[brlug-poly] thanks

[Eric G Ortego]

On 10/24/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> ACPI and laptop hardware has been supported better on Windows since before
> Linux distributions even thought about supporting it.
>

Are you actually going to give well-thought out examples or just continue to
spew opinions?

Of the laptop toting XP users I have met they are all amazed at how fast my
desktop is ready, right where I left off I might add, when I open the lid. I
have used XP on several laptops and in allot of instances(maybe caused by
some human) the laptop won't sleep and wake as I expect, instead just
"regular" shutdowns and starts ups, or worse the battery drains to death
while "sleeping." When they do hibernate it takes considerably longer and
that on machines about 3 times the speed of my own.

This wins the made-up statistics award for 2005.
>

Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? But it is sad that
generalizations are too often accepted at face value.

You remind me of the LSU/Les Miles bashers who invent things like "LSU was
> #1 in recruiting under Nick Saban....The defense never gave up this many
> yards under Nick Saban"
>

O.o *beware* mud puddle, slippery when wet.

 The application icons never change position. As you open more programs they
> stack to the right.
>

Icons do change place when a domain computer abruptly dies reverting to an
older copy of the profile, I see this every single day on multiple PC's. NT,
2000, XP on seperate networks.


> This is simply fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Name an open-source
> application, and there is probably a windows build for it.
>

For the most you are correct, but doesn't that say something about the
quality of those open source applications?
The design surely must be more thought out. From the small differences like
system logging, to the larger like drawing to the windowing system. They
have to account for all types of systems they wish their code to run on.

 GiMP, gaIM, OpenOffice, X-Chat....all have windows builds. Infact, the
> X=Chat developers insidiously charge money for the windows builds.
>

Whats wrong with charging money for software? Build it yourself if you think
paying the authors or the builders is insidious. Sheesh, I decry a
hypocrite.

 Would you go as far as to say that those applications have trojans?
>

You can audit the code your self if you fear that there may be malware
included. Not the case for closed source apps, or even closed source
freeware.

 You better stop now while you're ahead.
>

Heh

Out of the box, XP does not
> > even include a spell checker. I need the red letters kmail and most
> > other
> > free text editors give me. I also want tools like a spreadsheet, iso
> > writer,
> > compiler and so on. I was amazed to learn that XP Home does not include
> > programs, like flash, Real, Xine, xmms, noatum and so on, for watching
> > movies
> > or listening to music the way that Mepis does. The average person who
> > really
> > uses their computer for work and play will have to dig up dozens of
> > extra
> > applications. It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what
> > Debian
> > provides at no cost.
>
>
> This is an outright lie.
>

How is that a lie?

Debian provides nothing.
>

Debian provides package management tools. Pretty good ones.

First of all, Winamp is free and that takes care of all of the
> aforementioned needs.
>

But Winamp doesn't come with XP either.

It is actually easier to download the Winamp installation build from their
> website than use Debian's apt-get utility.
>


Maybe so, maybe as easy, maybe not... if you put 2 computer-ignorant people
on PC's (XP & mepis) telling one to install Winamp and the other to install
xmms I would put my nickle on the mepis luser to finish first. If you show
them how to do it then ask them a week later to do it again, I would still
put my nickle on the mepis luser.

Why do you feel the need to make up things to support your argument?
>

Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? Its sad that often
generalizations can actually work to convince others.

 You are free not to buy them if you don't want to. You are also free to
> continue running Windows 95 if you choose to do so as well.
>

You must continue to run windows 95, unless you choose to upgrade or cannot.
Often apps only work on one specific system in which they were built to run.
This is one reason Microsoft has looked bad for breaking so many apps with
their service packs. Its also one of the reasons that I read the
installation documentation on important Windows only applications.


>  Let's say you sold widgets and competed with a lot of other companies who
> also sell widgets. WOuld you not do everything legally and ethically
> possible to make sure everyone buys your and ONLY YOUR widgets?
>


I would not, because there is nothing ethical about doing everything legally
possible to make sure everyone buys *only my* widgets. What you describe
sounds allot like Communism, and a bit like the essence of Microsoft. In a
free market I should do everything legally and ethically possible to try to
convince you that you want to buy my widget and make sure you know if you
have bought the widget which I sell. To suggest that I(or my company) should
do everything legally & ethically possible to eliminate the choice of which
widget everyone can buy sounds socialist.

People who rant about this show their absolute lack of understanding of all
> things business-related.
>

Ranting does not show lack of understanding, maybe lack of self control and
maybe overzealous conviction.


>  By the way, what do you make of all of the bugs and insecurities that
> have showed up in Firefox now that it has reache dcritical mass?
>

Disclosed, therefore avoidable & likely to be fixed.

 No "Linux" "has" ssh.
>

No windows has a mouse.

All require you to download from an internet repository.
>

Most *nix distributions come with openssh installed just like most PC's come
with a mouse.


Free softare is all about sharing, non free is all about sucking money. The
> > net result is that non free software is expensive and difficult to use
> > where
> > free software is cheap and easy.
>
>
> You are a liar.
>

lol, you are a funny.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051024/22f35501/attachment.htm