then root didnt complain about UAC because UAC is no more annoying then the way linux constantly wants a password for every damn tweak you want to do.





> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/08/google-chrome-redefining-the-operating-system/
> _The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, *the web is the platform*._


theres no proof of what googles going to do there, just a pundit/blogger posting his thoughts and speculation, same as all the other articles about chrome os. 




> IE5 and IE6 was a local, intranet and internet browser.  You could enter paths like C:\, \\SERVER, http://, https, and ftp://.  It could run web applications (Java, JavaScript, Flash) and it was intregal to Windows 98 SE and up.  The only difference between Chrome OS and it is instead of IE running on Windows, it will just be IE.  It is a step backwards, not fowards.



thats your OPINION, as to the IE thing, I haven't used IE for anything more then windows update and the rare activeX site in years, Opera, Safari 3/4, Chrome, and even FF offer a better user experience and are more secure(FF being the least secure once you add alot of extensions).

IE8 is a step in the right direction, but it still doesn't properly support W3C specs/standards 




> Oh, and it is also important to mention that since IE7, IE is restricted to just internet use.  Microsoft got sued by the EU mandating that IE not be included with the OS so Microsoft had to dumb it down and separate it.  If the EU sues Google for the same reason, Chrome OS will be shot dead because there is no separating the browser from the UI in that case.


sorry, but I have zero issue with the browser not being an intagral part of the os, its still requiered if you want to use windows update or alot of MS sites, and being its not locked into the OS it should stop/slow the use if IE as the core/gui of many business apps, this is a good thing since it means those apps wont be as easly broken by moving from os to os or windows version to windows version(or even by updating IE with security patches)  




> And no, we don't agree.  IE6 was brilliant and the EU killed it.


....this pretty much prooves the opinion I have formed of you after your SLI rant(insisting its 100% hardware based...) 

anybody who thinks IE3-4-5-6-7 where great......well I dont want banned so I wont say what I and others are thinking.





> I've been using Windows XP for three years now with no anti-anything.



funny, wonder how many viruses your system has, or how much is going on that you dont know about, I know people like you who insist/insisted they didnt/dont need an antivirus, every one of them has ended up having to reinstall far more often then those I know who run a decent AV, some learned and started running a decent AV, the others still insist they reinstall so much for other reasons, your probbly one of those types that also never wares a rubber when they have sex, good luck with that as well.





> If that is the attitude you are going to have, then I'm done with this discussion.



no real loss here, Your spouting miss-information about linux and non-windows OS's stops then I dont really got any more reason to tell you your wrong.

As I said, Im a windows user, but it isnt the best os in the world for everything, even a windows fanboi like me will admit that, ofcorse unlike many windows fanboi's i have experience with non-windows os's and networks(started out on novel and IBM ringbus networks for god's sake) so I can speak a bit more intelligently about whats possible.

when it comes to Chrome OS, nobody here knows what it will turn out to be like, hell only people who WORK FOR GOOGLE have any clue where google is headed with it, the rest is speculation.

One Question, Ford do you work for MS?


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 17, 2009)

Frick said:


> Hah, meecrob kinda reminds me of Alecstaar.
> 
> Anyway, I think it will be interesting too see what this could do. It's not revolutionary, but as Google has done some neat things before it might be pretty darn cool.



I know alec, but im not him, hes a true ass, Oh and he wouldnt be defending a non-windows OS, he really doesn't like *nix, hell, hes 99% a Delphi programmer who works with win32, he even hates x64 because he sees it as pointless.

but I wont back down when I see somebody spouting BS trying to convence the uninformed that mis-information and opinion are fact.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> One Question, Ford do you work for MS?


No.


No comment on the rest.  I'll leave those discussions for when it comes out.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jul 17, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> I do know that Microsoft loves to give away tons of free copies of Windows in these countries and then claim it back as "charity" -- funny, since it's hardly costing them anything...



Indeed, Google invest millions in it... a wait... they too don't spent a dime to help those poor little Africans.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 17, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> I do know that Microsoft loves to give away tons of free copies of Windows in these countries and then claim it back as "charity" -- funny, since it's hardly costing them anything...



It's called Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and it gives those people what they need the most. Medicine.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 17, 2009)

Yeah, a computer without electricty is less useful than a stick. 


Microsoft's charity is getting Windows and Office to not-for-profit businesses (libraries, churches, etc.) for cheap.  Libraries, for instance, can buy Windows Server 2008 Datacenter for $120.  That would cost $3000 (per processor) for anyone else.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 21, 2009)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Indeed, Google invest millions in it... a wait... they too don't spent a dime to help those poor little Africans.



Aye, so _not_ pretending to give away millions in charity is just as bad as pretending to help people by giving away something that isn't costing you anything?

No, if you ask me, it's not.



btarunr said:


> It's called Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and it gives those people what they need the most. Medicine.



I'm talking about Microsoft -- not Bill & Melinda Gates.    The two aren't the same thing.


----------



## joshiers8605 (Jul 22, 2009)

I love the browser they have, this would be pretty neat to tinker around with as well


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 22, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> I'm talking about Microsoft -- not Bill & Melinda Gates.    The two aren't the same thing.


Microsoft: For every completed download of Internet Explorer 8, Microsoft’s Browser for the Better campaign will donate the financial equivalent of eight meals to Feeding America’s network of 206 local food banks, which supplies food to more than 25 million Americans each year.

To participate, go here.


Employees: Microsoft employees gave $87.7 million to charity last year


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 22, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Microsoft: For every completed download of Internet Explorer 8, Microsoft’s Browser for the Better campaign will donate the financial equivalent of eight meals to Feeding America’s network of 206 local food banks, which supplies food to more than 25 million Americans each year.
> 
> To participate, go here.



The "financial equivalent of eight meals" pretty much says it all, to me.  For all I know, they could be talking about one free copy of Windows Vista, like what I was saying earlier.

Not only do I think that's not charity, but they're worse off for having Windows Vista.  



FordGT90Concept said:


> Employees: Microsoft employees gave $87.7 million to charity last year


To what charities?  In what form, hard cash or in imaginary "deferred benefits" or some other such creative accounting?  Convenient that the seattletimes article link wasn't working, too.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 22, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> The "financial equivalent of eight meals" pretty much says it all, to me.  For all I know, they could be talking about one free copy of Windows Vista, like what I was saying earlier.
> 
> Not only do I think that's not charity, but they're worse off for having Windows Vista.


Giving up to $1 million away isn't charitable?




mdm-adph said:


> To what charities?  In what form, hard cash or in imaginary "deferred benefits" or some other such creative accounting?  Convenient that the seattletimes article link wasn't working, too.


Does it really matter?  They can't report it as a charitable donation unless it meets specific federal guidlines.


I thought I fixed the URL...try again:
http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.c...employees_gave_877_million_to_charity_la.html

The 16-page PDF can be downloaded from that URL.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 22, 2009)

Who the hell cares about donations? This article is about Bill's opinion of Chrome OS.

I tend to agree with him. It's mostly a publicity stunt, thus the relative lack of any kind of useful details about the OS. I don't like what I've read so far about it tho. I don't think Cloud is where we need to be focusing our efforts right now. Our infrastructure in most places isn't quite up to the task, not to mention the bandwidth caps the ISP are instilling. 

Once somebody kicks the ISPs in the ass and gets them to update our infrastructure, and forces them to be up front about bandwidth caps, cloud computing will be much more viable.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 22, 2009)

Except for intranets, I can't see cloud computing ever catching on.  In order for cloud computing to work on the internet, you need no less than 99.9% reliability.  Once you got that, you need to figure in all the excess bandwidth it uses and bitrate required before users get annoyed by the performance.  Frankly, I don't think it can catch on for at least another 10 years, at least in the USA.

On other hand, if Chrome OS is just a browser for a GUI and still has all the normal functions of a computer, its success will be restricted by hardware and software support (it has to change the Linux demographic).

At the same time, I don't see how having a browser for the GUI of a computer is in any way beneficial.  In fact, it is riddled with disadvantages (e.g. it takes longer to render a web page than render a window thanks to hardware acceleration/GDI+).  The only advantage is users can program their GUI with relative ease (layout, design, etc.) but I doubt many users actually care for this feature.

So yeah...another wait and see.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 22, 2009)

go fios, verizon dosnt need to update the fios infrastructure, the most they have used in any market they have installed fios into is 1/3 of the avalable bandwidth that their fiber can provide!!!

as to the rest yeah they all need a kick in the nuts from the govt to get them to stop overselling their networks bandwidth, then trying to move to pay scale type plans......blah.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 22, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> go fios, verizon dosnt need to update the fios infrastructure, the most they have used in any market they have installed fios into is 1/3 of the avalable bandwidth that their fiber can provide!!!
> 
> as to the rest yeah they all need a kick in the nuts from the govt to get them to stop overselling their networks bandwidth, then trying to move to pay scale type plans......blah.



I can't get Fios. I'd already have it if I could.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jul 22, 2009)

erocker said:


> Indeed, but the majority of end-users have no idea what Linux is. When it comes to the masses things like brand familiarity come heavily into play. Many people don't know what the abbreviation O/S even stands for yet they've seen Google before. For the sheeple of the world it's all about hype, marketing and saturation. After that the product has to be simple and work, then everyone will jump on board. If it doesn't work people will go back to Windows whatever they were using previously.



Not sure about your demographic, but in mine, about 9/10 of all the people here (in tennessee/kentucky) are very well aware of linux, about 10% of them could name 2 or more different linux releases.  Just like when they first tried to release netbooks with linux to reduce the price, ChromeOS will fail because of vast incompatibilites.
Let me know when ChromeOS starts to utilize directX, and the .net infrastructure, then well talk about ChromeOS's chances in the real world.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 22, 2009)

3870x2 said:


> Not sure about your demographic, but in mine, about 9/10 of all the people here (in tennessee/kentucky) are very well aware of linux, about 10% of them could name 2 or more different linux releases.  Just like when they first tried to release netbooks with linux to reduce the price, ChromeOS will fail because of vast incompatibilites.
> Let me know when ChromeOS starts to utilize directX, and the .net infrastructure, then well talk about ChromeOS's chances in the real world.



anybody wanting to game on a netbook needs a reality check......so dx dosnt matter, anybody wanting .net apps shouldnt be after a netbook either, they are  A NET-BOOK!!!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 22, 2009)

Wile E said:


> I can't get Fios. I'd already have it if I could.


Ditto.  I'm lucky I got 2.5mbps ADSL.




3870x2 said:


> Let me know when ChromeOS starts to utilize directX, and the .net infrastructure, then well talk about ChromeOS's chances in the real world.


Google would have to jump through legal hoops to get access to either technologies.  Both are closed-source and wholly owned by Microsoft.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 23, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Giving up to $1 million away isn't charitable?



Not if whatever you're giving away isn't costing you anything at all, no.  It's just a tax writeoff, done for personal gain.



Wile E said:


> Once somebody kicks the ISPs in the ass and gets them to update our infrastructure, and forces them to be up front about bandwidth caps, cloud computing will be much more viable.



You know, the only "somebody" who could ever have the power to do that is the government, right?  There's nobody else with the power.



3870x2 said:


> Not sure about your demographic, but in mine, about 9/10 of all the people here (in tennessee/kentucky) are very well aware of linux, about 10% of them could name 2 or more different linux releases.  Just like when they first tried to release netbooks with linux to reduce the price, ChromeOS will fail because of vast incompatibilites.
> Let me know when ChromeOS starts to utilize directX, and the .net infrastructure, then well talk about ChromeOS's chances in the real world.



Chrome is not designed to use directX or the .net infrastructure, nor will it ever.  It's not designed to compete against Microsoft in their market.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 24, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Not if whatever you're giving away isn't costing you anything at all, no.  It's just a tax writeoff, done for personal gain.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That was kind of what I was implying.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 24, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Not if whatever you're giving away isn't costing you anything at all, no.  It's just a tax writeoff, done for personal gain.


It will cost them up to $1,000,000.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 24, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It will cost them up to $1,000,000.



How?  Microsoft can "give away" as many copies of Windows as it pleases -- it doesn't cost them anything.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 24, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It will cost them up to $1,000,000.



it costs them NOTHING to give windows away, ms could sell windows at 15-20bucks a copy retail and still make a profit, the retail market is not where they make their money, its OEM's and office the make them the big bucks, The reason u still see triple digit prices on Windows is because MS hasnt accepted the reality that they will keep loosing market share slowly but surely as *nix and mac become more user friendly and viable, Its already to the point where Netbooks and even some notebooks are more attractive with *nix then with windows due to the fact you get little to no trial or crapware with them and save money in the process.

Why spend more when your not planning to game or use anything that really needs windows?

I know my aunt loves her laptop with desktop bsd on it, its got apps for all her needs and runs great, and no worries about spyware/malware/viruses/exct, it also cost her a good bit less because she didnt have to pay for windows+office software,exct, she was able to just load up and do what she wanted, IF she runs into a need for windows app support she can buy crossover and have an easy solution


----------



## DrPepper (Jul 24, 2009)

Hardly anyone knows how to use linux OS'. Also windows is gaining market share much faster than mac and linux. Especially since the cheapest mac laptop is about £500 more than the cheapest laptop of the same size.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 24, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> Hardly anyone knows how to use linux OS'. Also windows is gaining market share much faster than mac and linux. Especially since the cheapest mac laptop is about £500 more than the cheapest laptop of the same size.



windows has been LOOSING market share, do some googling.

with a presetup consumer linux you DONT NEED TO KNOW HOW TO USE IT, you just use it, same as with windows, If the gui's easy to use and its got the basic apps most people need per-installed, and it runs at a decent speed, they are happy.

a few years back, i would have said your comment was true about people not knowing how to use linux, and that being an issue, but anymore, a properly setup linux distro can be just as easy to use as windows, proof of this is that my father was using a system here at the office  for 2 weeks b4 he figuared out it wasnt windows!!!!(vector linux 6 using the LXDE desktop)


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 24, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> How?  Microsoft can "give away" as many copies of Windows as it pleases -- it doesn't cost them anything.


You can't donate Windows to charity whom's objective is feeding people.  They don't need Windows, they need food or money to buy food.


Moreover, there is always a per-item production cost--nothing is free (see cost over value methodologies).


----------



## DrPepper (Jul 24, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> windows has been LOOSING market share, do some googling.
> 
> with a presetup consumer linux you DONT NEED TO KNOW HOW TO USE IT, you just use it, same as with windows, If the gui's easy to use and its got the basic apps most people need per-installed, and it runs at a decent speed, they are happy.
> 
> a few years back, i would have said your comment was true about people not knowing how to use linux, and that being an issue, but anymore, a properly setup linux distro can be just as easy to use as windows, proof of this is that my father was using a system here at the office  for 2 weeks b4 he figuared out it wasnt windows!!!!(vector linux 6 using the LXDE desktop)



I don't see how linux has become anymore user friendly. My mum, brother and father can't use ubuntu at all and neither can anyone I know. Also over the xmas period when people are most likely to get a laptop they usually buy the cheapest 15" which is always a windows vista laptop. It's hard to believe that microsoft's market share is dropping. I can only imagine it increasing next year.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 25, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> I don't see how linux has become anymore user friendly. My mum, brother and father can't use ubuntu at all and neither can anyone I know. Also over the xmas period when people are most likely to get a laptop they usually buy the cheapest 15" which is always a windows vista laptop. It's hard to believe that microsoft's market share is dropping. I can only imagine it increasing next year.



then you must have some sub-retarded people around you, because dispite noobuntu being a crap distro IMHO its not hard to use for normal day to day stuff.

and there are alot of FAR BETTER distros around that are faster and easier to use.

When i first played with linux it was 98% command line with xorg running as a gui to make you feel like you where using a modern os, since then its gotten so that the avg joe can actualy open a pre-setup system running a decent distro and just do whatever, email, download porn, facebook, twitter, myspace, exct, most people dont game, they dont do any real demanding stuff with the system, they just want to get online and surf and beable to type something up if needed(openoffice or abiword cover that nicely) 

anybody who cant use a modern user friendly linux should just give up and buy a mac OR not even bother with a computer.....because i hate to tell you this but windows enlarge isnt any easier to use for those same tasks, and in some cases is more hassle due to viruses/worms/exct.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 25, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> I don't see how linux has become anymore user friendly. My mum, brother and father can't use ubuntu at all and neither can anyone I know. Also over the xmas period when people are most likely to get a laptop they usually buy the cheapest 15" which is always a windows vista laptop. It's hard to believe that microsoft's market share is dropping. I can only imagine it increasing next year.


I don't know about market share but Microsoft sales sunk 17%.  Mostly contributed to the economy.




Meecrob said:


> anybody who cant use a modern user friendly linux should just give up and buy a mac OR not even bother with a computer.....because i hate to tell you this but windows enlarge isnt any easier to use for those same tasks, and in some cases is more hassle due to viruses/worms/exct.


There aren't many first-time users of Windows in the USA anymore.  If you've used Windows as far back as 1995, you can use Vista/7 just as easy.  There really is no learning curve.

On the other hand, the majority of people have never touched a Mac or Linux.  They may have used Mac a school but most of those users walk away disgusted.  Anyway, there is a learning curve with switching from a platform you encountered at least once in the past to a platform that you have never seen.  Is it worth $90 to skip the learning curve?  Most say yes.  People tend to stick to what they know as people generally don't like change.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 25, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I don't know about market share but Microsoft sales sunk 17%.  Mostly contributed to the economy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



what learning curve, u click the start menu, click the firefox/opera/seamonky icon and theres your web browser
you click openoffice and choose writer or the like and theres ur office suit.

you click media and choose a player(all well labled) and theres your media player.

most people use the system in a way that means they arent gonna be doing anything diffrent when using linux then they would if they had windows installed, try it yourself,go here
http://vectorlinux.com/downloads
download a version, and test it, even my father(a true moron when it comes to computers) was able to use that without any help getting started from me, hell he didnt even realise it wasnt windows till weeks after he started using it for a couple hours each day...and then he was just suprised at how easy it was when he alwase thought linux/non-windows wasnt useable by normal people.

and vectors not built to be 100% noobie friendly(its damn easy tho if u got any long term windows experiance u can use it) 

the main distro(6 standard) even has an easier then windows gui based installer!!!

they also have presetup virtualbox images you can get virtualbox here
http://www.virtualbox.org/
its free and will let you test any os you want without needing a 2nd computer or multi boot


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 25, 2009)

A lot of people don't assume FireFox means Internet browser.  A lot of people also don't make the association of OpenOffice with documents.  They need to learn all of those previously unknown associations in addition to all the fundamental things like installing printers, changing the display resolution, defragmenting hard drives, and where to save your stuff.

With windows, most users can tell you exactly how to do those things...
Internet: Internet Explorer
Document: what you bought (if any)
Intall Printer: Put the disk in and click "install" then "OK" a few times.
Defrag: Hard drive properties
Resolution: Display properties
etc.

People have learned these things from previous exposure to the system.


I'm 100% happy with Windows, why would I use Linux/Mac?  I have no problem spending $100-150 on an OS.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 25, 2009)

netbook=your not changing display res.

office=office, again this isnt anything u need to re-learn as even my father figuared it out without help and with no prior experiance with openoffice (or any office other then ms office for that matter) 

printers in vector where simple and most printers are covered by the built in print daemon, those that arent are not to likely to be in most peoples homes.

many of these people your talking about cant do what you are talking about in windows, they just use whatever the settings on the system are when they get it and are "happy"

and unlike most people, you know what an OS is and CARE, most people JUST DONT CARE, if it works for their use they are happy period.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 25, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> windows has been LOOSING market share, do some googling.
> 
> with a presetup consumer linux you DONT NEED TO KNOW HOW TO USE IT, you just use it, same as with windows, If the gui's easy to use and its got the basic apps most people need per-installed, and it runs at a decent speed, they are happy.
> 
> a few years back, i would have said your comment was true about people not knowing how to use linux, and that being an issue, but anymore, a properly setup linux distro can be just as easy to use as windows, proof of this is that my father was using a system here at the office  for 2 weeks b4 he figuared out it wasnt windows!!!!(vector linux 6 using the LXDE desktop)



Yeah? Go ahead and download some random program on the internet, and try to install it in Linux.

And your market share theory is a bad one because the market fluctuates. How much do you want to bet that MS regains that market share at 7's release?


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 25, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Yeah? Go ahead and download some random program on the internet, and try to install it in Linux.
> 
> And your market share theory is a bad one because the market fluctuates. How much do you want to bet that MS regains that market share at 7's release?



they will regain some, because win7 has a version targeted at netbooks where vista didnt and xp really wasnt optimal for that either.

and most people dont download real apps anymore, they download crap that is malware/spyware yes, but real apps......naaa, specly not a netbook.

I see what your saying, but i deal with quite a few morons and have for years, and its gotten to the point where alot/most people are perfectly happy as long as their system "just works" meaning they dont get ms office trial edition (30-90days) they get a full office suit, they dont need to worry about viruses and they can do their normal internet business.

And FYI, I am 100% happy with my windows for my main rig, server 2008 sp2 rocks, BUT most people arent like us, they arent power users.

and WileE your into mac's and you have the ballz to mention downloading random apps and installing them?


----------



## Wile E (Jul 25, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> they will regain some, because win7 has a version targeted at netbooks where vista didnt and xp really wasnt optimal for that either.
> 
> and most people dont download real apps anymore, they download crap that is malware/spyware yes, but real apps......naaa, specly not a netbook.
> 
> ...


Installing apps in OS X is easy as hell. Double-click then Drag and drop for most of them. Installers for the rest.

The linux apps you find in the wild are rarely that easy. Either you have to check all of the dependencies manually, and compile them, or you check your dependencies, and then hope you got the right pre-compiled binary for your distro.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 25, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Installing apps in OS X is easy as hell. Double-click then Drag and drop for most of them. Installers for the rest.
> 
> The linux apps you find in the wild are rarely that easy. Either you have to check all of the dependencies manually, and compile them, or you check your dependencies, and then hope you got the right pre-compiled binary for your distro.



like I said a good consumer distro, not the geek distros.

Xandros for example you just head to their app store(appget program) and find your program, if dependency's are needed, it gets them to, as to apps that arent listed in their appstore, you can use debian packages last i checked and they do let you just install.

I use Xandros as an example because IMHO of the "user friendly" distro's I tested a while back it was still the easiest came with alot of stuff to make moving from windows as seamless as possible including crossover being part of the default install(meaning windows apps can be setup and used with little to no hassle) 

there are a ton of other 100% free distros that are not really hard to use.

I agree windows makes it easy to download and install alot of apps, BUT because its so easy alot of people endup installing spyware/addware/junkware and then the system dies a slow horrible death forcing people like us to re-install the damn thing for the damn bloody noobs.

and honestly, if my father and my mother and the office worker here can use vector 6 without me needing to babysit them and tech them anything, then thats a pretty damn good sign that its easy to use and at least to them appears to be just another "windows" version.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/software/soa/Is-it-Windows-7-or-KDE-4-/0,139023769,339294810,00.htm

watch the video, pretty much prooves avg people dont know what os they are seeing/using and dont really care, if it works, lets them do day to day stuff, and looks pretty, they dont really care if its got a K in the bottem right corner or a windows logo or whatever.

I find it funny when people say vista is hard to use and yet they think kde4 looks far easier to use (rofl) and then the same people think windows7 will be easier to use then vista.......

vista is no harder to use then xp was when it came out, win7 is in effect vista with a more mac-like gui.

each time they upgrade windows over the past few years it requiers "joe sixpack" type users to re-learn how and where to find stuff they use to do all the time, frustrating and annoying the customer, Not good a good business model/plan if you ask me.


people moving from xp or older to vista/7 would have close to the same learning curve as they would moving to say xandros or even vector6(it really is pretty damn easy to use) because of all the little gui changes, hell the display properties threw my mother for a loop on my system(server 2008) because she was use to XP's and she has to change res when her laptops connected to the external monitor


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 26, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> Xandros for example you just head to their app store(appget program) and find your program, if dependency's are needed, it gets them to, as to apps that arent listed in their appstore, you can use debian packages last i checked and they do let you just install.



This works until you either have a problem installing, or an oddball program.

As much as people want to wish, linux is not quite there yet. They need a unified installer. Never understood why this hasn't been done yet. :shadedshu

PC-BSD took a nice OS X approach, wheread uBuntu took a really warped version of Windows's program management. Neither work that great still, if you're clueless about what you're doing. Synaptic still has a lot of cryptic files to the newbie.

That, and xOrg need to pull their heads out of their ass. Ati cards are beyond useless when it comes to linux. My x1600 doesn't have any available Ati drivers for 3d. t(*_*t) you too, Ati.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 26, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> This works until you either have a problem installing, or an oddball program.
> 
> As much as people want to wish, linux is not quite there yet. They need a unified installer. Never understood why this hasn't been done yet. :shadedshu
> 
> ...



Ati has working drivers now. ATI is easy for the non-noob now. It's definitely not the way it used to be.

I agree with everything else tho. I've been saying that Linux needs a unified installer for years. They need to make it double-click simple if they really want significant market share.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 26, 2009)

I think the reason why is because they haven't got the backing of a company like Macrovision (makers of InstallShield).  At the same time, installers really aren't that complex to make.  In the end, I think it is all the distros without a prexisting install system (taken from Unix or integrated into Linux in the beginning) that is universal to them all is the problem.  Maybe installing is one of the fundamental areas all these distro authors disagree so one proposed installer will never gain universal acceptance.

Oh, well.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 26, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I think the reason why is because they haven't got the backing of a company like Macrovision (makers of InstallShield).  At the same time, installers really aren't that complex to make.  In the end, I think it is all the distros without a prexisting install system (taken from Unix or integrated into Linux in the beginning) that is universal to them all is the problem.  Maybe installing is one of the fundamental areas all these distro authors disagree so one proposed installer will never gain universal acceptance.
> 
> Oh, well.



It's simply down to a bitch-fight between debian and red hat. The devs for either claim that theirs is superior, and are not willing to compromise with the other to come up with a universal package. It's a matter of pride getting in the way of advancement.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 26, 2009)

I figured, the story of Linux.


----------



## joshiers8605 (Jul 26, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I figured, the story of Linux.



story of my life


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 26, 2009)

Wile E said:


> It's simply down to a bitch-fight between debian and red hat. The devs for either claim that theirs is superior, and are not willing to compromise with the other to come up with a universal package. It's a matter of pride getting in the way of advancement.



also alot of other distros wont use either of their solutions, linux's main failing is they have NO ISO that all distros need to follow, so theres no unified installer for apps or drivers, its just whatever the devs of each distro think is best.



Dippyskoodlez said:


> This works until you either have a problem installing, or an oddball program.
> 
> As much as people want to wish, linux is not quite there yet. They need a unified installer. Never understood why this hasn't been done yet. :shadedshu
> 
> ...



you can run into those kind of problems with windows tho as well, install shield is notorious for weird issues that are effectively UN-fixable due to the makers not wanting to figuar out the cause.

Hell ms's own installer has issues!!

want proof try and install the zunesuit on windows vista or 2008 x64, IT WONT WORK!!!! you have to use reg hacks to get the zunesuit on your system, and thats far from friendly to 99.999999999999999999999999% of the market.

If you need help with most linux distro's and getting some app installed, you can just ASK FOR HELP on their forums or irc channels, hell vectors devs will walk ANYBODY thru any problem they have, very nice clam guys 

EDIT: 
make note that at least with linux if an installers bugged or borked you can get it fixed or fix it yourself, on windows if a windows installer or install shield installers borked most times you cant do shit about it.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 26, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> also alot of other distros wont use either of their solutions, linux's main failing is they have NO ISO that all distros need to follow, so theres no unified installer for apps or drivers, its just whatever the devs of each distro think is best.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And those occasional install problems on windows are bugs. That has nothing to do with trying to download and install a program on linux, with all of it's different installer and packaging systems. A bug is entirely different than incompatibility.

Don't turn this into an argument of semantics. The fact is, Windows and OS X are overall easier to use the linux, period. No ifs, ands or buts. Until Linux becomes as easy to use, it will never gain a real foothold in the market.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 26, 2009)

Wile E said:


> And those occasional install problems on windows are bugs. That has nothing to do with trying to download and install a program on linux, with all of it's different installer and packaging systems. A bug is entirely different than incompatibility.
> 
> Don't turn this into an argument of semantics. The fact is, Windows and OS X are overall easier to use the linux, period. No ifs, ands or buts. Until Linux becomes as easy to use, it will never gain a real foothold in the market.



want me to list the installer bugs and problems I have found, or the number of windows installer's there are out there


Windows
NSIS (Nullsoft Scriptable Install System)
Actual Installer
Advanced Installer
CreateInstall
CreateInstall Light
CreateInstall Free
DeployMaster
DreamShield(free deployment tool for .NET Framework based applications)
Excelsior Installer
Excelsior Delivery
Inno Setup
InstallAware
InstallBuilder
Install Creator (Pro) (formerly Install Maker (Pro))
InstallShield
Installer VISE
Instyler Setup
MSI Package Builder
QSetup
Scriptlogic Desktop Authority MSI Studio
SetupBuilder Developer Edition
SetupBuilder Professional Edition
Setup Factory
Tarma ExpertInstall 3
Tarma Installer 5
Windows Installer(to many versions to list)
Wise Installation Studio 7
Wise Installation Express 7
Wise Package Studio
WiX
wyBuild & wyUpdate written in C#



Mac OS X
Installer for Mac OS X, from Apple Inc.
Iceberg for Mac OS X
Remote Install Mac OS X
VISE X by MindVision Software


so each of them has multi installers, mac having the least(thanks to apple being very strict on what they allow on osx) 

windows has a shitload if different installers, and if you hit a bugged installer, good luck tracking down the problem and fixing it or for that matter getting the company behind it to fix it.

At least with linux, If you cant fix it yourself, most times you can ask in IRC or on a forum and have help very quickly to get the problem fixed with a spicific installer.

example from today, i grabbed the latist opera10 installer for windows and linux, couldnt get the linux installer to work, went on irc, and somebody helped me edit the install script file to fix the error(took like 30sec, just had to change one line of text) and bam worked no problem.

yet i have a STACK of windows apps that WONT INSTALL on any windows version but XP without hacking the hell out of them(no i dont mean they wont install on server, they also wont install on 2k or vista because there are bugs/flaws in the installer) 

Linux is far from perfect, but its not as bad as it use to be, at least when you run into a wall, you can ask for help and most times, somebody will help you, with windows, good luck getting a proprietary installer issue fixed, even by the people who made the damn thing!!!

Hell MICROSOFT cant even fix the zunesuit's vista x64 installer so it works without hacking the registry(ask DarkNova or anybody else running x64 vista/7 with a zune) and THEY MAKE THE DAMN INSTALLER AND SOFTWARE IN IT!!!!

if it was Linux, you could pop open the install package, find the install script and fix it, but its windows, and its locked down so you cant edit the installer to fix the damn bugs 

Windows is GREAT when it works(like I said, I *LOVE *my 2008) but its not flawless, and when stuff like an installer is borked, most times you will be flying blind trying to fix it :/

And as I have said, I agree they need one unified click and install system, BUT not a copy of windows click and install system.

P.S. have any of you ever used the Xandros app manager/store? wish windows installer/manager was as friendly and easy to use!!!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 26, 2009)

I got over 260 GB of apps (too many to list) installed on this computer and not one installer bug.  Installer problems are the exception on Windows, not the norm.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 26, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> want me to list the installer bugs and problems I have found, or the number of windows installer's there are out there
> 
> 
> Windows
> ...



Yeah, but those Installers are all self running. You still just double click on them. They are completely transparent to the user, so it doesn't matter to anyone but the devs. The user just downloads the program, and double clicks it. No messing around in command lines, or worrying whether or not you grabbed the proper installer for your OS, as all of those installers are for your OS.

And apple doesn't restrict what's allowed on OS X. The fact is, OS X's default install method doesn't require an installer at all, therefore there is less need for installers in OS X. Most OS X apps are pre-package to be drag and drop, kinda like a portable app.

And if you can't get it to work in Windows, a simple google search, or a forum post here, will most likely get it fixed. And it's usually no more difficault than having to use the command line in Linux. But bugs have nothing to do with the point at all.

Normal people don't use irc, btw.

And you are still just arguing semantics, and completely dancing around the point. Windows and OS X are easier to use, period. Bugs DO NOT COUNT. They are bugs, not flat out incompatibilities or dependency hell. There are so many more Windows apps, of course there will be a lot of bugs.

You can try to make cases of how easy it is to use the Xandros app manager is, but the fact remains it's only good for the things in the app. It doesn't do a damn thing for you if you find something you want that's not in their store.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 27, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Yeah, but those Installers are all self running. You still just double click on them. They are completely transparent to the user, so it doesn't matter to anyone but the devs. The user just downloads the program, and double clicks it. No messing around in command lines, or worrying whether or not you grabbed the proper installer for your OS, as all of those installers are for your OS.
> 
> And apple doesn't restrict what's allowed on OS X. The fact is, OS X's default install method doesn't require an installer at all, therefore there is less need for installers in OS X. Most OS X apps are pre-package to be drag and drop, kinda like a portable app.
> 
> ...



linux isnt any harder really, at least the good distros, you just rclick the installer packege, extract it to a folder, then run the instal script(click it) and it installs, no worse then many other archived apps.....

you/somebody mentioned problem packeges/buggy packeges fact is thats no worse then the installer hell that can be windows.

You dont seem to get it, I have done a shitload of googling and even lately trying bing to find fixes for some installers, some arent compatible with vista, some arent compatible with x64 windows(despite the app in them being x64 compatible) 

Windows can be just as bad as Linux for installer issues, the diffrance being that if you need help with a linux installer you WILL GET IT, with windows, you have a good chance of not being able to fix the installer without knowing far more about the os and installer/installer packer then any sain person would want to know(I know it and I dont even want to know it!!!) 

OSX is a different beast controlled by apple, and has a limited software library that even makes linux's look large in comparison.

and if OSX borks up, apples responce 9/10 times is to reinstall the os........no workarounds no "heres how to fix it" just tell you to reinstall and that its fast......

oh, and yes, manytimes the easiest way to fix any system is to wipe it and start over, but many people dont want to have to reinstall everything or reset all their settings, its just alot of hassle.

last week a guy from my mothers church named Ed asked me to look at his computer, it got a virus from an infected GIF file, well, I cleaned it off and such, offered to reinstall the system for him to clear up some errors that where being a real bitch to track down(missing files that it trys to load at start up, but cant find whats trying to load them in reg or other config files)  he didnt want it reinstalled and was willing to put up with the error messeges because he didnt want to have to deal with getting the system set back up like he likes it.

Hell I can relate, i keep forgetting to make backup images so i can just restore if i start having problems(cant atm, my backup hdd is gone, waiting to get a new larger one) 

and one place you must admit linux and mac are better then windows is in the dept of user security, normal users CANT BORK THE SYSTEM UP, where as in windows, even with UAC they can cause the system to not be useable for them(change res outside what the monitor supports for example) 

try VL6 on virtual box, play with it a bit, setup opera10(not hard at all) see what i mean about it not being that hard, and far easier then having to track down windows installer buggs(alot of bugs on the install shield forums for example recommend a full system reinstall.....) 

linux is far from perfect, but so is windows and so is mac, nothings perfect for everybody or every use, for me windows 2008 rocks, for some it would be very hard to use due to this or that, hell alot of mac users are lost when they see windows, where somebody like me can adapt to damn near anything I run across, even weird ass guis like the 3d cube and sphere gui's some *nix distros have installed, or text based "gui" setups.

the way i see it, adapt or die, because in the computer world things are constantly changing, some for the better, others for the worse.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 27, 2009)

Stop wandering off course. Ed has nothing to do with this either. lol.

And Apple does not limit OS X apps. just like MS doesn't limit Windows apps. And Apple's support service has nothing to do with this discussion either.

Again, BUGS ARE NOT THE TOPIC AT HAND. Of course Windows apps will have more bugs. It's simple matter of percentages. Leave the bugs out of the discussion.

Nobody claimed any OS was perfect, but if you insist Linux is as easy as Windows or OS X, you are simply delusional. It being harder to use is exactly why it has not gained a strong market share. It is still significantly behind both Windows and OS X, despite all of it's growth.


----------



## Braveheart (Jul 27, 2009)

well if it works we can say bye bye to desktop app programming and say ello to web apps


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 27, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Stop wandering off course. Ed has nothing to do with this either. lol.
> 
> And Apple does not limit OS X apps. just like MS doesn't limit Windows apps. And Apple's support service has nothing to do with this discussion either.
> 
> ...



apple keeps far more control over osx then ms does over windows, same as apple keeps far more control over iphones then any other company keeps over their phones, and in this case ITS A GOOD THING, it keeps osx users from having to deal with alot of really crappy installers and such.

and have you used any of the current "easy to use" linux versions m8,  they arent any worse for most people then windows is, hell distro's like xandros even let you setup windows apps without any real work!!!!

dependancys are and issue, but you can run into the same shit with windows, havent you ever had an app that needed a file from the visual c++ or visual basic or the java runtime liberys?

I have, and god its freaking annoing, and windows dosnt install them by default, nor do many apps, hell it took me weeks to track down a bug with kalonline a while back for a buddy that was directly linked to the fact he didnt have the visual c 2005 runtimes installed( 2008's dont work,u need 2005 and 2008 as well as the vb runtimes and and and....blah)   

the only os that appears to lack dependencies is osx if your words are correct that all osx apps can just be extracted dragged and dropped, BUT alot of noobie users dont even know how to drag and drop.......so they are screwed if they dont want to run everything from the desktop!!!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 27, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> dependancys are and issue, but you can run into the same shit with windows, havent you ever had an app that needed a file from the visual c++ or visual basic or the java runtime liberys?


Nope.  I don't even have JRT installed.  Most quality installers check dependancies and makes sure they are at least as new as required.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 27, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> apple keeps far more control over osx then ms does over windows, same as apple keeps far more control over iphones then any other company keeps over their phones, and in this case ITS A GOOD THING, it keeps osx users from having to deal with alot of really crappy installers and such.
> 
> and have you used any of the current "easy to use" linux versions m8,  they arent any worse for most people then windows is, hell distro's like xandros even let you setup windows apps without any real work!!!!
> 
> ...


No, again, Apple does not limit app development on OS X in any way, just like windows. Nothing has to be approved by them at all, save for hardware. (and even then, manufactureres can write their own drivers, they just won't be supported by Apple. No different than Windows). The only thing Apple limits is the iPhone.

And despite your complaints against dependencies in Windows, it is a FAR more common issue in Linux. Installing most things in Windows is still easier for the majority of people.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 27, 2009)

ok, your correct, linux is trash, its utterly useless to anybody with less then a phd in computer sciences.

i give up, your right, No noob can be stuck on linux and just happily do their day to day activities, its just to damn hard to use and manage.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 27, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> ok, your correct, linux is trash, its utterly useless to anybody with less then a phd in computer sciences.
> 
> i give up, your right, No noob can be stuck on linux and just happily do their day to day activities, its just to damn hard to use and manage.



lol. And again, you show your childishness by insinuating I am an extremist to try to sway people to your point. Nice (failed) attempt.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 27, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> yeah, BUT alot of why many companies go back to XP is due to them not knowing enough about windows in the first place.
> 
> You can make vista look and feel like XP if you want, SO that cuts the learning curve down, the other main issue is the fact alot of companies dont update to current service packs, I saw a bank wipe their new vista laptops due 100% to the fact that they had vista pre-sp1 issues, had they updated to sp1/sp2 they wouldnt have had the issues they where running into(one of the issues was that adobe reader wouldnt work properly, and adobe+ms patches fixed that long ago)



Companies are not switching because of a "learning curve" or a visual appearance. They are switching because of the memory footprint and the system requirements.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 27, 2009)

Wile E said:


> lol. And again, you show your childishness by insinuating I am an extremist to try to sway people to your point. Nice (failed) attempt.



nope , i just give up, your right, linux is useless shit, to hard for any normal person to use.

and osx and windows are dreams that never have any real problems.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 27, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> nope , i just give up, your right, linux is useless shit, to hard for any normal person to use.



You're a fool to say otherwise.

Linux is still in usability hell for the non pc-literate. Not even uBuntu has broken that barrier yet. Close, but not quite.

And I've yet to actually find something that you click the "install script" to install. Not with default settings, anyways.

dpkg -i package is by far the best install method to date, but still too complex for the average user. The only reason Linux is as far as it is today with the idiot crowd, is because they're ale to pre-package -EVERYTHING- 90% of people need with the initial install, whereas OS X and Windows cannot.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 27, 2009)

http://www.xandros.com/


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 28, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> You're a fool to say otherwise.
> 
> Linux is still in usability hell for the non pc-literate. Not even uBuntu has broken that barrier yet. Close, but not quite.
> 
> ...



I've never used the command line to install _anything_ on Ubuntu.    I've found that .deb files work exactly like .exe files in Windows -- was your installation of Ubuntu damaged in some way?


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 28, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> I've never used the command line to install _anything_ on Ubuntu.    I've found that .deb files work exactly like .exe files in Windows -- was your installation of Ubuntu damaged in some way?



no, your lieing, linux is never user friendly, never easy to use, and never easy to manage, just admit your lieing and give them the respect they want/demand.

linux is trash, useless to anybody with less then a phd in computer sciences.

your constantly stuck using command line for everything, none of the apps have the right names, oh yeah and installing spyware/addware/malware is just way to hard.....it should be automatic!!!


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 28, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> no, your lieing, linux is never user friendly, never easy to use, and never easy to manage, just admit your lieing and give them the respect they want/demand.
> 
> linux is trash, useless to anybody with less then a phd in computer sciences.
> 
> your constantly stuck using command line for everything, none of the apps have the right names, oh yeah and installing spyware/addware/malware is just way to hard.....it should be automatic!!!



You're right!  I've never been able to install any spyware/addware/malware on my Ubuntu machines -- I don't even run antivirus software.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 28, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> I've never used the command line to install _anything_ on Ubuntu.    I've found that .deb files work exactly like .exe files in Windows -- was your installation of Ubuntu damaged in some way?









YAY dependencies?

Easy, and reliable to use.

After you decipher the 3 missing dependencies.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 28, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> http://www.hostthenpost.org/uploads/cd434af59fe2b132be27122454981fdf.png
> 
> YAY dependencies?



You wouldn't expect to install a program meant for Windows Vista on Windows XP, either.  

If you're having dependency problems, it's either:

A)  You're trying to install an application meant for another version of Ubuntu.

B)  The application you're trying to install wasn't correctly packaged.

C)  Your install of Ubuntu has been damaged -- if you're trying to tinker with Ubuntu in a VM like it looks like you are, this wouldn't surprise me, as that's what VM's are for.  

What version of Ubuntu are you trying to run, and what program isn't installing correctly?  I could probably help, but if you ask me, you should stick to installing applications found in Ubuntu's "App Store" (the "Add/Remove Programs" menu item).


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 28, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> You wouldn't expect to install a program meant for Windows Vista on Windows XP, either.
> 
> If you're having dependency problems, it's either:
> 
> ...



 It is a fresh 9.04 CD. This CD verfies via checksum, it is not damaged, and works fine. All of the information you asked is in the screenshot. aTunes .DEB download from their homepage. And I can vouch that this is packaged perfectly fine, because I installed this in my install of Linux Mint. Mint 7, which is JAUNTY BASED.

The difference is Linux Mint packages any/every codec they can get their hands on including mPlayer and VLC with the Distro. uBuntu does not.  The definition of "Dependency hell". I thought Linux was easy and user friendly? 

 DEBs work just like EXE's? Not so much. All I want is aTunes!  Why am I restricted to Ubuntu approved apps?


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 28, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> http://www.hostthenpost.org/uploads/cd434af59fe2b132be27122454981fdf.png
> 
> YAY dependencies?
> 
> ...



try to figuar out why kalonline wont run when it just gives you a random hex code error.

turns out you need visual c++ runtimes installed (the 2005 version!!!) but good luck figuring that out, nowhere does it explain that and there are no online sources for help on the error.

it also effects a huge stack of other apps and games, hell visual basic errors are still common on little apps people make, saying you need some ocx or oxc or whatever file, again good luck as a noob figuring that out.

in one way linux(most distros) are better is that at least they tell you that your missing dependencies, unlike windows where u can spend hours/days/weeks trying to figuar out why that one app just wont run.

try it yourself, install kalonline without any visual c runtimes and see how easy it is to track down why the game crashes/wont work, I use it as an example because its 1. free, 2. easy to get 3. one i KNOW will give u hell.

then tell me windows dosnt have dependences.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 29, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> then tell me windows dosnt have dependences.



Windows dependencies suck too 

However, 99% of the programs that need something come with an installer for an install that isnt network connected. (Especially games.)


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 29, 2009)

Yup, almost every game has at least DirectX Run-Time installer on the disk.  About 1/4 of them have Microsoft Visual C++ 2005 installer too.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 29, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> It is a fresh 9.04 CD. This CD verfies via checksum, it is not damaged, and works fine. All of the information you asked is in the screenshot. aTunes .DEB download from their homepage. And I can vouch that this is packaged perfectly fine, because I installed this in my install of Linux Mint. Mint 7, which is JAUNTY BASED.
> 
> The difference is Linux Mint packages any/every codec they can get their hands on including mPlayer and VLC with the Distro. uBuntu does not.  The definition of "Dependency hell". I thought Linux was easy and user friendly?



Linux Mint may be based on Ubuntu 9.04, but it's _not_ Ubuntu 9.04.  I don't know what the makers of Linux Mint have done regarding the packages that are present, but there's obviously something extra they've done.  You can't blame Ubuntu for this.

All I can tell you is that the maker of aTunes is NOT packaging up his .DEB file correctly, because -- and this is just my own experience, YMMV -- in my four years now of working with Ubuntu, I've _never_ had package dependency problems unless I was trying to install something that wasn't meant for the version of Ubuntu I was using at the time.

All I can tell you is to try posting a message on aTunes' message board (I'm sure they've got some kind of bug reporter), but don't worry -- the problem isn't caused by either you or Ubuntu, you're blameless.  



Dippyskoodlez said:


> DEBs work just like EXE's? Not so much. All I want is aTunes!  Why am I restricted to Ubuntu approved apps?



You're not!  

However, just like when you install an unsupported app on a Blackberry or Windows Mobile (or crack your iPhone), it's up to *you* to fix your own problems by that point.

This is why the founder of Ubuntu (Mark Shuttleworth) keeps banging his head against the wall because people don't seem to understand that Ubuntu *is not a replacement for Windows* -- the practices and behaviors you're used to with Windows aren't going to be the same.  You get pre-installed apps that do _almost_ everything you need with Ubuntu (like, instead of trying to install a music manager like you are, try using the pre-installed Rhythmbox application) -- there's no need to get frustrated over installing things you find on the internet.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 29, 2009)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Windows dependencies suck too
> 
> However, 99% of the programs that need something come with an installer for an install that isnt network connected. (Especially games.)



not really true the good ones have the dependences in the installer, but the same is true for lunux apps/repositories the good ones dont need you to decipher dependencies its all there for you.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Yup, almost every game has at least DirectX Run-Time installer on the disk.  About 1/4 of them have Microsoft Visual C++ 2005 installer too.



try "almost every retail game" alot of free games and downloadable games, hell even a good number of retail games lack the dx installer on the disk ASSuming that the gamer/user has that installed already.

cant tell you how many times i have had to explain to people on vista that they need to download and install the dx9 runtimes because some game they bought dosnt got the dx installer on it.....frustrating!!!


----------



## Wile E (Jul 31, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Linux Mint may be based on Ubuntu 9.04, but it's _not_ Ubuntu 9.04.  I don't know what the makers of Linux Mint have done regarding the packages that are present, but there's obviously something extra they've done.  You can't blame Ubuntu for this.
> 
> All I can tell you is that the maker of aTunes is NOT packaging up his .DEB file correctly, because -- and this is just my own experience, YMMV -- in my four years now of working with Ubuntu, I've _never_ had package dependency problems unless I was trying to install something that wasn't meant for the version of Ubuntu I was using at the time.
> 
> ...


"Just use what's already there" is the biggest copout there is. I don't want to use what's there, I want to use exactly what I chose to use, not what some distro devs said I should use.

And if Linux wants to actually get somewhere, they need to be more like windows in ease of installing. I should be able to download just about any linux program, double click it, and it installs, regardless of the distro I choose to use. Until that happens, Linux is never going to gain meaningful market share. 

Yes, some programs require dependencies, regardless of platform, that's a given. However, it happens a hell of a lot more in Linux. Whether you or meecrob want to admit it or not, it's a fact.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 31, 2009)

Wile E said:


> "Just use what's already there" is the biggest copout there is. I don't want to use what's there, I want to use exactly what I chose to use, not what some distro devs said I should use.
> 
> And if Linux wants to actually get somewhere, they need to be more like windows in ease of installing. I should be able to download just about any linux program, double click it, and it installs, regardless of the distro I choose to use. Until that happens, Linux is never going to gain meaningful market share.
> 
> Yes, some programs require dependencies, regardless of platform, that's a given. However, it happens a hell of a lot more in Linux. Whether you or meecrob want to admit it or not, it's a fact.



1)  You're the odd one there.  There's a reason why the iPhone is quickly becoming the most popular smartphone out there -- people don't want to bother with wondering "is a program going to work" or not.  It's not a copout -- it's the new way of doing business and pleasing your customers.

You're an enthusiast -- you have to be aware of the fact that the way you "like doings things" on a computer is NOT the way that most other people.  Jesus, man -- *there's a reason why IE is the most popular browser out there.*  People DO just want to use "what's already there."

2)  NO.  Ubuntu does NOT need to be more like Windows.  :shadedshu  You can't beat Windows on their own turf -- every good businessman knows this.  It's been too long that they've held their monopoly -- they've got far too many people locked in.

You can't beat them -- you can only expand into markets that they don't already own.  

3)  Like I said, YMMV, but I've encountered just as much dependency problems on Windows as I have from Ubuntu over the years.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 31, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> You're the odd one there.  There's a reason why the iPhone is quickly becoming the most popular smartphone out there -- people don't want to bother with wondering "is a program going to work" or not.  It's not a copout -- it's the new way of doing business and pleasing your customers.


I think that has more to do with Steve Jobs not dying than anything.  Give it a quarter or two more and see if it flatlines/falls.



I think you can beat Microsoft at their own game (Windows).  The problem is, your new OS would have to be pretty much 100% compatible with theirs.  Microsoft will fight tooth and nail to make sure it won't.  As such, to make an OS that can truly compete with Windows, you'll need about 60% lawyers, 20% marketing, and 20% development.


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 31, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I think that has more to do with Steve Jobs not dying than anything.  Give it a quarter or two more and see if it flatlines/falls.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you can beat Microsoft at their own game (Windows).  The problem is, your new OS would have to be pretty much 100% compatible with theirs.  Microsoft will fight tooth and nail to make sure it won't.  As such, to make an OS that can truly compete with Windows, you'll need about 60% lawyers, 20% marketing, and 20% development.



Even if Steve Jobs died, the stock would only take a minor hit.  You'd be surprised at the amount of iPhone owners who don't even know who Steve Jobs is.

And you pretty much proved my point about competing with Windows.    The only players big enough to take them on directly, in their own space, don't find any worth in it.  

Plus, with the changing nature of electronics today, I'd argue that it's not even really necessary -- give it 15 years.  The idea of having to keep a "PC" constantly on a desk somewhere ("What, your computers were so big you had to keep them on a desk all the time?  Or carry them around in a backpack?") is going to seem quaint.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 31, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Even if Steve Jobs died, the stock would only take a minor hit.  You'd be surprised at the amount of iPhone owners who don't even know who Steve Jobs is.


Steve Jobs is Apple.  When Steve Jobs left, Apple almost died.  When Steve Jobs could no longer work (liver problems), Apple's performance dove.  I don't know of any corporation whom's performance is so closely tied to one individual.  It is madness--anyway, short term trends usually don't provide much indicators for long term trends.  Except for Q2 (when Jobs came back), iPhones did pretty lousey.


People were pointing out Jobs looked ill at a keynote speech in June/July:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=496913
http://www.itp.net/blogs/87-is-steve-jobs-ill

Apple's shares started diving in late August:
http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp...6&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:AAPL&ntsp=0

Those dates are pretty close.


Also consider that the bottom fell out of housing markets in late September.  Apple was falling before the rest of them were.

As a reference, here's Microsoft:
http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp...2&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:MSFT&ntsp=0


----------



## mdm-adph (Jul 31, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Steve Jobs is Apple.  When Steve Jobs left, Apple almost died.  When Steve Jobs could no longer work (liver problems), Apple's performance dove.  I don't know of any corporation whom's performance is so closely tied to one individual.  It is madness--anyway, short term trends usually don't provide much indicators for long term trends.  Except for Q2 (when Jobs came back), iPhones did pretty lousey.
> 
> 
> People were pointing out Jobs looked ill at a keynote speech in June/July:
> ...



Yeah, yeah -- I know all the Steve Jobs related trivia and rumors.  Thanks for the review.

Still doesn't matter to me.  The company that Jobs left in the 90's wasn't the same company that is today.  Today Apple is a huge player in their markets (smartphones and PMP's) -- _people are locked into their products_.  That will keep them going for years and years and years, even if Jobs dies and their products turn to junk.

Come on -- that exact same process has kept Microsoft in business for years.  :shadedshu


----------



## Wile E (Aug 1, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> 1)  You're the odd one there.  There's a reason why the iPhone is quickly becoming the most popular smartphone out there -- people don't want to bother with wondering "is a program going to work" or not.  It's not a copout -- it's the new way of doing business and pleasing your customers.
> 
> You're an enthusiast -- you have to be aware of the fact that the way you "like doings things" on a computer is NOT the way that most other people.  Jesus, man -- *there's a reason why IE is the most popular browser out there.*  People DO just want to use "what's already there."
> 
> ...


1) Every single person I have ever known, has found a program online at some point in time that they wanted to download and use. And if the "use what's already there" business model was so successful in anything but the smartphone market, don't you think Linux would be a hell of a lot further than it is now?

2) I only mean more like Windows in ease of use, and especially ease of installation. But even more than that, Ubuntu itself needs to go the hell away, and quit screwing with Debian's standards, creating yet another standard. The last thing we need is another competing standard.

3) I flat don't believe you.


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 1, 2009)

mdm-adph, just give up, WileE says your wrong and a lier you must be wrong and a lier, linux should just go away, mac and windows are better in every way and have none of the problems linux has.


----------



## Wile E (Aug 2, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> mdm-adph, just give up, WileE says your wrong and a lier you must be wrong and a lier, linux should just go away, mac and windows are better in every way and have none of the problems linux has.



Yeah, and if you actually paid attention to what I said, instead of just trolling by making baseless insinuations in a vain attempt to discredit me, you'd realize that I never said, at any point, that Linux was bad (only Ubuntu). I said that Windows is easier to use than linux, and as such, it is not for mainstream users.


----------



## mdm-adph (Aug 3, 2009)

Wile E said:


> 1) Every single person I have ever known, has found a program online at some point in time that they wanted to download and use. And if the "use what's already there" business model was so successful in anything but the smartphone market, don't you think Linux would be a hell of a lot further than it is now?
> 
> 2) I only mean more like Windows in ease of use, and especially ease of installation. But even more than that, Ubuntu itself needs to go the hell away, and quit screwing with Debian's standards, creating yet another standard. The last thing we need is another competing standard.
> 
> 3) I flat don't believe you.



#1 They're completely different things.  And no -- *Desktop* Ubuntu (like you'd run on a regular PC) is right where I expect it to be right now, going up against the likes of Microsoft and Apple.  Ubuntu is going up against decades of entrenched locked-in users, stuck with Microsoft -- it doesn't matter if Ubuntu is the greatest thing since sliced bread, it can't beat Microsoft on its own turf, no matter how much better it is.  

But then, it's not supposed to -- the founder himself has said this, time and time and time again.  However, it doesn't matter in the long run -- the next generation of computing devices is already shaping up to be a non-Microsoft world, be it smartphones or tablet PC's (whenever the hell they finally get around to marketability ). 

#2 To me, Ubuntu is just as easy and dependable _at those things it was meant to do._  If you're looking for it to do the exact same things as Windows, look elsewhere -- it was never meant for that.

About Debian -- Ubuntu is free to do with Debian whatever it wants, just like Debian is free to do whatever it wants with other GPL code.  That's the way it works.  Ubuntu's relative "success" (at least in the fact that we're sitting here talking about it) means, to me, that it's doing something that maybe Debian couldn't or didn't want to. 

#3  Like I said, YMMV.  For the things I do with Ubuntu (browse the web, watch videos, listen to music) I never have any problems.  There's nothing to it.  I've installed maybe 10 programs over the course of a few years, since I started with Ubuntu.  For the things I do with Windows (install games, play games, update games) I have problems from time to time -- not a _massive_ amount, but still a good bit more than Ubuntu.

However, I don't expect you to believe me -- I don't believe half the hardware specs people say they have on this site, either.  



Meecrob said:


> mdm-adph, just give up, WileE says your wrong and a lier you must be wrong and a lier, linux should just go away, mac and windows are better in every way and have none of the problems linux has.



Dude -- I got this.  Go take five.


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

naaa, you have spent pages telling me that linux is a nightmare, you and dippy and ford, the funny part is that I have seen alot of noobs have serious problems with clean windows installs due to not having DEPENDENCES MET.

mostly due to visual C and Visual Basic runtime liberys not being pre-installed or included in the apps installer, but you insist that dosnt happen, when others here Im sure have had it happen and seen it happen to other people they know.

OSX I have delt with on a low level, Apple dosnt tell people how to fix problems when you call them, 9/10 times tell you to reinstall the os because thats the easiest way to fix all apple related problems(has always been it seems) 

Sure not alot of people currently use IRC, BUT every decent linux distro has it built in, and has info on how to connect so that you can get help when/if you need it, they also have forums despite the fact that most people dont use forums either.

and noobuntu(ubuntu) is trash, anybody whos had experience with a decent distro wont touch it, its a bastardized debian thats totally unoptimized and seems to be built by simply taking random apps and tossing their prebuild/compiled versions into a .deb for people to install, where other distros like VL tend to optimize their offerings.

Example KDE, it can be HORRIBLE and SLOW on some systems, I use to blame KDE for this, Till I tried it on VL, I was honestly SHOCKED, KDE was as fast as XFCE, same goes for gnome, the gnome build for VL is FAR faster and more optimized then the ones other distros use.....its shocking how much little things like attn to detail matter 

well, you can go on saying that linux is worthless for the average user, I will just be happy Knowing that my dumbass father proves you wrong, hell he even got citrix setup without asking for my help(shocked me to.....)


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> #1 They're completely different things.  And no -- *Desktop* Ubuntu (like you'd run on a regular PC) is right where I expect it to be right now, going up against the likes of Microsoft and Apple.  Ubuntu is going up against decades of entrenched locked-in users, stuck with Microsoft -- it doesn't matter if Ubuntu is the greatest thing since sliced bread, it can't beat Microsoft on its own turf, no matter how much better it is.
> 
> But then, it's not supposed to -- the founder himself has said this, time and time and time again.  However, it doesn't matter in the long run -- the next generation of computing devices is already shaping up to be a non-Microsoft world, be it smartphones or tablet PC's (whenever the hell they finally get around to marketability ).
> 
> ...



the problem with ubuntu is that they DONT GIVE A DAMN THING BACK TO THE LINUX COMMUNITY, and they insist on making everything possible as noobiefied as possible, they also refuse to OPTIMIZE THEIR SHIT, ubuntu is like pre-sp1 vista to be honest, its got potential but its so slow and annoying to use that most people will not want to deal with it and will just move back to windows thinking all linux is as laim as ubuntu.

honestly try VectorLinux6 or Wolvix or any other slack based distro and then try and say ubuntu isnt crap.


----------



## mdm-adph (Aug 3, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> the problem with ubuntu is that they DONT GIVE A DAMN THING BACK TO THE LINUX COMMUNITY, and they insist on making everything possible as noobiefied as possible, they also refuse to OPTIMIZE THEIR SHIT, ubuntu is like pre-sp1 vista to be honest, its got potential but its so slow and annoying to use that most people will not want to deal with it and will just move back to windows thinking all linux is as laim as ubuntu.
> 
> honestly try VectorLinux6 or Wolvix or any other slack based distro and then try and say ubuntu isnt crap.



Everything Ubuntu does with their code is open-source.  Nothing is restricted -- you're free to take it and use it for what you want -- how is that not benefiting the community?  

I'm not looking for ultra speed, anyway (not that I've ever had a problem with Ubunut's speed) -- I'm looking for ease-of-use.  Nothing is easier to me than buying a laptop from Dell for $299 that comes with Ubuntu presintalled.  

The last thing I want to do is start messing around with slackware or gentoo or something -- I don't care how fast they are.  The things I've heard about gentoo scare me, for instance.


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

mdm-adph said:


> Everything Ubuntu does with their code is open-source.  Nothing is restricted -- you're free to take it and use it for what you want -- how is that not benefiting the community?
> 
> I'm not looking for ultra speed, anyway (not that I've ever had a problem with Ubunut's speed) -- I'm looking for ease-of-use.  Nothing is easier to me than buying a laptop from Dell for $299 that comes with Ubuntu presintalled.
> 
> The last thing I want to do is start messing around with slackware or gentoo or something -- I don't care how fast they are.  The things I've heard about gentoo scare me, for instance.



gentoo is for uber geeks who have nothing better to do then sit around playing with code and compiling every app they want to use every time it comes out.

Slack(even the root distro) isnt even close to that bad, and Vector and many other slack based distros have made it easy peezy to setup and use, sure they dont got the MASSIVE repositories that ubuntu has, but if you cant find an app in their repo's you can just request it OR download the RPM and convert it(pretty easy really), some distros even have it setup so they auto compile apps from their source files using the proper optimizations for the systems they are on(makes the app faster and run better)  

the only windows app that I have found that works like that is Paint.net and thats due to how proper .net programing works(proper .net apps can be 64bit on 64bit windows and 32bit on 32bit windows and can compile themselves on install)


----------



## Wile E (Aug 3, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> naaa, you have spent pages telling me that linux is a nightmare, you and dippy and ford, the funny part is that I have seen alot of noobs have serious problems with clean windows installs due to not having DEPENDENCES MET.
> 
> mostly due to visual C and Visual Basic runtime liberys not being pre-installed or included in the apps installer, but you insist that dosnt happen, when others here Im sure have had it happen and seen it happen to other people they know.
> 
> ...



Your father is an exception. Has he tried to install anything that wasn't in the default repos yet? Has he tried to add a repo just to get a program he wants yet? (Notice the use of the word yet). Get back to me when he does.

And I have never had to reinstall OS X over a problem yet. You talk as if that's a normal thing, and it isn't. You've seen it happen what, once or twice? And then you only did it because tech support told you to. Like linux has a good tech support line as well, ooops, oh wait a minute, what linux tech support line? How is that significant? I've been using OS X since it's release, and any problems I have that prevent booting are usually always fixed by a permissions repair in Disk Utility, or in extreme cases, booting to the install DVD, and running a permissions repair from from Disc Utility on the install disc. The fact is, your OS X knowledge is lacking, and as such, your couple of bad experiences were made a lot worse by you not knowing what to do. OS X repair gets every bit as complicated as Linux or Windows repair at times. Nothing you can do about it. Sometimes shit goes wrong, no matter the OS.

At least we agree on Ubuntu. I hate that distro. lol.

And for the record, just in case I didn't mention it to anyone, I run Fedora normally. If I want a deb distro, I grab Debian.



mdm-adph said:


> Everything Ubuntu does with their code is open-source.  Nothing is restricted -- you're free to take it and use it for what you want -- how is that not benefiting the community?
> 
> I'm not looking for ultra speed, anyway (not that I've ever had a problem with Ubunut's speed) -- I'm looking for ease-of-use.  Nothing is easier to me than buying a laptop from Dell for $299 that comes with Ubuntu presintalled.
> 
> The last thing I want to do is start messing around with slackware or gentoo or something -- I don't care how fast they are.  The things I've heard about gentoo scare me, for instance.


Grab Debian. It's a proper deb distro. Ubuntu is crap compared to it. And if you wanted it to just work, you would've grabbed it with Windows.  



Meecrob said:


> gentoo is for uber geeks who have nothing better to do then sit around playing with code and compiling every app they want to use every time it comes out.


----------



## mdm-adph (Aug 3, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Grab Debian. It's a proper deb distro. Ubuntu is crap compared to it. And if you wanted it to just work, you would've grabbed it with Windows.



I'd rather not have to bother with it.  Ubuntu does what I need, and my Dell came with it pre-installed.  Everything worked from day one -- why do I need Windows again?.

For that matter, why do I need to bother downloading, burning, and tweaking another distro again?


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Your father is an exception. Has he tried to install anything that wasn't in the default repos yet? Has he tried to add a repo just to get a program he wants yet? (Notice the use of the word yet). Get back to me when he does.



wasnt even off the repo, thats what suprised the hell out of me, he got it off his school district's links for the critix client and was able to install it himself(hes not very bright at computers......thats why it really shocked me) 

and adding more repo's to gslapt is easy, surprisingly easy infact.




> And I have never had to reinstall OS X over a problem yet. You talk as if that's a normal thing, and it isn't. You've seen it happen what, once or twice? And then you only did it because tech support told you to. Like linux has a good tech support line as well, ooops, oh wait a minute, what linux tech support line? How is that significant? I've been using OS X since it's release, and any problems I have that prevent booting are usually always fixed by a permissions repair in Disk Utility, or in extreme cases, booting to the install DVD, and running a permissions repair from from Disc Utility on the install disc. The fact is, your OS X knowledge is lacking, and as such, your couple of bad experiences were made a lot worse by you not knowing what to do. OS X repair gets every bit as complicated as Linux or Windows repair at times. Nothing you can do about it. Sometimes shit goes wrong, no matter the OS.



I have had to call them far more then a couple times, enlarge due to a few chicks I met at the local community college, they bought mac's because they where "cute" and the person at the college bookstore said they where easy to use and never had those "pc problems", they all have had various problems that caused apple to tell them to reinstall, them being the "dumb blonde" type(tho none of them are blonde....) had to ask me for help, oh did i mention i really really hate macmini's?  i convenced apple to just send me an hdd to toss in one when i convenced them the hdd was going out, took a week to get the drive to me(called monday and it was the next monday or tuesday when it arrived) getting those little things open......well its a chore, replaced the drive, setup the system and the webcam(Built into the apple monitor she bought) wouldnt work, called apple, guess what their fix was.......reinstall, this didnt surprise me, and the fact it didnt work didnt surprise me either, eventually got it all straitened out by calling the local apple shop and they emailed what i needed to me, seems alot of the disks that apple sent to people with serten mini models where missing drivers for some devices >.<  



> At least we agree on Ubuntu. I hate that distro. lol.



I have hated it since I tried other distro's and found slack based builds, its like they intentionaly try and make it suck ass or something.



> And for the record, just in case I didn't mention it to anyone, I run Fedora normally. If I want a deb distro, I grab Debian.



exectly, hell Mepis was great till they started feeding off noobuntu....



> http://img.techpowerup.org/090803/gentoo-abducted-1600x1200.png



as to the image, yeah that fits most gentoo users i know, and they dont get why i dont like linux for day to day use as a gamer-geek, I dont fell like recompiling fucking wine every time a new ver or game comes out


----------



## Wile E (Aug 3, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> wasnt even off the repo, thats what suprised the hell out of me, he got it off his school district's links for the critix client and was able to install it himself(hes not very bright at computers......thats why it really shocked me)
> 
> and adding more repo's to gslapt is easy, surprisingly easy infact.
> 
> ...



Well then, that surprises the hell out of me. He must've actually tried reading, unlike most users. I am actually completely shocked. What distro is he on again?

As for the web cam in OS X (or any issues with missing kexts, for that matter), all you had to do was update with the device plugged in. And just because Apple tech says reinstall, you know damn well that's not what always needs done. All tech support lines are like that, and look for the easy way out. This isn't exclusive to Apple, so stop bringing it up like it's a fault with OS X, because it isn't.

And yeah, I liked Mepis back in the day, where you could boot it live, but use a USB drive to keep you user stuff saved, that way you OS was 100% customizable and portable. And this was done via a simple preference pane. No command line, or advanced configuration needed. Now it's just crap.


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Well then, that surprises the hell out of me. He must've actually tried reading, unlike most users. I am actually completely shocked. What distro is he on again?
> 
> As for the web cam in OS X (or any issues with missing kexts, for that matter), all you had to do was update with the device plugged in. And just because Apple tech says reinstall, you know damn well that's not what always needs done. All tech support lines are like that, and look for the easy way out. This isn't exclusive to Apple, so stop bringing it up like it's a fault with OS X, because it isn't.
> 
> And yeah, I liked Mepis back in the day, where you could boot it live, but use a USB drive to keep you user stuff saved, that way you OS was 100% customizable and portable. Now it's just crap.



VectorLinux 6 std editon, same one DarkNova has on his laptop.

And yeah alot of techsupport lines pull that, but in my experiance apples the only one that says reinstall quite that much, most of them want to do remote desktop to fix the system for you, hell thats how my father gets stuff fixed on his dell, he even extended his service contract 2 more years so he can keep having them fix his bluetooth keyboard/mouse problems and drivers for new devices like their office laser printer(his home office printer wouldnt install on vista due to UAC issues, dell had to download a diffrent driver to get it working for him) 

and mepis was nice, but they went to being part of the noobuntu alliance and it went downhill  

Honestly it shocked the hell out of me seeing him using citrix because i know it wasnt part of the os install, went and looked and he had added it himself...........was flaberghasted to be honest......hes a real dumbass and he managed to get it working so he could get some files off his work system.......


----------



## Wile E (Aug 3, 2009)

I'm seriously speechless that your father managed to pull it off. He must've had help from someone at work. That's the only thing I can even think of.

And what is Vector based on? I don't think I've ever tried it.


----------



## Meecrob (Aug 3, 2009)

Wile E said:


> I'm seriously speechless that your father managed to pull it off. He must've had help from someone at work. That's the only thing I can even think of.
> 
> And what is Vector based on? I don't think I've ever tried it.



this was in the other room here at my mothers office(i work here) he had no help(why im so shocked) 

vector is slack based, highly optimized and they try and keep it easy to use, but dont treat the user like a noobtard moron either, you still have root access(infact you set that account up duing install as well as your user accounts) 

I have managed to run vector's older SOHO editions and even this current vl6 on an old ass laptop i have for testing, 233mmx cpu with 208mb ram and a 5.6gb hdd, and its USEABLE, not fast but useable, it can even play ogg music as you type stuff up, try even getting debian/ubuntu or fedora installed on this POS and it will error during install, IF you manage to get it fully installed it will chug so bad you cant really use it, but under VL using xfce or LXDM its quite useable, not lightning fast ofcorse but USEABLE!!!!

Wolvix is another good slack based distro, tho its a bit more work to setup(no gui installer unlike vl6) 

I also had some like lunar linux that compile themselves on install, but they take DAYS to compile on slower older systems so its not worth the bother.

For noobies I still say that Xandros is the best bet as it will support most windows apps "out of the box" due to it having crossover built-in and the repo being HUGE and designed so that anybody who can use a mouse can use it(no dependancy issues because it deals with them on its own)    

but as a 2nd option thats FREE vector is my top choice, it really is just EASY TO MANAGE, oh, and yes it has a few querks, but nothing i havent seen windows do at times, like nic cards that wont get DHCP auto forcing a driver reinstall or config change/reset, but unlike windows VL makes that easy to deal with as u can just enter the network manager and change 2 settings, restart and it works, windows.......oi, dont even get me started about how much hassle xp sp2 gave me with nic's wired and wireless!!!(stupid windows firewall!!!!)


----------

