History: LinuxVsWindows
Preview of version: 4
"Windows XP rocks" (Imam Jumhoor)
"What is meant here by rocks is rocks the very circuits of your machine because it is so badly written and inefficient" (Sharh al-Jumhooriyyah)
McMood: Haha, that was quite funny. But what I want to know, did you have to write some code and then compile it in order to execute such humour?
SS:
McMood: Please see comments below - Linux exposed by a "Linux Lover"!!!!!! Shock!
Linux Versus Windows debate
There isn't one. Everyone knows Windows is just a million times more user friendly which makes up for its inadequacies compared to Linux. (General Consensus amongst sane ppl)
SS: You know I have to disagree with you there. But I shall not argue the case since I use windows at home and at work
.
McMood: What part of that statement do you actually disagree with?
SS: <Arnie>'Aaaaallluvit</Arnie>
SS: See you have to sample the evil to truly appreciate how bad it is. So in using windows I learn exactly how crap it is and can give an informed opinion on the matter. Whereas people who only use Windows can never make any informed judgement on Linux
McMood: This morning an avid linux evangelist sent me an email saying the following:
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125706,pg,13,00.asp
check number 27
Have a nice read, I am not sure yet if the person has shot himself in the foot or not, is it a review praising Linux or is it actually highlighting the very reason why Linux is not used by the "general" user.
Oh some snippets for you all to digest on:
In the meantime, if these are features you crave, check out Smeg, the Simple Menu Editor for Gnome
and
I had harbored fervent hopes that the Breezy Badger would have better support for wireless networking. I've been kvetching in this space for more than a year about the lack of an easy, point-and-click interface for Wi-Fi network selection on the Gnome desktop. When I'm someplace where the Internet is flowing freely through the airwhether it be at a trade show, a coffee shop, or my own living roomI should be able to peruse a list of available networks, clicking to select one to glom on to. This sort of functionality, which has been standard in Windows and the Mac OS for some time now, remains elusive in Ubuntu Linux.
McMood: So Ubuntu to you to! SMEG!
Wifter : Umm, I think the 'feature' the writer requires is something called NetworkManager which has been around for many months now ...
http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/
McMood: Err he commented on this too!
There's a solution out there called NetworkManager that brings exactly the functionality I'm looking for to the Gnome Desktop; it's included in Fedora Core 4, and perhaps other distros I haven't checked on in a while. But no working NetworkManager package yet exists for Breezy. Compiling and installing NetworkManager by hand may be possible, but right now I don't have a Sunday to devote to that sort of trial. So I limp along with what's available in Ubuntu, a little network selector called Netapplet that becomes completely befuddled when it encounters a wireless network it hasn't seen before. I hope the next version of Ubuntu (Mangy Muskrat? Drunken Duckling? Ornery Otter?) includes NetworkManager or some similar solution.
Wifter: Umm, Mahmud, perhaps it hasn't struck you yet, but your criticism is therefore against Ubuntu Breezy (the previous release), and not against Ubuntu Dapper (the current release which HAS NetworkManager) nor is it against GNU/Linux in general, which have had NetworkManager for many months.
Comprendo ? Note: <OPEN PROGRAM=HUMOUR> If this is the case, then I agree with you, and if not then you are a sticky dumpling in a bowl of custard. <End Execution of Humour Command> GNU/GPL/V.0.001
SS: McMood EVERYONE agrees that Linux is a better OS than Windows. The only argument some (very very) bright individuals have is that the usability of Windows is the pivotal factor. Oh and did I mention I use windows almost exclusively and that I will never revert to using Linux under its current degenerate infrastructure.
Saleem: So you're being treacherous to linux? Yeah, like it matters which OS is better, the fact remains that geeks like and use linux. Va jakkaynaahum tajkeeyaa (probs wrong but better for comedy effect!)
McMood: Sorry I got it wrong guys, it wasnt Ubuntu Breezy it is Ubuntu Dapper. So get it right guys, its Dapper software. Daptastic! Dip sticks?! and Smeg! come to mind...
Oh and they are trying to indoctrinate from kindergarten - http://www.edubuntu.org/Screenshots
you have to give it to them they are trying hard. What they don't understand when the child becomes vaguely literate they will switch to Microsoft because you cannot play PC games effectively under a linux environment cos they dont support half the graphical features. If it did it would be probably good. If they had lots of things it would be amazing, but, its still at the IF stage...and it is quite iffy...
Wifter: Umm, Quake3, Doom3 and Quake4 all work under Linux. Are you saying those games don't have "half the graphical features" of other Windows-based games ?
McMood at least be honest in your assessment of Linux's portability of games. It is unfortunately way behind, it cannot even support many high grade graphics cards - example my laptop, ATI x1400 radeon it does not support acceleration hence I get a max res of 1280x800 on laptop and juddering when moving screens up and down. The only games that Linux really supports are Quake and Unreal Tournament - I have checked many many Linux game sites. Apart from that the rest are obscure games and do not support the latest games. And Quake 4 is far from the leading edge of graphics of other games...
"What is meant here by rocks is rocks the very circuits of your machine because it is so badly written and inefficient" (Sharh al-Jumhooriyyah)
McMood: Haha, that was quite funny. But what I want to know, did you have to write some code and then compile it in order to execute such humour?
SS:
McMood: Please see comments below - Linux exposed by a "Linux Lover"!!!!!! Shock!
Linux Versus Windows debate
There isn't one. Everyone knows Windows is just a million times more user friendly which makes up for its inadequacies compared to Linux. (General Consensus amongst sane ppl)
SS: You know I have to disagree with you there. But I shall not argue the case since I use windows at home and at work
.McMood: What part of that statement do you actually disagree with?
SS: <Arnie>'Aaaaallluvit</Arnie>
SS: See you have to sample the evil to truly appreciate how bad it is. So in using windows I learn exactly how crap it is and can give an informed opinion on the matter. Whereas people who only use Windows can never make any informed judgement on Linux
McMood: This morning an avid linux evangelist sent me an email saying the following:
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125706,pg,13,00.asp
check number 27
Have a nice read, I am not sure yet if the person has shot himself in the foot or not, is it a review praising Linux or is it actually highlighting the very reason why Linux is not used by the "general" user.
Oh some snippets for you all to digest on:
In the meantime, if these are features you crave, check out Smeg, the Simple Menu Editor for Gnome
and
I had harbored fervent hopes that the Breezy Badger would have better support for wireless networking. I've been kvetching in this space for more than a year about the lack of an easy, point-and-click interface for Wi-Fi network selection on the Gnome desktop. When I'm someplace where the Internet is flowing freely through the air
McMood: So Ubuntu to you to! SMEG!
Wifter : Umm, I think the 'feature' the writer requires is something called NetworkManager which has been around for many months now ...
http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/
McMood: Err he commented on this too!
There's a solution out there called NetworkManager that brings exactly the functionality I'm looking for to the Gnome Desktop; it's included in Fedora Core 4, and perhaps other distros I haven't checked on in a while. But no working NetworkManager package yet exists for Breezy. Compiling and installing NetworkManager by hand may be possible, but right now I don't have a Sunday to devote to that sort of trial. So I limp along with what's available in Ubuntu, a little network selector called Netapplet that becomes completely befuddled when it encounters a wireless network it hasn't seen before. I hope the next version of Ubuntu (Mangy Muskrat? Drunken Duckling? Ornery Otter?) includes NetworkManager or some similar solution.
Wifter: Umm, Mahmud, perhaps it hasn't struck you yet, but your criticism is therefore against Ubuntu Breezy (the previous release), and not against Ubuntu Dapper (the current release which HAS NetworkManager) nor is it against GNU/Linux in general, which have had NetworkManager for many months.
Comprendo ? Note: <OPEN PROGRAM=HUMOUR> If this is the case, then I agree with you, and if not then you are a sticky dumpling in a bowl of custard. <End Execution of Humour Command> GNU/GPL/V.0.001
SS: McMood EVERYONE agrees that Linux is a better OS than Windows. The only argument some (very very) bright individuals have is that the usability of Windows is the pivotal factor. Oh and did I mention I use windows almost exclusively and that I will never revert to using Linux under its current degenerate infrastructure.
Saleem: So you're being treacherous to linux? Yeah, like it matters which OS is better, the fact remains that geeks like and use linux. Va jakkaynaahum tajkeeyaa (probs wrong but better for comedy effect!)
McMood: Sorry I got it wrong guys, it wasnt Ubuntu Breezy it is Ubuntu Dapper. So get it right guys, its Dapper software. Daptastic! Dip sticks?! and Smeg! come to mind...
Oh and they are trying to indoctrinate from kindergarten - http://www.edubuntu.org/Screenshots
you have to give it to them they are trying hard. What they don't understand when the child becomes vaguely literate they will switch to Microsoft because you cannot play PC games effectively under a linux environment cos they dont support half the graphical features. If it did it would be probably good. If they had lots of things it would be amazing, but, its still at the IF stage...and it is quite iffy...
Wifter: Umm, Quake3, Doom3 and Quake4 all work under Linux. Are you saying those games don't have "half the graphical features" of other Windows-based games ?
McMood at least be honest in your assessment of Linux's portability of games. It is unfortunately way behind, it cannot even support many high grade graphics cards - example my laptop, ATI x1400 radeon it does not support acceleration hence I get a max res of 1280x800 on laptop and juddering when moving screens up and down. The only games that Linux really supports are Quake and Unreal Tournament - I have checked many many Linux game sites. Apart from that the rest are obscure games and do not support the latest games. And Quake 4 is far from the leading edge of graphics of other games...
;){kind=link}