Saturday, September 13, 2008

It's all about determination

A wonderful post on "Linux Weekly" reminded me of another lame luser talking point.

I think one of the main reason most of the people try Linux and go back to Windows is that they aren't determined to make the switch, and they can't conceive that there are other ways of doing things than the Windows methods. If something is done differently on Linux, they quickly jump to a conclusion that goes like 'This is not right, on Windows it's done the other way around.
What the fuck? People don't switch to Linux because they aren't determined enough?

Talk about putting the cart before the horse. You lusers always make the same damn assumption, that for some self-mutilating reason,"people" actually want to switch to Linux.

You know, it turns out that if you make something better and it makes people more productive then people will switch to it, regardless of whether they are "determined" or not. I mean look at Google Chrome for example. That thing has been out one week and it already has more penetration than Linux on the desktop. 

Making people more productive usually means either that a) they don't have to learn anything new and they can do what they always did a little better, or that b) they have to learn a tiny bit more, but they could do something before that they couldn't previously.

For most people, switching to Linux is neither a) or b). You have to learn a bunch of new stuff to do the same old shit. And by switching, you lose access to tons of apps, thereby enabling you to do less. Oh but it does enable you to spend many of your weekends now trying to learn to program so that you can fix bugs and contribute code so that programs will let you do what you could already do before you started going down this merry path. No, there is no command to give you your life back.

Oh by the way, I have this invention that you might like. It's a new kind of scissor. It's got one big handle hole to put your leg through, and another smaller one to stick your dick through. It's really great. You can cut shit and get off at the same time. I'm sure you can totally throw away your old scissors it if you are determined enough to do so. So who wants one?

And before I go, Twitter is a flaming pile of shit.

236 flames:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 236   Newer›   Newest»
julian67 said...

For once I agree with you.

Learning something new is BAD.

If you can't do everything tomorrow exactly like you you did it yesterday it's time to burn a liberal.

The sooner people just stop this learning stuff the better. It upsets jesus and makes people anxious. Dang!

" Twitter is a flaming pile of shit."

Yes but so are you.

Anonymous said...

Amen to the Twitter observation. Fucking web 2.0.

Harald said...

I mostly agree, but using Chrome as an example was unjustified. Chrome got its penetration not because it's a fantastic piece of software, but because it's fucking Googles browser. Whatever little piece of software Google spits out is guaranteed to get media coverage.

Mehrdad said...

Something that some people would never understand is that NOT ALL PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS. I don't know why it's so hard to understand for lusers.

Anonymous said...

@julian67

If you were armed with any reading comprehension, you would have gotten the point of his post.

He is saying that you have to learn new ways to do things, in addition to losing exponential amounts of productivity on your machine.

All of this while telling yourself that it is better and that you are experiencing "freedom."

Also, you appear to become more and more juvenile with every one of your responses.

For all of your (self-professed) intelligence, you are incapable of rational, civil discourse.

vanjalolz said...

Google chrome is a perfect comparison; Google took an already established idea, improved it, then built it and released the source.

They didn't take an idea, turn it on its head, then say "this way is better, tough luck".

They didn't write half the code, and then release it and say "someone else can finish the rest".

And they didn't force all the people of google.com to use it to use the service, like that fosstard from a few weeks ago who blocked IE from his shitty site with tables.

Anton said...

There is some truth to this article, and I think using Chrome as an example is perfectly justifiable. It took something absolutely crucial to our browsing experience, improved it (by taking lots of features and ideas from others) and managed to do it all very discreetly.

As an example, I've set my default browser to Chrome and my parents (who previously were using Firefox) had no idea that I made the switch. In fact, they were saying things like "the computer feels a bit faster now, did you do something to it?"

If tomorrow I did that exact same thing to my OS, they would probably shit themselves and ask me a ton of questions as to why I made the computer "worse".

Anonymous said...

Hahahaha, look at this article: http://desktoplinux.com/news/NS4038980010.html

It details the launch of yet another Linux distro (because the 32,000 already out there aren't enough.)

The review includes nonsense such as this: "My kids forget their Windows games when they see how far Linux gaming has come. They play on-line with fantastic first person shooters like Sauerbraten, Urban Terror, or World of Padman. Or they enjoy great race games like Torcs, Trigger, and Mania Drive. The times when Linux offered no more than a nice game of Mahjongg are long gone..."

Anonymous said...

OK, so what LH inferred is that all other OSes are useless (not just Linux) because the end result is typically the same for users.

As for Google Chrome--I'm not impressed. A fast Javascript virtual machine engine doesn't impress me. The quick recent site thumbnails is meh too. But we'll see how Chrome matures.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

OK, so what LH inferred is that all other OSes are useless (not just Linux) because the end result is typically the same for users.


Wrong! He was talking about Linux, and he was referring to the fact that you learn new ways to do things in addition to receiving zero benefit by doing so. And you get to lose 99% of the applications you need, or want, to run.

Isn't literacy wonderful?

julian67 said...

"@julian67

If you were armed with any reading comprehension, you would have gotten the point of his post. "


I am and I did.

"He is saying that you have to learn new ways to do things, in addition to losing exponential amounts of productivity on your machine.
"


Gosh, no, really? Gee thanks for the explanation.

"Also, you appear to become more and more juvenile with every one of your responses.

For all of your (self-professed) intelligence, you are incapable of rational, civil discourse."


fuck you :-)

The original author has a reasonable point. It takes time to learn an OS, or pretty much anything more complex than a toaster. Nobody is born knowing the Windows interface, tools, terminology. All that has to learned too. I grew up and went through education and my first employment before computers were omnipresent. At school there one BBC Micro (in a purpose built room, like a shrine!). At my first job eveything was still pre-computer age. Printing was done with big offset litho machines, the preparation of documents was done with typewriters, letraset, cutting boards, blue pencils, scalpels etc. The organisation's files were all paper and there was a huge filing department. I got excellent training in several soon to be redundant skills.

later I used computers in various jobs, mostly running custom software or BSD. Windows barely featured. I didn't get a PC of my own until I was in my 30s. Naturally I started with Windows, and learning to use it, maintain it and generally become proficient is still extremely clear in my mind. There was nothing easy, obvious or intuitive about it (I'm not saying there ought to have been, but only challenging the common misconception that familiarity-with-windows=intuitive).

Starting to use Linux based OSs is equally clear in my mind and was no more difficult (in some ways easier because if you can read plain text it's almost all there to be learned if you want to).

Inevitably while you're learning something you're less proficient than when you know the system, so a home user switching from Windows to something else is going to struggle for a little while (I'd expect business users to get appropriate training). And it can be frustrating when your knowledge acquired from years of using Windows turns out to be either not very useful, or even an obstacle (ingrained habits, expectations/assumptions you believe are generic but are actually OS specific etc). Linux hater's comment "And by switching, you lose access to tons of apps" is indicative of this state of mind/progress. It's equally valid to say that by switching you gain access to tons of apps. Of course in the beginning you don't know one app from the other, you have to suck it and see. This is a lot like when I started with Windows and tried out a huge amount of different applications to work out which apps were actually useful to me. Apparently this is productive learning if done on a Microsft system but a futile waste of time on a non MS system ;-) I had to do all that again when I switched to a Linux distro. Luckily I had the benefit of a package manager and I spent a lot of time using that as a discovery tool. It beats the crap out of searching the www, reading shill reviews or trying free/shareware from magazine cover CDs or download sites.

I can't think of any area where I'm less productive now, but certainly that was the case for a little while in some areas when I was just starting out. That would be exactly the situation for someone going from Linux or Mac to Windows...it takes a while.

"...enable you to spend many of your weekends now trying to learn to program so that you can fix bugs and contribute code"

is one of the tiredest of tired cliches and stupid and wrong as well. Nobody needs to learn to program unless they want to write programs. No regular user needs to be able to fix bugs. Nobody is expecting you to contribute code. This is either an expression of ignorance or pure FUD. Maybe both.

The thing about Chrome is just odd. Chrome is a browser, not an OS. The binaries are only available for Windows. Installing it takes 2 minutes and requires no change to the OS, the partition table, boot record etc. Comparing it to trying out a different OS is stupid. Switching OS is distinctly non-trivial, takes time and preparation and is best not done on a whim. I tried Chrome on XP the day it came out, like millions of others. It's obviously beta in that it lacks features and stability but is reasonably good. People seem to be amazed at the rendering speed, but anyone who uses webkit browsers is already familiar with this (Safari, Konqueror, Epiphany-webkit). It isn't special or unique and I guess it makes a decent enough replacement for IE6 but I'm still not sure why anyone using Windows would prefer it over Firefox, Opera or even IE7. If it was released by someone other than google it would be obscure and virtually unused.

So the big news today is that when you try something unfamiliar you might not be expert at it on day one.

Doh!

"If at first you don't succeed, give up" - Homer Simpson.

Anonymous said...

@goofyBitch67

Wow. We are all in awe of your acerbic wit and long-winded responses.

Anonymous said...

Wrong! He was talking about Linux, and he was referring to the fact that you learn new ways to do things in addition to receiving zero benefit by doing so. And you get to lose 99% of the applications you need, or want, to run.

Which would mean all other OSes because none are exactly alike.

The only exception would be OS X; in this case you learn new things (key shortcuts for one) to achieve the same result but only sacrifice 75% of popular Windows applications rather than 99%; there are Adobe products, Microsoft Office, etc. available for the Mac.

What isn't clear to me, however, is how I can access 100% of all non-3D Windows applications via STS and natively execute a large majority of all Win32 applications via Wine and Crossover with Silver rating or better.

David Colborne said...

I actually like the Chrome/Linux comparison. There are some quirks in Chrome that aren't the same as Firefox, and some of them are kind of annoying; hit "Tab" in the address bar in Chrome sometime and hit "Enter", for example. It doesn't do the same thing other browsers do (i.e. it goes to an element in the web page instead of auto-completing the address). That took some time to learn. Also, if you right-click on a link, where "Open in a new tab" is on Firefox is "Open a new window". Annoying.

And yet... Chrome is my default browser on my Windows machine. Why is that? The answer, of course, is simple - when a tab goes down, it doesn't take the rest of the browser with it. That alone is a good enough reason to keep it.

Writing from my Linux laptop here, I'm in a similar boat. Linux has some advantages for me - for example, it's much more tolerant of broken NTFS partitions for whatever reason, which makes it easier for me to restore data on otherwise nerfed hard drives. Similar reasons to that one are why I keep Linux on my laptop. However, none of those reasons are reasons why I would recommend my parents or anyone else in my family should get Linux - they're not restoring data off of hard drives or doing network diagnostics. Instead, they want to play MP3s, watch DVDs, edit photos, and so on. Each of those things is more difficult and provide less functionality in each of those fields using Linux than either Mac OS or Windows. Sure, you have to pay more for a Mac, and you have to pay more for Adobe software, but it also costs more for a large truck than a Yaris - guess what you're going to spring for if you need to tow a boat?

Anonymous said...

Instead, they want to play MP3s, watch DVDs, edit photos, and so on.

Fluendo offers a free yet legal MP3 codec for GStreamer; LinDVD is a legal DVD Player for Linux; Photoshop CS2 and even CS3 can be installed in Wine. Then there is Pixel, Krita, and Gimp as well.

You should of mentioned Blu-Ray movie playback. Linux users have to use AnyDVD HD on Windows to strip BD+ and ACSS from the media then rip it to the hard drive and/or burn to a blank BD-RE before they can watch the film from MPlayer on Linux.

Anonymous said...

Fluendo offers a free yet legal MP3 codec for GStreamer; LinDVD is a legal DVD Player for Linux; Photoshop CS2 and even CS3 can be installed in Wine. Then there is Pixel, Krita, and Gimp as well.

You've just listed 4-5 programs with obscure names, most of which are incomplete betas, and many of which are not even part of common distributions. This is precisely the problem. On Windows, Windows Media Player lets you play MP3s, DVDs, and whatever else. Photoshop installs out of the box and doesn't require figuring out what Wine is, configuring Wine, and messing with whatever pieces of Windows fail to work in Wine. Same deal on OS X. *That* is what you have to compete with - one obvious, standard and immediately functional way of doing the task, without needing to look up special software, install it, figure out how to launch it, etc. That's the difference between a consumer operating system and a kernel with a bunch of competing user-space programs.

Linuxhatersuxbillgatescock said...

"but they could do something before that they couldn't previously."

Are you autistic, dyslexic, stupid or just plain retarded? I suspect all 4.

Make sure you get all your flu shots this season fuckface.

julian67 said...

Playing MP3s is difficult? Watching DVDs is difficult? Editing photos is difficult???

Shit I must have been doing it wrong, it all seems a click away.....or less. Insert DVD in slot. Wait a few seconds: media player opens, DVD plays. Gripping stuff.

If someone really doesn't like gthumb or digikam or f-spot or gimp there's always Picasa. If Picasa is not easy enough they need a Polaroid camera and scissors.

Most distros play mp3, ogg, flac, wav by default. Even Gnewsense the FSF sponsored distro plays mp3s and xvid/divx on a default install. To play encrypted DVD you just install libdvdcss and your media player plays encrypted DVDs. I believe there are some DVDs that won't play because they use Sony's latest copy protection...the same copy protection that prevents them playing on some Sony DVD players (seriously).

Blu-Ray...that's probably true. I know Nero 3 for Linux burns Blu-Ray but I've no idea if they bundle their media player like the Windows version. Probably not I guess.

Linuxhatersuxbillgatescock said...

Great post Julian...It seems we are of approximately the same generation

People who struggle or do not comprehend Linux are just plain retarded, but instead of learning a thing or 2 about it, they would rather just yell down at anyone who shows them how retarded they are. Most Linux haters would probably have trouble switching mobile phone brands because the menus are different.

billgatespenis said...

I actually meant your previous post but I pretty much agree with everything you have to say.

Lord forbid we might have to learn! Make it stop no! gaaaaarg!!

I went from Debian to Ubuntu and back to Debian again and have twice the functionality and half the bloat of Ubuntu and none of bullshit I had to tolerate in Winblows..

julian67 said...

"On Windows, Windows Media Player lets you play MP3s, DVDs, and whatever else."

I expect things have changed with Vista but I've done a lot of XP installs and unless it's an oem version with extra apps bundled I can promise you Windows XP Home or Pro has no DVD playback capability by default.

What it offers you is a happy link to the Windows store where they try to convince the unwary that they need to hand over real money to be able to watch DVDs on Windows.

Out of the box it supports WMA, WMV, Wav, MP3. That's it. No DVD, no DivX, no AAC, no Ogg , no Flac, Matroska, wavepack, ape, flash etc etc etc

If you want proper multimedia capability you can of course have it, but you need to add it yourself. OEMs usually take care of this for you by bundling WinDVD or PowerDVD which is why people seem to think it's part of Windows.

I expect the people who buy a Dell Ubuntu think the same about their OEM DVD and multimedia capabilities ;-)

Windows XP also doesn't include any kind of decent image viewer, let alone an editor. Vista Home Premium has something reasonable though.


I'm not a fan of wine but last time I tried it the install went as follows. Download win32 somthing.exe/navigate to something.exe on CD. Double click on something.exe. Watch the program install....you know...next next...done. This is very different and a big improvement from even a couple of years ago. I was quite surprised.

Anonymous said...

Awww fuck this guy's a moron....

so going by his login no one will anything because it'd take time to learn.

But then again if your an idiot like the blogs author you can't learn anything new.

I'm surprised he worked out how to use the internet to post this

julian67 said...

>billgatespenis

>Linuxhatersuxbillgatescock

Looks like it's dirty party time at LinuxHater mansions.

Linuxhater has been pretty quiet today....guess he has his mouth full and can't speak right now....

Ed said...

Anonymous @ 9:21, you just made my day. I love how the guy references Sauerbraten--no offense to those devs, but they've barely got an *engine*, let alone a game (though their engine is kind of cool from a technical perspective). I evaluated it as a possibility for a project and ran the other way as soon as I saw how raw it was, and this was six months ago at most.

My Real Name is Steve said...

hee hee I think you're right Julian, Linuxhater and his right hand are "partying" hard ;o)

Anonymous said...

It's not about learning something new. It's about spending your time wisely. Spending time learning something new just to do what you're already doing is just a waste of time.

Many Linux advocates forget that to many people, the computer is the means to an end and not the end itself.

Anonymous said...

anonymous said
"You should of mentioned Blu-Ray movie playback. "Linux users have to use AnyDVD HD on Windows to strip BD+ and ACSS from the media then rip it to the hard drive and/or burn to a blank BD-RE before they can watch the film from MPlayer on Linux."

That's hilarious. Why not just watch it using AnyDVD HD. Guess that's not determined enough.

julian67 said...

Yes time is valuable and you have to spend some time if you want to get past the confused newbie stage. But the payback is you get tools which make boring tasks simple and incredibly fast.

For example: A couple of weeks ago I had to find files owned by a certain user in a filesystem. I knew they were of different types and horribly spread around, some in the root of the filesystem, some in directories, sub directories, sub sub directories....blaaagh. I wanted to find them and move them in one operation. It's a one liner run with root credentials, very simple, took a few seconds.

And if I wanted to find all those files, move them and also change the owner in one click that's expanded the script to three short lines. Tricky stuff.

The same task on a default XP install? Nope, Windows' very pretty built in search doesn't allow me to search by user. Even if it did I wouldn't have write permissions for someone else's files so I would have to log out/switch user to admin to move them, or open the bloody awful Windows terminal and use the utterly crap "run as". So remembering that I don't necessarily know the names or types of the target files, only the owner, I have to list everything(!) and then use the explorer gui to filter by owner and then I can do something with them (if I'm the admin). This is tedious and stupid and time consuming.

Probably there are wonderful 3rd party tools for Windows that give me the power of find or locate but I'd have had to spend time discovering them, trying them etc. Or I could spend some time getting to grips with powershell. But it's easier to have simple and powerful tools built in for these kinds of tasks.

Another example:

I have a big music collection. When I primarily used Windows I liked the .ape (monkey's audio) lossless compression format because it offered the most compression of the various lossless formats. I archived a huge collection as cue+ape. I've since revised my opinion and don't like the format; the author breaks backward compatibility with new versions, it's a pita format on any OS other than Windows, decompression takes forever, no portable players support it etc etc. When one of my 40GB portable players died I needed to go back to some of the archives and decompress and convert to Ogg or MP3 or Flac (which my working player supports). At this point I developed a serious dislike for .ape. Slow slow slow and pretty much useless as a playback format. So how to convert all these to an always ready to use format? And at the same time the various cue+flac or cue+wav scattered around in there?

Very simple :-) a script which converts cue+lossless and retains original track filenames and metadata (tags). OMG a script! Sounds geeky. Not really. I didn't even have to write it, just copied it off someone else. The script is in /usr/bin (like C:\Windows\Programs) and I just made a file manager custom action (equivalent to explorer's right click context menu). This is done in the gui, no scary command line bashing.

So how to recursively convert an entire drive of cue+lossless to individual tagged flacs correctly named and in their own album directories?

Right click on the top level folder containing the sub directories of cue+lossless and click the action. That's it, it recurses through the whole filesystem and does the lot. Fucking brilliant.

That's the benefit of plain text and self-interested co-operation/collaboration :-)

Other great timesavers: If you've got several computers you probably want to synchronise contacts, mail, pictures, music, bookmarks. You could hunt around for some fancy sync app or you could just get your head around ssh and scp and rsync, write yourself three of four one line scripts (it's kind of overdoing it to call these scripts....this is really just the simplest saved command) and when you need to sync you double click the appropriate script (use imaginative names like laptop1_to_desktop2_mail.sh) Bang! Done.

These types of things can all be done one way or another on any OS of course but on a Unix like OS it's that much simpler...no crappy shareware, freeware, adware, no need to buy anything. You need an application? Open the package manager and get it. Well tested applications and an abundance of ready made scripts available if you don't feel confident to write your own from scratch.

And if you're really phobic about reading the manual or remembering some commands, if the terminal makes you break out in a sweat....don't use it. There's always KDE whose filemanagers (konqueror/dolphin/krusader) probably have the most impressive range of bolt on goodies you can find anywhere, so you can do it all in a happy shiny gui and never see that scary black terminal with evil blinking cursor (if you can tolerate KDE. I can't, but apparently its interface is perceived as non threatening by foolish noobs migrating from MS...so little do they know.... )

nidonocu said...

Windows user, linux-user hater here. ;) Though ironically I'm working on an open source app that runs on .net (with the whiny people asking me to switch to Mono makes me want to stab things. But I digress).

Just wanted to say as someone who likes Twitter, I request that you give reasons as to your dislike as you do when putting the case against unsuitable use of Linux. ;) Saying 'its stupid' is not allowed when writing a blog, you have to give reasons!

Other than that, do continue, just remember that criticism should always be constructive, even if its a bit ranty. :)

Anonymous said...

It's about spending your time wisely. Spending time learning something new just to do what you're already doing is just a waste of time.

Many Linux advocates forget that to many people, the computer is the means to an end and not the end itself.


There you go poking holes into the bad rationalizations that people use to justify their new hobby.

Anonymous said...

@julian67

Why not just use iTunes?

Anonymous said...

Very true. You switch to Linux, and after all the hassle and jumping though endless hoops, you discover there's nothing you can do you couldn't do before the switch. And that's of course the best case scenario.

Linux offers absolutely no benefit for the consumer user.

Anonymous said...

Having been through this, I sorta understand. Why would you need to go to SO MUCH EFFORT just to change. If it does take so much effort, how can it be worth it.? Well, the answer is in there.

Only the people that have truly crossed the river can tell you how it is on the other side. If you set out and then turn back, you clearly didn't make the far bank, so you can't possibly know how it is on the other side, now can you?

Its kinda like the Kübler-Ross model, where stage 1 is "denial". And if you reject the fact that you're in stage 1, you just confirmed it. Doh!

A better analogy still is smoking (and this won't make sense to anyone who hasn't, and then gone through the struggle of trying to give up). Using Windows is like smoking. The people doing it hear that it would be much better if they didn't, and to stop is going to take a lot of effort. It is not until one has really tried, struggled even, to give up, and then succeeded. Only then can they look back and see just how phucked up it really is. So back to the article - yes, from the perspective of a user, it does sound a bit warped why one would put so much effort into quitting, but then it would, wouldn't it? You should see it from this side!!
:)

Anonymous said...

Most of us have been to the other side, used Linux for substantial amount of time, and then realized that using Linux is a hollow experience. You need to work harder in order to achieve less.

Linux: There is nothing behind curtain number three.

Anonymous said...

Gave up for substantial amount of time, and then couldn't see the point in health, wealth and freedom, so went back to using again.

Anonymous said...

Lusers keep harping on the fact that Linux is harder to use because they are accustomed to how Windows apps work and have 'grown up' learning how to use Windows. It just takes time to get used to the 'quirks' of Linux.

Then explain to me how come so many previous Windows users have made the switch to MacOSX and aren't looking back? How did they so easily dump the Windows interface for the MacOSX interface?

If everyday users like mums and dads can easily switch from Windows to Macs, why can't they just as easily switch from Windows to Linux?

The answer, because Linux is programmed by geeks for geeks. Always has been, and always will be.

Anonymous said...

Google took an already established idea, improved it, then built it and released the source.

Except, of course, they didn't. They released PARTS of Chrome under the Chromium project. But not the whole thing.

Funny how freetards miss those little details.

Jochen said...

You are just not determined enough to use twitter.

Anonymous said...

the hater is back! loved this post.

julian67 said...

" Jochen said...

You are just not determined enough to use twitter."


First comment that made me laugh for a long time :-)

Thank you.

"that's the best you can do?

p0wned, mate. "


Looks like the fabulous parrot-monkey hybrid is alive and well. Sponsored by Duracell.

realist said...

Nope, Windows' very pretty built in search doesn't allow me to search by user.

Alas, SBS and other MS server tools do.

Seems to me you're bitching about not having multiuser tools on a single-user OS.

Dick said...

I have a big music collection. When I primarily used Windows I liked the .ape (monkey's audio) lossless compression format because it offered the most compression of the various lossless formats. I archived a huge collection as cue+ape. I've since revised my opinion and don't like the format; the author breaks backward compatibility with new versions, it's a pita format on any OS other than Windows, decompression takes forever, no portable players support it etc etc. When one of my 40GB portable players died I needed to go back to some of the archives and decompress and convert to Ogg or MP3 or Flac (which my working player supports). At this point I developed a serious dislike for .ape. Slow slow slow and pretty much useless as a playback format. So how to convert all these to an always ready to use format? And at the same time the various cue+flac or cue+wav scattered around in there?

Yes, this is a scenario Windows users face EVERY DAY.

Linux: the best OS for former .ape devotees who have a digital player die and must need to convert to a new format.

You do realize that both WMP and iTunes automatically scan and convert, negating the need to manually do it?

Anonymous said...

You need an application? Open the package manager and get it.

I'd like Adobe Photoshop and inDesign, please.

Oh, wait -- they're not available on Linux!

Neither is any good piece of software. What's the point of having a package manager if NOTHING USEFUL IS AVAILABLE.

EPIC FAIL.

Anonymous said...

You need an application? Open the package manager and get it.

Unless you're running Ubuntu Dapper, a two years old OS where it's impossible to upgrade to Firefox 3.

Package managers are a complete disaster, and yet they're praised by freetards as the second coming.

Anonymous said...

@julian67
//I didn't get a PC of my own until I was in my 30s. //

Because of that utter fail, you should simply fuck off, you bloody wanker.

Anonymous said...

@julan67

//It's equally valid to say that by switching you gain access to tons of apps. //

Tons of apps which are basically worthless duplicates of each other. Fuck you and all, you cheeky bastard.

julian67 said...

"You do realize that both WMP and iTunes automatically scan and convert, negating the need to manually do it? "

I'm not talking about a collection of .ape tracks,

I'm talking about a collection of cue+.ape, cue+wav, cue+flac etc.

The clue is in the cue ;-)

itunes and wmp do not do this. Well done for trying but you misunderstood tfa.

"Alas, SBS and other MS server tools do.

Seems to me you're bitching about not having multiuser tools on a single-user OS. "


You're right. For all the claims of MS fans here and elsewhere XP is in no way a real multi-user OS. It's not great that one would have to purchase an expensive server OS to get the ability to do some very simple searches, or temporarily elevate privileges to deal with other users' files. The same facilities which are available by default and at no extra cost to anyone using Mac OS X, GNU/Linux or a BSD.

I'm sure that some people are genuinely sole users of their Win OS (if you choose to discount users such as Admin and the other system accounts theye didn't realise exist). But being a single user system dressed up and pretending to be multi-user in a world that needs real multi-user is hardly a benefit.

Anonymous said...

@linuxhaterssucks

//People who struggle or do not comprehend Linux are just plain retarded,//

Or they've found that, after using Linux for several years (like myself), they've found that it really doesn't offer any advantages over a properly setup XP box. But then, you're "probably too retarded" to know how to setup XP correctly. Fuck you and all.

julian67 said...

"Google took an already established idea, improved it, then built it and released the source.

Except, of course, they didn't. They released PARTS of Chrome under the Chromium project. But not the whole thing.

Funny how freetards miss those little details."


Eexcept, of course, they did.

You can obtain the source and build the exact same Windows binary if you like.

All the source code is available.

Funny how idiots miss those little details

julian67 said...

Anonymousretard said: "Or they've found that, after using Linux for almost half an hour and pissing their pants (OMFG no internet explorer innit), they've found that it really doesn't offer a free clone of XP for cheap bastards who finally realised their piratebay version of XP was one big trojan. But then, I'm too retarded to know how to setup XP correctly, or even tie my own shoelaces so I don't fall over. I fuck little boys and masturbate over pictures of Melissa and Bill getting it on. What's it like then, sex with another adult who isn't your father?"

Fixed it for ya.*


* currently my favourite All-American retard witticism.

Anonymous said...

I need LH advice on this bug: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/269656/

PLZ KTHXBYE

Anonymous said...

You can obtain the source and build the exact same Windows binary if you like.

But it's not:

http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-windows

Chromium and Chrome are two different things, julian. Google is fostering that confusion.

Anonymous said...

But being a single user system dressed up and pretending to be multi-user in a world that needs real multi-user is hardly a benefit.

It is highly debatable whether most of the users in the world really need a multiuser system.

.net jerkface said...

The reason people don't switch to Linux is actually in his other blog post:


http://linux-weekly.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-to-install-skype-20-in-ubuntu-804.html
1. Install the needed dependencies
Type in a terminal application and provide your user's password:

sudo apt-get install libasound2 libc6 libgcc1 libqt4-core libqt4-gui libsigc++-2.0-0c2a libstdc++6 libx11-6


I'm surprised that the Linux world hasn't moved to virtualization as a solution to the dependency problem. However this would require admitting that the problem exists which in itself is a problem.

Using Windows is like smoking. The people doing it hear that it would be much better if they didn't, and to stop is going to take a lot of effort.
It is not until one has really tried, struggled even, to give up, and then succeeded. Only then can they look back and see just how phucked up it really is.


Funny how the opposite happened to me. Working with Linux at a very deep level made me realize how much the OS was cloned 1970's system architecture, the bulk of which had multi-terminal, command-line computing in mind.
I also began to resent how much of the Unix world was filled with lame programming hacks created by lifetime virgins who would prefer it if the public didn't use computers at all. Many of them clearly prefer programs to be unintuitive and have arcane names. Unix in many ways is a boy's club where secret handshakes and silly rules are the norm.

Programming in Linux actually invoked a very deep hatred within me for all the people that support it. I went back to windows and am very pleased with Vista.

I still follow the Unix world to some degree, especially the BSDs since they for the most part are free of the proselytizing that you constantly see with Linux. I also don't trust Linux anymore for server use, I don't think it is as stable as it used to be however I admit that my evidence is purely anecdotal.

Anonymous said...

How many times does it need to be emphasized?

Windows NT is a multi-user operating system.

Is that clear enough? This means NT4, 2000, XP, and Vista are all true multi-user operating systems in every sense of the word. Yes, crappy Win9x was a single user operating system based on DOS, but that does NOT means NT is the same thing. Win9x was killed almost 8 years ago, and the lusers still can't keep up.

Anonymous said...

I use both Linux and Windows XP both work totally perfectly for me (TM). Don't know why we need the Joe users in linux.

Microsoft and Apple have to struggle for the Joes coz they are companies, they depend completely on their marketshare, linux don't, linux doesn't win anything cause your momma uses it, linux was created for high-performance servers, scientific computation, and by technical curious people to technical curious people, and that's it. There have been efforts to make linux more user-friendly and that's a very good thing, but again we don't depend on your grandmom using it.
If you are curious about linux I'll help you installing it and with the first steps, if you are happy with MacOsX / Win and don't feel like learning anything new, Ok!, keep it.
Some times I boot in win for gaming a little, for everything else Linux is my choice :).

Some people is just not mentally prepared for the idea of software that doesn't depend on how much money it can make.

PS: I'm not meaning anything offensive by Joe, just common non-technical user.

tuomov said...

Whether learning a new skill is worth it, really depends on whether the learning effort is comparable
the effort the skill saves later on. If you use the program a lot, such as a programmer might use a text editor, clearly learning the tool isn't really that much of an effort compared to how
much you are going to use the skill later on. But when you have to read a book (or two) to do some very basic, setup that should only have to be done once one each computer -- such as disabling font blurring, which is in or close to the book-reading department on Linux -- the learning effort is far too high compared to the use-once-and-forget demand for the skill.

tuomov said...

"There have been efforts to make linux more user-friendly and that's a very good thing, "

Unfortunately WRONG!.

Those efforts have destroyed Linux for the power user, turning it into an idiot box -- no user serviceable parts inside -- only suitable for idiot users with very low demands, content with what the distros shove at them, and the developers of those corporate sponsored softwares themselves.

Anonymous said...

Those efforts have destroyed Linux for the power user

¿?¿?¿?¿

I use ubuntu, considered one of the most user-friendly distros, I have my friendly desktop that all my friends know how to use in case they come visiting and want to check facebook or msn. And at one click distance I have the console, with gcc, vim and diff and everything linux has always had, at other one click distance I have the eclipse IDE. Don't know what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

Personal example.

I use Mac OSX and find it alright. I need to use at times Win: I don't like it but I adapted.

One day I wanted to install Linux: I really did. Why? For the kick, for curiosity, for the (free) price.I was just looking for ONE serious reason to move and I would have at least installed it.

But then I thought... what would I gain? Do I feel I miss on any program? No. Is there anything I cannot stand on Mac OSX? No (though of course there are things I dislike... like in everything).

So I gained very little and lost a lot: a lot of time, first of all. Plus it was (at least at first) going to be a worse experience.

Am I an idiot for not wanting to spend hours/days/weeks of my life learning Linux to do just what I can already do on OSX? Maybe. Time is a scare resource and I do like to learn new stuff but there's so much out there to learn that I don't really see the point in learning Linux.

The example Julian67 gave are also not very appropriate: I do not doubt that on a multi-user computer, maybe on some network, Linux could make sense. But for home, as a desktop replacement, for my own computer (one user)... they don't really apply.

And I don't see the point in using any other format than AAC either, unless they give me better quality, without taking anything away (including their use on portable music players). And I don't mean just a little bit better quality, but a LOT more quality. (many people thing on similar lines for DVD vs. Blu-Ray).

Btw, Julian67, this sentence is gold: "Or I could spend some time getting to grips with powershell.". I love the irony in this sentence from someone who is arguing that the rest of the world should spend time to learn Linux... and yet they don't want to "spend some time getting to grips with powersheel". Lol: fantastic!

Robin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Btw, to add to what I just said (at 9.55AM), is not learning Linux vs. nothing: then I may try it.

It's learning Linux vs. learning Lisp, or Cocoa, or Sociology, or Philosphy, or reading a new novel, or improving my cooking, or doing some more sport, or educate myself on politics, etc...

If one day I'll _need_ Linux then it's ok, but as long as Linux does just the same, and requires lots of time spent learning it or just maintaining it... I am sorry, but it's a losing proposition.

Anonymous said...

Btw, Julian67, this sentence is gold: "Or I could spend some time getting to grips with powershell.". I love the irony in this sentence from someone who is arguing that the rest of the world should spend time to learn Linux... and yet they don't want to "spend some time getting to grips with powersheel". Lol: fantastic!

What's actually funnier if that if people spent tenth of time they're gonna waste switching on learning how to use Windows even at a basic level instead, they'd find all the reasons for switching would be gone.

Robin said...

hilarious as always :) well i was determined switcher once. returned to xp sp2 after six months. it's really exactly as you wrote; i felt like i'm trying to run through the mud. trying, and it's going but slowly and with zero efficiency. posting bugs is fun the first time, but later it becomes just frustration. and that tons of tutorials around the web how to do this or that using terminal and typing sudo this and sudo that.... well now in 2008 typing commands and compiling lossless decompressor in the terminal is just silly. that's why i loose my determination and returned back even i was determined.

.net jerkface said...


linux was created for high-performance servers, scientific computation, and by technical curious people to technical curious people, and that's it


Linux was created by Linus Torvalds because Stallman and the gnu gang couldn't get the hurd working. There was never a goal of making it geared for high-end. That is part of the problem with Linux, it tries to be all things to all people. They should have done a server/client kernel split a long time ago.

It is a myth in fact that Linux is a high-performance server OS. It is more of an acceptable OS that is good for supercomputing since it is free and can be slapped onto an x86 box.

A Windows 2008 server will actually smoke a Cent server when it comes to web serving, even though win server has all the same win32 'bloat' that vista has. Watch as Linux loses even more web server share with ws2008 x64 web edition being only $400.

Anonymous said...

I was not talking about web servers, although linux is still dominant in that area, we are discussing over a linux server right now :), go to top500.org and show me a windows box, windows is just not tunable enough for that use.

Anonymous said...

*I know there are some Windows HPC down in the list if you search enough, before you jump to bit my throat :).

Anonymous said...

For most people, switching to Linux is neither a) or b). You have to learn a bunch of new stuff to do the same old shit

This makes me wonder why OpenOffice programs doesn´t have the same shortcut keys of MS Office ones. It could help the transition to OpenOffice but its developers doesnt seem to like make things easier. BTW, their mantra has always been "the harder the better".

julian67 said...

"It is highly debatable whether most of the users in the world really need a multiuser system. "

That's a remarkably odd thing to say. The internet is the ultimate network. If being seamlessly connected to and accessible by almost any person, trusted or untrusted, doesn't prompt you to think about multi-user systems broadly and specifically it must be because you're a Windows 98 developer, right?

Anyway While you're still debating that.... Microsoft has finally relented and decided they do, after all, thinks it's necessary and Vista supports sudo-like privilege escalation and attemps to do sane things like not let unprivileged users/processes own the entire system.

If MS had done this back in 2001 for XP we'd probably be enjoying a www without 99% of the malware, spam and general noise. Unfortunately they didn't really believe in the internet, the ultimate network and multi-user environment, and accordingly released an OS not designed to cope with it. Result: boom times for Symantec, MaCaffee (spelling?), and every malware writer and script kiddy ever.

btw the fact that you can switch user doesn't make an OS multi-user. How many users can be logged on and working simultaneously on XP Home? I believe it's two, the logged in user and a remote desktop user. Please correct me if this is wrong, it's a long time since I used XP Home. How many simultaneous users does XP Pro support?

"The reason people don't switch to Linux is actually in his other blog post:

http://linux-weekly.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-to-install-skype-20-in-ubuntu-804.html
1. Install the needed dependencies
Type in a terminal application and provide your user's password:

sudo apt-get install libasound2 libc6 libgcc1 libqt4-core libqt4-gui libsigc++-2.0-0c2a libstdc++6 libx11-6
"


That's odd as well. This guy seems to like to do things the hard way.

A better way is adding the skype debian repository and installing it with synaptic. No scary command line stuff required, just a copy and paste of the repo details into synaptic, reload and click click it's done.

"The example Julian67 gave are also not very appropriate: I do not doubt that on a multi-user computer, maybe on some network, Linux could make sense. But for home, as a desktop replacement, for my own computer (one user)... they don't really apply.

And I don't see the point in using any other format than AAC either, unless they give me better quality, without taking anything away (including their use on portable music players). And I don't mean just a little bit better quality, but a LOT more quality. (many people thing on similar lines for DVD vs. Blu-Ray).

Btw, Julian67, this sentence is gold: "Or I could spend some time getting to grips with powershell.". I love the irony in this sentence from someone who is arguing that the rest of the world should spend time to learn Linux... and yet they don't want to "spend some time getting to grips with powersheel". Lol: fantastic! "


If you're using OS X you're already enjoying the benefits from a multi-user system, even if you didn't notice. Really ;-) It's one of the reasons Macs are more reliable and more secure than a certain other American OS.

AAC obviously sounds fine. But the world of IT is full of once popular formats which are now useless, the same for architectures and Operating Systems. If you want to be really confident of your music being accessible in 10 years time it's better to archive it in a format that's portable and unencumbered by patents. Just in practical terms the iPod is very popular and AAC sounds nice, but if your friend's portable doesn't support AAC you can't share your sounds. If your AAC tracks are DRM'd you can enjoy the possibility of losing all rights to hear them after upgrading hardware or changing OS. Search for "yahoo music drm" to read about the benefits of DRM. As to quality, well unless you choose a really bad old encoder the audio quality has more to do with the settings you choose than the output format. Any of Ogg, AAC, Lame MP3 lossy formats will give indistinguishable results with fairly similar filesizes. This can vary if you aim for small filesizes at some quality cost, or aim for ultimate quality and hang the filesize.

Powershell: first it's not built in, it's bolt on.

Secondly it's actually pretty complex. It's designed for sysadmins not regular users. You can get by in bash with just a few commands, you don't need to know a language or anything about writing scripts. You're limited at this level but you can still do a surprising amount.

But powershell has a much higher barrier, it's not something you can just blunder into and expect to achive anything. With bash you could sit down with a list of 10 commands and with a few minutes trial and error actually start doing stuff. With powershell you really have to to sit down and study it and be comfortable with scripting. I did also point out that if you use Konqueror you can have a huge amount of these powerful tools presented to you in a nice gui.

This isn't a criticism of powershell, I'm just pointing out why your finding my remarks hilarious is only hilarious if you didn't try the things for yourself and see the very substantial differences.

.net jerkface said...


go to top500.org and show me a windows box, windows is just not tunable enough for that use.


I found 5.

http://www.top500.org/stats/list/31/osfam

LOL thanks for the link though, very interesting.

Anonymous said...

LOL thanks for the link though, very interesting.

Np, supercomputing is a fascinating field :)

.net jerkface said...


How many simultaneous users does XP Pro support?


10, but the limit is artificial.

Remember that xp is basically win2000 which is mulit-user.

However xp has had some multi-user limitations when compared to linux, many of which have been addressed in vista.

So you guys are kind of both right and wrong.

Anonymous said...

Julian67: I'll be brief about the AAC discussion in order not to go OT. I leave you the last word if you want but this will be it on the topic for me for now.

Yes, having a future-proof format is great, I agree. AAC seems pretty alright given how many people seem to allow you to use it at the moment. And looking at MP3 the patents problem is not so big.

DRM are a whole different beast, and have absolutely nothing to do with Linux, or AAC. It deserves its own discussion, but don't assume that I automatically meant AAC+DRM. I was referring to AAC as in the format iTunes rips your CDs in, and that it's pretty broadly implemented.

On Powershell I take your word for it: yes, I have not used it (though I do use bash from time to time for my job) but if you say it's in a whole different league (in terms of learning curve) then I take your word.

Btw, it's true that Top500 is full of Linux computers. But that's like comparing Formula1 cars with city cars: they are totally different needs, plus the driver has a whole team of engineer expert for himself (just like there's a team of IT experts for each Top500 computer).

Still, Linux on the desktop, has absolutely nothing to do with this.

julian67 said...

"And looking at MP3 the patents problem is not so big."

Actually the chickens are coming home to roost after all these years. The dangers associated with MP3 patents and recent changes to EU and US laws regarding software patents have opened up a huge huge can of worms.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/07/patent_crackdown_at_cebit/

"German police raided 51 booths at the CeBIT computing show this week because of breaches of audio compression (MP3) patents. According to senior prosecutor Hans-Jurgen Lendeckel, several mobile phones, screens, sat navs and MP3 devices were seized....."

It's quite an amazing turn of events, especially when you consider that ownership of some of the patents concerning MP3 is still disputed.

Just last year Microsoft were sued to the tune of US$1.5 billion , see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6388273.stm, because they've been shipping their OSs with MP3 support. I believe they got that judgement reversed on appeal but it's a good illustration of the pleasures and benefits of software patents particularly when the ownership of the patent isn't even definitely known.

What it means to you and me as consumers is another $5 on the price of an MP3 capable player, or simply less and less choice as manufacturers/exporters drop out of markets whose punitive legislation threatens their ability to trade without jeopardising their existence.

If AAC becomes as pervasive as MP3 we can expect more of the same. Apple are well known for fiercely protecting their trademarks, patents and copyrights.

The other result is that the Chinese discovered Ogg Vorbis :-) You can pick up almost any no name music player and it won't say so on the packaging, on the player or in the manual but chances are it supports Ogg Vorbis. Same with products with embedded audio devices, these are usually now using patent free formats.

Anonymous said...

Hello. I know this is old, but I only recently found out that Pidgin IM has been forked because of disagreements between its developers and users.

As if reading about the developers' attitude wasn't enough, I stumbled upon this:

http://weblog.obso1337.org/2008/four-words-for-funpidgin/

Anonymous said...

@billgatespenis – Sep 13 11:36PM
“…half the bloat of Ubuntu and none of bullshit I had to tolerate in Winblows..”

What exactly is this “bullshit” that you have to put up with in Windows? I mean, Windows has its flaws like any other OS but I rarely encounter anything I’d call bullshit. BSODs are rare unless you spend your time dicking around with your system. There’s a lot of whining about all the bullshit from Windows, but there’s nothing specific ever mentioned. The fact that Microsoft has a monopoly share of the OS market and you don’t like that doesn’t mean that there’s ANYTHING wrong with Windows. We can’t always get what we want. That’s not just being unfair…that’s life. Shut the fuck up and deal with it.

jc-denton said...

of course determination and not that stuff like flash, which used to work fine with older Ubuntu versions suddenly doesn't rellay work anymore..

julian67 said...

'“…half the bloat of Ubuntu and none of bullshit I had to tolerate in Winblows..”

What exactly is this “bullshit” that you have to put up with in Windows? "


How about anti-spyware, anti-virus, applications which won't run without admin rights, applications which will run but can't save settings without admin rights, having the default Windows Media Player assign itself as the default handler for all multimedia files unless the user has admin rights and can select them (regular user can't do this), error messages with all the human readability of a cypher, WGA authentication not once but repeatedly, EULAs like those for iTunes and WMP which assign rights to delete your content to a 3rd party, system configuration via non-human readable registry keys (try reassigning the default bitmap image editor if you want some entertainment), unwanted hibernations/suspends because the OS doesn't understand an application is running, background automatic updates rebooting the system with no warning even though you're using it, not being allowed to transfer the OS to upgraded or new hardware, having a run as facility that barely works and often doesn't work at all, having a file indexing and search tool that works as crudely and slowly as a non indexing search tool, having no configurable window management and no virtual desktops, having a multitude of 3rd party applications using different toolkits, different layout schemes, different default behaviours/keyboard shortcuts, having windows wireless tool repeatedly try to connect and give me an error even though I've switched the damn wireless off at the kill switch...

Is that enough bullshit? It was enough for me.

Anonymous said...

That's a remarkably odd thing to say. The internet is the ultimate network.

Julian, your total ignorance of OS design and usage is staggering. Surely you must know there's a difference between a multiuser OS and a networked OS.

Why do you bother?

ghost of tom watson said...

unwanted hibernations/suspends because the OS doesn't understand an application is running,

Oh, come now. Let's be a little realistic, julian.

background automatic updates rebooting the system with no warning even though you're using it

On Windows? Now you're just making shit up, Julian. XP and Vista don't install background automatic updates until shutdown.

having the default Windows Media Player assign itself as the default handler for all multimedia files unless the user has admin rights and can select them (regular user can't do this),

Wrong.

having windows wireless tool repeatedly try to connect and give me an error even though I've switched the damn wireless off at the kill switch...

You mean that little popup dialogue in the corner right THAT GOES AWAY BY ITSELF? You use that as an example of why using Windows is a HASSLE?

Your lack of knowledge is simply staggering, mate. Good for entertainment, but not for accurate information. We knew you didn't know shit about Linux; now we know you don't know shit about Windows.

tuomov said...

"""
Those efforts have destroyed Linux for the power user

¿?¿?¿?¿

I use ubuntu, considered one of the most user-friendly distros, I have my friendly desktop that all my friends know how to use in case they come visiting and want to check facebook or msn. And at one click distance I have the console, with gcc, vim and diff and everything linux has always had, at other one click distance I have the eclipse IDE. Don't know what you are talking about.
"""

If you really want to know, read the articles referred to in the following spam:

The idiot box Linux

State of fonts review

The downfall of X

Udev sucks

Our size fits all: The ethos of the Gui No One Might Enjoy

Among many others...

Anonymous said...

the author is an uninformed moron and probably a hillbilly to boot!

Marcus said...

"No, there is no command to give you your life back"


Hahahahaha... ROFL! :)

julian67 said...

"Oh, come now. Let's be a little realistic, julian. "

If your approach is simply to disbelive anything that you don't feel comfortable with why bother?

True example: I use XP Pro SP3 (Asus OEM). My favourite old skool scrolling shooter is Warblade http://www.warblade.as/index.asp If I play it on battery power the fucking computer suspends at minute x. I have to set the suspend on battery time to never.

"XP and Vista don't install background automatic updates until shutdown."

That's true for Vista but try to remember I was replying to a post about XP.

XP is still happy to download, install updates and reboot, all automatically and fuck the logged in user. It did it to me last month.

Wrong.

Actually right ;-) If you have an pre-installed system someone did the initial setup for you. My Asus XP Pro OEM pre-install is pretty much bare bones by default, it requires the user to actually set the OS up in the same way as from an install from a retail XP CD. You have to set up WMP for each user using admin or power user rights and then reset the accounts to restricted, otherwise the first use of WMP by each user defaults all media files back to being handled by WMP for that user. This is normal XP behaviour that most users don't see because most people buy pre-installed and pre-configured. I've installed more XP computers than I can count or remember, it's boring and tedious but at least offers some insight into the large amount of work/added value you get from an OEM. They really save Microsoft's ass because if regular users had to do the install and set up themselves most would drop XP after the first hideous experience.

Vista is a huge huge improvement in this respect. It's the first MS OS with a fighting chance of actually detecting hardware, installing appropriate drivers and basically working ootb. Mostly.

THAT GOES AWAY BY ITSELF

The point being that it doesn't. First the tool should be aware of the kill switch status and simply not bother trying, secondly (if that's too much to ask) it should just try once and stfu. I mean how fucking lame is it that it can't tell the kill switch status?

It also has the crap feature that after resuming from suspend or hibernate wireless networking doesn't resume, it has to be manually prompted to rescan for available networks. Reminder: XP, not Vista.

ghost of some asswipe your firm conviction that a pre-installed OEM XP is the same as a default XP install is getting very boring.

"Surely you must know there's a difference between a multiuser OS and a networked OS. "

I know that but apparently you don't and nor did Billy G when he unleashed 95,98,ME and XP. (Ok he did know but he didn't give a shit because us suckers were going to buy it anyway).

Do you really want to use a single-user OS on a global network (the www)? An OS where the single user is god? Hook your Win 95/98/ME machine up to your cable modem, (use any crappy software firewall you think is best). Wait 5 minutes. Oh fuck it got raped. Try the same thing with XP running as admin. It still gets raped but you're too dumb to notice because it stays vaguely usable a little longer.

Do you think there's a demand out there for a multi-user OS that can't network?

Do you actually think anyone out there is looking for a desktop/laptop/server which isn't multi-user and doesn't connect to other machines?

Anonymous said...

As a conclusion, I think there's no big chance for a person to switch, unless he truly wants it. Windows users need either good determination for switching, or eventually help from someone who has already been there and knows how to make a convert for the wonderful world of Linux.

I love how it's always, in some way, shape or form the user's fault. Here's it's the user's fault because they "lack the determination". How's about not just a reason to switch, but a GOOD reason to switch? Open source and freedom to modify code I have no interest in modifying don't qualify as good reasons.

Give users the incentive to switch platforms, and they will.

I come from the reverse perspective, after using Linux for years and years and years (starting with Manrape^H^H^HMandrake 4, Debian, then slackware, Gentoo, LFS, Ubuntu, Arch), I finally decided to give NT-based Windows (XP in this case) a try, about a year or two ago. I had to relearn a lot of things, had to learn how to do things differently, had to get used to using backslashes, case-insensitivity, all kinds of things. Ultimately, however, although I'm less productive in terms of development, I'm orders of magnitude more productive in everything else.

There were real world incentives to make the switch, for one, the world uses Windows, OOo blows goats and I was tired of using a 5 year old copy of WordPerfect. It gave me native access to my beloved Photoshop, Corel Draw and painter. Opened the door to a wealth of multimedia production applications, access to 3D modellers that don't suck, my tablet was behaving properly, my external soundcard works properly, midi instruments aren't a pain in the ass to use, the video drivers don't suck, things don't randomly break between updates, I don't have to fiddle with shit just to get it to work properly, etc. And I can get the best of both worlds, too. if I dig deep enough I can tweak the OS and the UI to my heart's content. Powershell gives me a powerful, bash-like (syntactically) Object-Oriented (unlike bash) command shell, I could even run my beloved CSH if I wanted to, via SFU (which I have little use for anymore, having gotten, for the most part, used to how Windows does things).

The incentives were there, the process, although painful at first, were well worth the effort. "determination" had little to do with it, it was more about the rewards of vastly increased productivity. I still prefer my Macs overall, though, but the sheer third party application support on Windows balances that out.

So yeah, gives users the incentive to switch, make them more productive, instead of trying to force-feed them rhetoric or trying to wow them with 3D cubes that'll only end up being needlessly distracting once the novelty value wanes (and it will, quickly), and they'll switch.

ghost of tom watson said...

XP is still happy to download, install updates and reboot, all automatically and fuck the logged in user. It did it to me last month.

Then you've misconfigured something. The default is to do it upon reboot.

ghost of tom watson said...

It also has the crap feature that after resuming from suspend or hibernate wireless networking doesn't resume, it has to be manually prompted to rescan for available networks. Reminder: XP, not Vista.

Wrong again, Julian. XP autoresumes networking after hibernation or suspension. Unless someone like you has been mucking with the settings, which apparently you've been doing by your own admission. You may want to review what the defaults truly are before slamming the OS.

ghost of tom watson said...

ghost of some asswipe your firm conviction that a pre-installed OEM XP is the same as a default XP install is getting very boring.

Hate to say it, mate, but you're the one on the wrong side of that assumption. You're assuming your asus installation is normal and the default; I'm using a non-OEMed nonbranded XP directly from Microsoft. I can see why you're confused, but it does explain why you're so wrong about what truly is the default.

And you could have admitted that without being so insulting; people here tend to treat you much more politely than you treat them.

ghost of tom watson said...

Wait 5 minutes. Oh fuck it got raped.

Myth. C'mon, julian; you can do better than repeat the luser canards.

ghost of tom watson said...

Do you actually think anyone out there is looking for a desktop/laptop/server which isn't multi-user and doesn't connect to other machines?

Poor Julian. He's so ignorant about OSes that he doesn't understand DESKTOPS and SERVERS do two different things. Guess what, mate; I expect my server to do something different than my desktop.

Mate.

My Real Name is Steve said...

@Gutless Anonymous Fucktard..

"What exactly is this “bullshit” that you have to put up with in Windows? I mean, Windows has its flaws like any other OS but I rarely encounter anything I’d call bullshit.

Are you stupid or actually retarded?

BSODs are rare unless you spend your time dicking around with your system. There’s a lot of whining about all the bullshit from Windows, but there’s nothing specific ever mentioned.

See below

The fact that Microsoft has a monopoly share of the OS market and you don’t like that doesn’t mean that there’s ANYTHING wrong with Windows.

I agree, but Windows sucks for many other reasons. I couldn't give a fuck who has market share, but then how can something that is FREE have a MARKET share?

We can’t always get what we want. That’s not just being unfair…that’s life. Shut the fuck up and deal with it."

Well I feel sorry for you. I have managed to get what I want for minimal cost with maximum usability. If you're still using windows but aren't satisfied with it then more fool you. Shut the fuck up and deal with it cocksmoker.

One example of the bullshit is the constant decay of the state of many windows installs. Then I backup and reinstall and get "sorry you'll have to ring microsoft to get a new cd key" WTF!!? Didn't I *pay* for this OS? "Actually sir you are only *leasing it*" WHAT THE FUCK? Fuck Microwank, I want an OS that lets me install it as many fucking times as I like after I have handed over my fucking hard earned money for it...then there's the continual defraging, anti-whatever software, ms nagware, IE is not even compliant with web standards not to mention how fucking slow it is, Outlook sucks a donkey cock (nah it's actually quite good ;o )

The internet is 2-3x faster on Debian than it ever is on Windows. My ISP states that my connection = 2Mbps = 427kB/sec yet I download something on windows and the max speed I get is 200kB/s IF I'M FUCKING LUCKY...go to the same site on Debian and I get *sustained* speeds of 600+kB/sec with *wireless* internet, and even higher speeds with a wired connection. What the fuck is up with that? Windows likes being slow? What a crock of shite.

Not to mention the piss-poor desktop graphics...compiz-fusion shits all over anything that MS or Apple put out without shitting all over your system...I can just imagine ms trying to imitate compiz, botched code, BSOD, targeted shitware etc etc.

Linux (Debian4.0 in my case) is not perfect but it's pretty fucking good for something that cost me a fraction of my internet cap and time and that I can fuck with relentlessly without losing my mind over code or files I cannot access. I mean I had to do some actual typing into that *bizarre* terminal window to get my wireless drivers working but after having worked up a sweat and got it all working I realised *that's why my computer has a fucking keyboard* - it's not just for abusing retarded windows users on the web.

That reminds me of more windows gayness. Do a new install and try and view your C:\ drive and you get some fucking gay warning "You should not modify the contents of this blah blah wank fuckin bullshit". I mean who is windows for? People who have trouble using cellphone menus? Fair enough, but I'm not one of those people and while people like me make up the minority (like people in the 15th century who knew the world was round) we will never go away, nor will we ever be happy using MS shitware.

Anonymous said...

^Just when I thought the lusers who post on this blog couldn't get any more stupid, a new champion emerges.

LeeDB said...

I'm a longtime Windows user who tried Linux a year ago. Hate to break the news, but I was impressed enough that I built a 2nd machine so that I could have both a Windows box and a Linux box. BTW, I didn't do any research to find Linux friendly hardware. I just bought stuff on sale and put a machine together, and Ubuntu, Mandriva, openSUSE, and VectorLinux all worked great on it including the wireless USB dongle. I settled on Mandriva after trying out the others.

Curiosly enough, I had replaced the wireless USB dongle with a PCI card on the windows box because I could never get more than about 1.5 mbps download speed on my 5mbps FIOS service. Even the PCI card only gets about 2.8mbps on DSL reports, but at least it is an improvement. I stuck the USB dongle on the Linux box, and wow, over 4 mbps on DSLreports. I tried the PCI card in the Linux box - 4.9mbps instead of 2.8mbps on Windows. Then I tried openSUSE 10.3 on my Dell D620 laptop - 4.9mbps (only 2.9mbps with the genuine Intel pro-wireless driver in Windows). So Linux is so terrible in wireless - gee at least when it does support the hardware, it does it right. Oh and speaking of hardware, out of 2 PCI cards, 1 PCMCIA card, 1 USB dongle, and 1 integrated intel wireless chip, all work fine (actually better) in Linux except for the cheapest Airlink PCI card, which only does about 1mbps in Windows, anyway.

Am I "switching" to Linux from Windows - no. Do I hate either one - no. Do I scoff sometimes at Microsoft - yes. After all, they saddled us with Win95/98/ME for years before they finally resorted to the NT based stuff. That still didn't prevent blaster and nachi worms from ravaging corporate and personal systems alike. Would Linux be any better against worms, etc. if it was more popular? I don't care - I never gave Linux developers any money. When people and their employers spend spend spend on Microsoft, they expect better. Mac sales are way up - I wonder why. For those that like to knock open source, the wampserver package works great on WinXP - no limited MS IIS webserver required. Open source has made my windows box better.

Do I hate closed source - no. Why should I? If someone wants to put out a good closed source product, I might buy it if I like it, and that should be everyone's right. Do I need extra "determination" to keep my Linux box - heck no. It's been fun playing with a different OS. It's been fun trying out different Linux distributions.

Do some things about Linux annoy me - absolutely. Many have been brought up in this forum. Are they really reasons to hate it? Sounds silly to me. Both Linux and Windows have their strengths and weaknesses. Having a machine on each is the best of both worlds, and all the haters on both sides don't know what they are missing.

And let's face it, Windows has been fairly easy to obtain for free over the years, so a lot of you who like to blast the so-called Free-tards are really Windows free-tards. Linux doesn't give you the same (I got something for nothing) satisfaction like your pirated copy of windows does.

julian67 said...

"Then you've misconfigured something"

"Something" huh? We're seeing you dig deep and come up with some real gems of knowledge here. Awesome!

The extent of my "configuration" has been to enter the key when prompted the first time I connected.

"XP autoresumes networking after hibernation or suspension"

Hmm, works-for-you? And every wireless driver is the same is it?

"mucking with the settings, which apparently you've been doing by your own admission"

Hmm, mucking about huh? More wisdom from our favourite MCSE.

Please less of the jargon and techno babble!

Changing the suspend threshold from x minutes to never via the gui designed explicitly to allow this is "mucking about"? A nefarious activity, shameful enough that a person might have to "admit" to it?

You dope (was going to call you a dumb cunt but I'm trying to swear less because I've realised you're probably a child).

"nonbranded XP directly from Microsoft"

Directly from Microsoft? Really? Did you wander into the front office at Redmond and buy it from Bill's PA or was it from one of the famous Microsoft shops, the ones we see on every high street? Let me guess, it's XP Home PirateBay XtraTrojan edition?

"you can do better than repeat the luser canards. "

Try it and you'll see. Any version of Windows before XP SP2. It'll be down within 5 minutes. If you have an XP install CD from before SP2 try doing an install while connected. The OS will be taken down within seconds of the network drivers being installed. You won't even make it to the welcome tour. No shit. That's the full power of a single user user-is-admin system in a networked world.

"He's so ignorant about OSes that he doesn't understand DESKTOPS and SERVERS do two different things. Guess what, mate; I expect my server to do something different than my desktop"

You're not entirely sure what you're talking about are you?

Two different things?

You're sure about that?

You counted and checked on both paws did you?

Here's the big news: if you run bittorrent or emule or soulseek or skype or BBC iPlayer or use Windows ICS or allow remote desktop connections into your machine, or any of numerous other applications and services you're using your desktop as a server.

OMFG!

Anonymous said...

Try it and you'll see. Any version of Windows before XP SP2.

Lol. So your complaints are 4 years old. Having in mind Linux distributions are shit NOW, perhaps you might want to remember how they were four years ago. I know, I know, freetards are always willing to nitpick about Windows, yet they struggle with determination to make their Linux crap half-work.

julian67 said...

"Lol. So your complaints are 4 years old"

No that wasn't what it was about at all.

You're a fucking idiot who entirely missed the point.

It was about the merits or otherwise of single-user (user=admin) systems. The same applies to anyone who runs today's XP as admin, or Vista as admin with UAC disabled, or OS X or any GNU/Linux OS as root user.

There are people posting here who have failed to notice that the existence of botnets of hundreds of thousands of compromised PCs (all of which run a Microsoft OS) is entirely due to 98 being a single user system and XP shipping by default set up to work the same stupid way. But they, like you, are so dumb they think a multi-user system with privilege restrictions and access controls is a waste of time.

These hopeless retards call themselves power users and think they're ahead of the game because they disable UAC and run as admin and guarantee the www will remain the same fucked up environment for years to come.

Awesome! Lol! OMFG! ROFL! 4Q! See you next tuesday!

julian67 said...

"My Real Name is Steve said............I realised *that's why my computer has a fucking keyboard* - it's not just for abusing retarded windows users on the web."

Second comment that made me laugh today. And I learned something too :-)

So my left hand can be used for typing? Not just scratching my arse and pointing? Revolutionary! If this catches on we might see the whole course of human evolution change, we will retain left arms after all. Which is good news cos it would be no fun trying to wank and use a mouse at the same time.

.net jerkface said...


My ISP states that my connection = 2Mbps = 427kB/sec yet I download something on windows and the max speed I get is 200kB/s IF I'M FUCKING LUCKY...go to the same site on Debian and I get *sustained* speeds of 600+kB/sec with *wireless* internet, and even higher speeds with a wired connection. What the fuck is up with that? Windows likes being slow?


Lol yes the problem must be that Windows can't handle a 2mbps tcp/ip connection. Microsoft is working hard on that one.

Anyways 2megabits = 256kilobytes

Anonymous said...

You're a fucking idiot who entirely missed the point.

The point is, freetard, you have no point.


It was about the merits or otherwise of single-user (user=admin) systems.


The fact that users run their systes with elevated priviledges does not make them single-user systems. Go find a fucking clue, freetard.

Das Irie said...

Wow, another pointless pissing match brought on by another link to another vapid Linux cheerleader blog.

LinuxHater: you are indeed the puppet master. A deft twitch of the rope, and they dance away for your amusement for days.

But the show is ever so dull. It becomes tedious, watching the same cock-measuring contest evolve day by day.

I read the comments, because there is the occasional gem amoungst the tailings. The rest is the sound of the dead horse being beaten (off).

julian67 said...

"he fact that users run their systes with elevated priviledges does not make them single-user systems"

In effect it does.The results are identical, insecure systems owned en masse.

C
U
Next
Time

ghost of tom watson said...

Try it and you'll see. Any version of Windows before XP SP2.

p0wned, mate. You lose.

julian67 said...

"p0wned, mate. You lose."

I realise you're going to have trouble understanding this, but constantly repeating "p0wned, mate. You lose." doesn't in fact make a terribly convincing case for anything except the remarkably barren state of your mind and your obvious ability to learn one or two phrases and repeat them ad infinitum.

Your combining mind numbing conceit with colossal stupidity doesn't make your "argument" even a little bit more convincing.

Perhaps try again.

If you say something like

"p0wned, mate. You lose. PERIOD."

you'll still be dumb cunt but you'll gain the admiration of your American equivalents.

Barking dogs offers more variety and meaning.

ghost of tom watson said...

but constantly repeating "p0wned, mate. You lose." doesn't in fact make a terribly convincing case

Don't need to when you say something so obviously stupid everyone here knows you're wrong. Why add to the noise you already generated?

p0wned, mate.

Anonymous said...

Directly from Microsoft? Really? Did you wander into the front office at Redmond and buy it from Bill's PA or was it from one of the famous Microsoft shops, the ones we see on every high street?

You do realize there's a boxed edition of XP, right, Julian? The kind the likes of Best Buy and Micro Center and Fry's carry on their shelves? (Or, rather, carried?)

Lord, just when one thinks you couldn't be dumber, you hit a new low. Bravo, penguinboy!

thecodewitch said...

The people who are the most vocal linux haters are often the ones that after having used it for a long time, possibly several years, realised that there is no benefit at all to using it, that it is in the end a drain on your time and energy, and an overall disappointing loss.

Given the choice of dealing with a community of shrieking, self righteous "Julian67"s, or a no-fuss OS and software that does its job and is ubiquitous, and doesn't pretend to be any sort of activist "movement", I finally chose to pack it in with linux, even though the system I had was reasonably functional.

It was such a relief getting it off my machine, and being able to focus on what it is I wanted to do, rather than the details of the running of the OS.

That said, there is nothing inherently bad about linux. There as some excellent tools and ideas in there, eg, Perl. Also, its mere existence has been a thorn in the side of MS, encouraging it to do things like release express editions of its visual studio suite, and its XNA thing, to ensure programmers stick with and grow up with Windows. Since those things don't suck, I applaud MS for this, even though you could argue that its the same tactic employed by tobacco companies. However, in this insane world of pre-emptive genocidal wars and the soon to be elected WWIII starting Sarah Palin, who the hell cares anyway.

Getting back to the topic, despite these positive things about linux, after 15 consecutive "years of the linux desktop" its time to pack it in as far as I'm concerned, or at least go in another direction.

If linux narrowed its focus to catering just for developers and not trying to be a consumer desktop OS, I think it would do a lot better. As it stands, it isn't good for the general public, and it isn't good for programmers.

Anonymous said...

For self install, absolutely. It can be hard. Of course, the same is true of Windows (ala very very profitable Geek Squad steady revenue from an easy to use OS). The argument falls flat on it's face for Linux OEMed PCs from Dell, HP, the wildly popular and easy to use UMPC lines. So, on the one hand, keep comparing non OEMed Linux to the crapware laden (no fault of Microsoft, the OEMs are to blame here) OEMed Windows version.

Once a tier one offers Linux as a mainstream choice, OEMed so that all the "determination" is not needed (amazing how OEMed means it all just works huh?) right alongside Windows on most/all of their product line (the day is coming folks, especially if Windows 7 is not truly great), we'll see what it really takes for Mr and Mrs Joe Average to use a Linux computer. My experience, once I OEM it for them, it's truly easy (and has the perk of just working without Geek squad to the rescue over and over again).

A very happy luser of 11 years now.

julian67 said...

"You do realize there's a boxed edition of XP, right, Julian?"

Yup, having bought boxed editions of 98SE and XP for myself and various editions for customers I'm fully aware of boxed editions and that they don't come "direct from Microsoft".

The doofus who thinks he got his direct from Microsoft is not hugely credible.

As far as I can tell from doing a lot of repairs, upgrades, reinstalls and builds the licensed versions are in the minority. Most XP installs seem to derive from a copy of an original CD or a downloaded iso and the usual trojaned keygen. Another huge subset is counterfeited software (i.e. you thought it was genuine but it isn't).

Fact is while all you lot are bitching about freetards this and freetards that you're also mostly so fucking cheap that you run ripped off unlicensed operating systems populated with ripped off unlicensed applications. Hypocrisy rules, usually by means of keyloggers and irc bots :-) (often silently installed along with the OS).

I see codewitch is now claiming Windows is a no fuss OS. Hello fantasy land.

It's interesting to see someone with the sense to realise that people like Sarah Palin are dangerous (imo because they serve the interests of supra-national big business and the military/military contractors instead of the people who elect them, but maybe codewitch has a different view) and not make the connections. If those corporate interests weren't being challenged, if people didn't take the shit and do the work to undermine those interests and offer alternatives we'd likely now have no choice at all. OS X would never have existed because the BSDs would have been quietly killed off in the courtroom and MS would be 100% in control of our computers. There wouldn't be a Google or equivalent because the costs of proprietary software at monopoly pricing combined with undue influence over hardware partners' pricing and ability/willingness to supply would be the primary tool in killing any competitive threat. Perhaps this doesn't seem too serious until you think about the way personal computers (and other types) have become the hub of large parts of our lives. They're our interface to our businesses, banks, shops, governments, families, friends, social groups, colleagues, political groups etc. How confident would you feel casting your vote via an electronic/digital voting machine owned and operated by a politically partisan organisation that uses its huge wealth to buy political influence and smother opposition/competition? How much privacy do you have when the government, the hardware manufacturers, the software vendors, the ISPs all view themselves as rightful collaborators and surveyors of everything you write, read, spend, watch? They implement trusted computing not to protect you but because they don't trust you.

I don't seem to suffer all these terrible inconveniences using Debian that people keep telling me I must be experiencing. There are some, but it's still a smoother ride than running Windows. But even if I did have serious difficulties I'd not be thinking about buying another MS system or even OS X. If Linux based OS was really as bad as people say I'd move to BSD and suffer a little inconvenience.

If you think I'm being paranoid that's OK but I've worked for government departments, a police force and one of the world's bigger telcos. If anyone believes these people don't have an unlimited and unquenchable thirst for your personal, professional and financial information, combined with a determination to bypass/ignore/flout any inconvenient legal restrictions they're unfortunately mistaken. I think the modern homily is "you're not searching google, google is searching you" which is trite and annoying while being completely true.

Anonymous said...

@julian67

I love how you selectively respond to comments, and only disregard those which point out how completely fucking stupid you are. Keep camping it up while sucking your uncle's bollocks. Freetard.

julian67 said...

"@julian67

I love how you selectively respond to comments, and only disregard those which point out how completely fucking stupid you are."


Thanks for the supporitng examples....or are you selectively responding and disregarding those instances which show how completely fucking stupid you are? But anyway, glad I could generate some love :-)

Keep camping it up while sucking your uncle's bollocks. Freetard.


It sounds like your family life is rather different from mine. I guess you save on floss?

Bye bye shiteater :-)

thecodewitch said...

Julian67:

It's interesting to see someone with the sense to realise that people like Sarah Palin are dangerous (imo because they serve the interests of supra-national big business and the military/military contractors instead of the people who elect them, but maybe codewitch has a different view) and not make the connections. If those corporate interests weren't being challenged, if people didn't take the shit and do the work to undermine those interests and offer alternatives we'd likely now have no choice at all.


I used to think linux will save the world too.

Then I grew up and realised its just an OS, just a tool, not a political movement. If the tool is faulty or annoying to use, and every computer you buy comes prepacked with a tool that isn't as annoying, I might as well stick with the tool the computer comes with.

Then you say this:

How confident would you feel casting your vote via an electronic/digital voting machine owned and operated by a politically partisan organisation that uses its huge wealth to buy political influence and smother opposition/competition? + other stuff about privacy

How has the existence of linux changed this? The only people who notice or care about the electronic voting fraud are the same people who would have noticed or cared even if linux had never existed. Ordinary people don't know, don't want to know, or are too busy paying off their mortgages to give a shit.

Linux is just an OS. If its not better than Windows, then people won't use it, even if its free. No amount of freedom talk will change this. And saying your specialised, tuned nerd machine is better than windows != Linux being better than windows for other people.

My opinion is, make linux more attractive to programmers and ISVs, and it might start to make some progress.

Anonymous said...

//Fact is while all you lot are bitching about freetards this and freetards that you're also mostly so fucking cheap that you run ripped off unlicensed operating systems populated with ripped off unlicensed applications.//

Ummm ... except that the "ripped off" copies of any Windows OS are the ones that usually have shitloads of problems -- and most Windows users posting here don't have those problems. Fail.

julian67 said...

"Then I grew up and realised its just an OS, just a tool, not a political movement"

Well GNU/Linux is just an OS, but it is part of a much broader movement. GNU by definition has a political aspect because it's about the power and rights of the individual (or company/collective/community). When you see something like the ongoing decline of the traditional vinyl/CD music market and the appearance of the Creative Commons licences, software patents, extension and expansion of copyrights it's very obvious that technology is having a huge impact and laws and conventions struggle to keep up. Creative Commons is a very visible example of how the free software movement and the GPL has had a much broader impact on people's thinking than might have looked likely a few years ago.

".....you feel casting your vote via an electronic/digital voting machine owned....


How has the existence of linux changed this? The only people who notice or care about the electronic voting fraud are the same people who would have noticed or cared even if linux had never existed. "


It looks to me like the existence of the free software movement is one of very few reasons why people feel entitled to investigate these disgracefully bad machines, why there are more than just an elite few able to investigate/analyse them, and hold them up to an ethical standard that's been defined in part by the free software movement. Gradually the ideas that we can be more than mere unquestioning recipients/consumers of software and that obscurity does not equal security or privacy are becoming normal.

20 years ago or 10 years ago if you'd tried to link ethics and software very, very few people would have accepted there was any kind of important connection. RMS is still being ridiculed and lampooned for relentlessly insisting the connection exists. Meanwhile we're looking at news stories about vulnerable voting machines, our personal/financial/professional data being stolen, traded, misplaced, abused, about governments trying to subvert their own laws and constitutions and run warrantless digital searches, have backdoors into every ISP, manipulate/obscure/invent/destroy data and so on, it's no longer in doubt that there is a connection. The reason it affects us as individual citizens/consumers is that our personal computers are part of those activities. We should have the right to know what part our own machines and "our" software play in this. Who actually has access to my computer? What can they get from it? How do they access it, when and why? Should I be allowed to know and decide or should I have to trust a self appointed group made up of government, software vendors, hardware vendors and ISPs to decide this for me? People are so focused on regular criminals (botnets, virus writers, phishers, ID spoofers, card cloners etc) that they overlook the fact that their personal computers grant the same level of access gained by a trojan/irc bot to the companies that wrote the OS and/or applications. Click click next next next, accept the EULA, cross your fingers and vainly hope they're nice people really. Good luck.

Proprietary companies by definition prefer you just accept what you're given. If we knew they were trustworthy and honest and acted with integrity that would just about be tolerable. But actually we know the opposite. They have commercial, financial and political ties to all kinds of other entities which they prefer you not to think about.

The whole connection between ethics and software (and related areas) has come into very sharp focus in the last decade. As our computers get more powerful and we find them more and more integrated into our lives the issue doesn't get any less significant. Recent technologies have made the harvesting and analysis of data so easy and irresistable that you can see a party like the US Republicans has turned from a group which disapproved of the intrusive state into a group which is making the Stasi look like unambitious amateurs.

When I lived in Asia I found censorship very irritating. All known proxy services were blocked. Websites which discussed anonymising software were blocked. Software companies who offer anonymising software were blocked. Surfing anonymously was a criminal offense. But there was a local Debian mirror hosted by a university.

apt-get install tor privoxy

Beautiful!

State firewall? No fucking problem any more :-) Transparent proxying? I shit on you :-) DNS hijacking? I ain't using your shitty military government DNS :-)

It was good for all the stuff they blocked for moral reasons too.


Sorry, didn't mean to go on quite so much, but anyway Billy G won't be seeing any more of my money or my data. Just got to get free of the clutches of the almighty Google next....could be more difficult.

yokozar said...

In the future we will design an operating system that is so different a serious mental workout will be required every time you use it.

We will then promote it as an anti-aging tool.

Anonymous said...

Its funny how luser retards go on about the windows "default" install. Due to shitty Netscape not being able to compete with MS we're stuck with the fact that MS cant bundle *anything* of use with windows.


And its funny that MS is still winning. Without being free. Even with all retard users who download the trojan/virus infected porn dialers and frolic in malware infested websites. Even then. They wont leave the MS eco system. Its fucking hilarious.


Should MS start teaching the FOSS lusers how to actually write a decent OS? What do you guys think?

-
A coworker brought this to my attention a couple of days back.

System crash on inserting SD card

Hilarious. To all the lusers: I'm here if you guys need a hug. And by hug I mean free piss to drink. I can give you the source too, for free.

Anonymous said...

Meanwhile we're looking at news stories about vulnerable voting machines

Yeah, because the previous system with analog voting machines was filled with much less fraud potential. Its not like votes from majority black districts in Florida weren't thrown out for no better reason than the fact that blacks tend to vote Democratic in the 2000 recount.

But hey if you want to be a jackass, julian67, and make the issue about highly insecure voting machines that have already been replaced by optical scanning machines that leave paper trails, go ahead and be a jackass.

Anonymous said...

The Free Software Foundation exists for the same reason that hippie compounds exist.

RMS started the FSF solely because he likes to hijack other people's code.

tuomov said...

"Gradually the ideas that we can be more than mere unquestioning recipients/consumers of software and that obscurity does not equal security or privacy are becoming normal."

Bullshit. When in FOSS you can't close the source to stay in power, to achieve vendor lock-in, you make the systems complex, so only a select few have the time to understand them. Power, vendor lock-in, and job security through complexity. The way many core software components have been designed (or rather, de-evolved), points to that conclusion. Perhaps it's not been intentional, with the people behind those wares just utterly incapable of software design. But once the crapware is in place, and the people behind it have gained a bit more power, there's little incentive to fix it.

Anonymous said...

Once a tier one offers Linux as a mainstream choice, OEMed so that all the "determination" is not needed (amazing how OEMed means it all just works huh?) right alongside Windows on most/all of their product line (the day is coming folks, especially if Windows 7 is not truly great), we'll see what it really takes for Mr and Mrs Joe Average to use a Linux computer.

But...but...Julian tells us those top-line OEMs like Dell and Asus just drip with care and love for Linux!

Saying desktop Linux has failed because of the failure of OEMs is truly staggering.

julian67 said...

""Gradually the ideas that we can be more than mere unquestioning recipients/consumers of software and that obscurity does not equal security or privacy are becoming normal."

Bullshit. When in FOSS you can't close the source to stay in power, to achieve vendor lock-in, you make the systems complex, so only a select few have the time to understand them. Power, vendor lock-in, and job security through complexity."


Your point doesn't actually contradict mine, it mixes up the ideas of complexity of code with the notion of security through obscurity(i.e secrecy).

Having read your "not a blog" I realise you're that you don't do conversations, only monomaniac rants and you saw an opportunity to drop a rant bomb.

But the point about complexity is true as far as it goes. Not many people understand anything at all about encryption or have any ability to hack the kernel. I don't, and having read your rants I know you don't either ;-)

The thing about complexity though is not absolute. It just means fewer people are able to understand those subjects, not that people are not allowed to. Still the fact that we are entitled to learn and understand the systems we use is there, as is the expectation that being a consumer/recipient doesn't disqualify one from being entitled to demand accountability and honesty. This doesn't have to just be about code. Look at the fuck up Debian made with openssl. It wasn't a hugely complex mistake but it wasn't spotted by the good guys for a long time. But when it was, it was dealt with transparently and honestly despite that being painfully embarrassing and potentially extremely damaging to all concerned. You can contrast that with proprietary vendor patches which admit to "a problem" or "a vulnerability" and offer little real information beyond that. Or with the recent Fedora/Red Hat screw up where Red Hat took the proprietary approach and stifled Fedora and prevented them from behaving in the same open way. If you use Debian you know what happened, what went wrong, if and how it affects you and what to do. If you use Fedora you just have to trust them because they say "Trust us, don't ask awkward questions", in the same way that you have to trust MS's patches, even the ones they slip by bundled into other patches because they don't want to talk about them publicly. I don't any longer use MS except for games and if I had been using Fedora or Red Hat I'd have stopped, on the basis that the fuckers won't tell me exactly what went wrong or if I was affected (assuming they even know), which leaves me completely unable to make an informed decision.

I know which approach leaves me in a position to make up my own mind. That's the point.

ghost of tom watson said...

20 years ago or 10 years ago if you'd tried to link ethics and software very, very few people would have accepted there was any kind of important connection.

Hate to say it, mate, but very few people today accept there's any kind of important connection. I don't think there's anything unethical about proprietary software, and neither do the vast majority of computing professionals.

Stallman is the worst ambassador possible for this.

The irony is that you yourself are a great example of this. After whining about Microsoft, you then (correctly, btw) point out Google is a much bigger threat -- and Google is a poster child for free software usage. So it's quite possible to do evil things with free software, and taking the higher road is just plain dishonest: code is a tool. Period.

Anonymous said...

I don't any longer use MS except for games

Way to live by your principles, pengiunboy. You're in no position to lecture anyone about anything, freetard.

Anonymous said...

Yup, having bought boxed editions of 98SE and XP for myself and various editions for customers I'm fully aware of boxed editions and that they don't come "direct from Microsoft".

So every boxed edition of Windows is pirated? Your paranoia is impressive. So all those packages of Windows XP, Vista and Office sitting on the shelves of Office Depot, Fry's, Best Buy and Micro Center DON'T come directly from Microsoft?

Pray tell, where do they come from?

With every posting you decline even further as a credible source of information. Give it up, mate.

untard said...

wow!

All you *.*'tards DO hv the fuckin time to write all this down. GET A LIFE.

julian67 said...

"So every boxed edition of Windows is pirated? Your paranoia is impressive."

At no point did I say every boxed edition is pirated.

You're an asshole.

"So all those packages of Windows XP, Vista and Office sitting on the shelves of Office Depot, Fry's, Best Buy and Micro Center DON'T come directly from Microsoft?".


For you they come from...err..Office Depot, Fry's, Best Buy and Micro Center. Those huge retailers might get them direct from Microsoft. You don't, and the dimwit who claimed he did was obviously lying. Or was simply so stupid he believes that when he buys from a retailer he's actually dealing directly with the original manufacturer. You should breed with each other, lets see if we can reverse evolution and get an ape like creature with semi-intelligent human like ancestors....

tuomov said...

"Your point doesn't actually contradict mine, it mixes up the ideas of complexity of code with the notion of security through obscurity(i.e secrecy). "

Complexity contradicts that "Gradually the ideas that we can be more than mere unquestioning recipients/consumers of software".

"Having read your "not a blog" I realise you're that you don't do conversations, only monomaniac rants and you saw an opportunity to drop a rant bomb."

I don't have comments on the non-blog for a) technical reasons (it's a static set of pages in a basic home directory space, generated by software (nanoblogger) that doesn't require me to use a crappy web interface to enter the posts), and b) I don't want a zillion idiots with nothing to contribute filling it with ridicule... as has started to happen to LHB commets too. I've considered using an external comment service such as Disqus, but probably can't be arsed. Those who have something substantial to comment, can write their own blog post, and let me know about it.. or just email me.

"The thing about complexity though is not absolute. It just means fewer people are able to understand those subjects, not that people are not allowed to. "

The difference in practise is negligible. It's the same meaningless bullshit that "demoracy" and other such things are marketed by.

I'll Be There For You said...

Look at all the Linux losers cursing and spitting on me for using Windows. But I am okay with it. I understand them. They're just frustrated Linux losers who can't get Linux to work, so they have to vent their anger at me, at anybody. They have to take out their hate for the fuck up Linux os on the Windows users they love the most. I totally understand them and I'll always be there for them, to comfort them, to tell them that it's not their fault. That it's the freetard developers fault. And I just hope that one day, they will be old enough to use a real operating system like Windows.

They always tell me, about the insecurities in Windows. But I ran as an admin all these years and never encounter any insecurity. In fact, I wasn't insecure about the insecurities of my Windows system. I was totally confident in it. The way I see it, they were just projecting their insecurities onto me. They're actually insecure about their Linux OS. So insecure about its insecurity that they rather protect their system files and leave the Home directories vulnerable to attacks. They have a lot of insecurities issues. I always tell them, "If you guys just stop going to those gay porn sites, then there wouldn't be any problem." They always denied it, but it was apparent that it was just another insecurity. I also tell them the truth: "that a Windows virus will always be better than that real STD virus that they've gotten from those Linux looser."

Anonymous said...

For you they come from...err..Office Depot, Fry's, Best Buy and Micro Center. Those huge retailers might get them direct from Microsoft. You don't,

Wow. I am impressed with your ability not to back down an inch even when you are so clearly and demonstrably wrong.

Yes, evil genies at Best Buy and Micro Center and Fry slip into the sealed package and make changes to the software between the time the software leaves the manufacturing facility and when you install the software!

Linus Stallman said...

Julian is fighting a war of attrition.
He doesn't try to counter any points, valid or not. he merely repeats his arguments, while ignoring everything else.
It's a well known debate tactic - instead of investing effort in countering points and finding sources for his arguments, he merely repeats them, leaving all other debaters to do the heavy lifting. At some point one of the debaters will make a small mistake, and then he will latch onto it, ignore corrections, and declare victory.

When arguing with julian67, you're making the following mistakes:
1. Respecting his opinions.
2. Assuming he invests the same effort as you to validate his points.
3. Trying to validate the points you were making when he tells you you're wrong. He doesn't check them himself, but tries to leverage your sense of fair play to work against you.
4. Assuming he plays the same game as you. He doesn't try to debate, but rather, he plays with you, trying to leverage your insecurities.

You can safely ignore him and his like, you're not any less correct for not addressing him.

Anonymous said...

No matter how far desktop Linux has come, it's still a wanker's OS. People who developed wanker's OS are also wankers. And they want everybody else to be a wanker. Just a simple question - why do i need to install tons of development libraries, a compiler and a whole bunch of other stuff just to install some app? Oh, please, stick your repositories up to your butt, no matter how large they get, they still suck. You can't put every single piece of code out there into repository.

Linux ain't that bad. Neither is Windows/Mac/whatever. I have a quad-boot (i. e. 4 OS's) laptop and i'm absolutely happy with it. One Windows OS for all the gaming/tinkering/wanking stuff, second Windows is purely dedicated to low-latency audio - Linux sucks BADLY in that area (and don't tell me about JACK and it's crappy drivers). One Linux box is for pure masturbation, the other - for my sucky development attempts (kinda tryin' to learn to submit a patch :-)). Email, internet? i do these on all 4 OS's, everything synchronized via symlinks. I mean i use the same Firefox/Thunderbird profile on all 4 machines.

Am i an ordinary user? no. I'm a wanker. I like wanking, i like digging down to console and make things work. But even such a badass wanker like me sometimes gets frustrated with Linux.

WHEN YOU LINUX FUCKERS UNDERSTAND: BINARY RULEZ!!!!! Sources are for DEVELOPERS!!!! My fuckin' mom ain't no developer, why would she even need a compiler?!

julian67 said...

"No matter how far desktop Linux has come, it's still a wanker's OS."

But you obviously missed this earlier linuxhater blog http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/08/rants-and-laughs_16.html

check the link "I can't use Linux because I'm addicted to porn"

which ponts to http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=878991

It's all total uninformed bs but entertaining anyway.

Anonymous said...

@Julian67

But when it was, it was dealt with transparently and honestly despite that being painfully embarrassing and potentially extremely damaging to all concerned. You can contrast that with proprietary vendor patches which admit to "a problem" or "a vulnerability" and offer little real information beyond that.


BULLSHIT. You have to *ACCEPT* all kernel patches that your distro gives you. If you don't, some software or the other is going to break down the line, or you may require a kernel upgrade to install some new device. So don't give that bull crap about choice. Besides average users are just going to accept the patch blindly, because they have better things to do with their time then look up changelogs


Regarding openness, there is a reason extra information isn't disclosed when you have mission critical deployments of your OS around the world. Please don't tell me your that fucking dumb? Please? Can I assume you have a working brain?

Anonymous said...

julian67 must have to stop half way through each of his misled rants to jerk off after spewing his 'technical knowledge' all over the comment box. anyone would think he gets paid to talk shit. Either that or his mother hasnt made him move out of her basement yet and her aged pension is enough to support him on.

Seriously, no one really cares what you think, you're not going to break ground with your rants and make anyone switch off Windows or MacOS just because you wave your hands about and carry a pointy stick.

And just for the record, I wont be coming back to check this post, so you can abuse me all you want, it'll fall on deaf ears.

Have a good day :)

Anonymous said...

@julian67

Keep fighting the good fight! Eventually, they'll see the light of freedom and abandon the evilness and downright useless pile of crap that is any Windows OS.

Or not. But keep on fighting!

Anon E Moose said...

Regarding windows updates.

Every update references a KB article in its title, so that even if the update itself contains little useful information as to what it does, one can look it up in the KB if they can be bothered.

julian67 said...

"BULLSHIT. You have to *ACCEPT* all kernel patches that your distro gives you. If you don't, some software or the other is going to break down the line, or you may require a kernel upgrade to install some new device. So don't give that bull crap about choice. Besides average users are just going to accept the patch blindly, because they have better things to do with their time then look up changelogs


Regarding openness, there is a reason extra information isn't disclosed when you have mission critical deployments of your OS around the world. Please don't tell me your that fucking dumb? Please? Can I assume you have a working brain?
"


The capitalised BULLSHIT is a nice touch. It adds great authority to your arguments and is a universally accepted sign of a refined, intelligent and cultured mind. But you ruined it by not addressing me as "dude" or "mate" and more critically you forgot to sign off with PERIOD.

There's no obligation to accept kernel patches. With one click in a package manager you can lock the kernel version and it will never receive another patch or upgrade. If you don't like the distro's kernel(s) you can build your own from their sources or from the original sources. There's no reason why this would break anything. For a while I ran a laptop with an old kernel (2.6.18 the Etch kernel), with the rest of the OS built from Sid repos. There are even distros which ship with an older kernel but use testing or unstable repositories, meaning you have a kernel from stable but otherwise run a rolling release. antiX is a case in point.

"there is a reason extra information isn't disclosed when you have mission critical deployments of your OS around the world"

There are reasons but those reasons have more to do with PR than anything else.

You seem not to have noticed that there are "mission critical deployments" of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Debian, Suse, Red Hat etc etc and that Debian and the BSDs have a stated policy and proven actual real world practise of disclosing all bugs and dealing with them publicly and honestly.

OpenBSD is probably the most secure desktop/server OS available. Their security record is that only two remote holes in their default OS have been found in the last decade.

That's a track record that puts them in a league of their own and is a result of their openness as well as their expertise.

They are probably the people most admanant about full disclosure and honest dealing in the entire world of IT. Dude. Mate.Dumb Motherless Fuck.

PERIOD.

Anonymous said...


There's no obligation to accept kernel patches. .. There's no reason why this would break anything.

You sure? Nothing will break? You're on very thin ice here. But I'll wait why you go and google some information.

And suggesting another distro? LOL, the answer to the cluster fuck FOSS. Have a problem with this.. oh.. use this distro. Have a problem with that? Use this distro. Heres an idea fuck face fretard, why dont you make one decent distro? Maybe we'll have to wait for advances in medicine to cure FOSS retardation.


There are reasons but those reasons have more to do with PR than anything else.


* HEllo users !! We have a bug in our OS. Heres what you can do to exploit it. Arent you glad we're so open ?!!




You seem not to have noticed that there are "mission critical deployments" of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Debian, Suse, Red Hat etc etc and that Debian and the BSDs have a stated policy and proven actual real world practise of disclosing all bugs and dealing with them publicly and honestly.

You seem to confuse openness and honesty with competence.

julian67 said...

"And suggesting another distro? LOL, the answer to the cluster fuck.....blah blah some shit..blah blah..more noise..some more bs ...blah blah...torrent of foul buttsquirt...blah.".

I didn't suggest using or changing anything.

To illustrate the point that you can run an old kernel with new libraries/applications I offered the example of a distro which does exactly that.

The fact that you can't or won't understand simple English is entirely a deficiency of your mind and/or personality, not a deficiency of any piece or collection of software.

"* HEllo users !! We have a bug in our OS. Heres what you can do to exploit it. Arent you glad we're so open ?!!"

The fact that you find this scenario remarkable and hilarious is actually about as good an illustration of your own ignorance as anyone could make.

Congratulations on making your first truly informative statement, even if unwittingly, and good luck getting the bullet out of your foot.

Anonymous said...

The fact that you can't or won't understand simple English is entirely a deficiency of your mind and/or personality, not a deficiency of any piece or collection of software.

The fact I am forced to accept all patches or I risk some critical component going broke in the not too distant future is an example of what? choice? Not even after a couple of beers. Maybe after your brain cells are dead from using FOSS crapware waiting for the kernel to compile.



The fact that you find this scenario remarkable and hilarious is actually about as good an illustration of your own ignorance as anyone could make.

Great. I think last weeks FOSS circle jerk has brought on a sudden onset of acute dementia. You're incapable of understanding really simple points. Perhaps I should start with picture illustrations or suggest a medical facility?

Anonymous said...

"But...but...Julian tells us those top-line OEMs like Dell and Asus just drip with care and love for Linux!

Saying desktop Linux has failed because of the failure of OEMs is truly staggering."

It isn't a failure of OEMs, they simply don't (yet) offer them mainstream. The Dell's are on a sister site, few except geeks ever find. The HP's are even worse, you can't get to them without a search on their site.

They are not offering them mainstream yet. It doesn't mean they don't "just work" and are easy to use (with more support for multi-media out of the box than windows), they simply haven't yet given it a serious go.

Look, at some point, an OEM will do this, offer some flavor of Linux on the main sites, across most machines, simply to increase their margins by squeezing MS for more advertising revenue. It isn't something MS wants, but if you were HP and could "entice" another $25/machine by doing so, that's a LOT of money.

julian67 said...

"The fact I am forced to accept all patches or I risk some critical component going broke ....some more horseshit...."

That clearly isn't a fact, as has already been pointed out.

You can believe it to be a fact. You can believe someone or something is coercing you. You can belive anything you like. But believing something doesn't make it so.

You clearly don't use the software in question. You have no more than the most superficial knowledge of it, possibly not even gained first hand. Your beliefs are irreleveant except to you, so believe whatever calms your fever.

"Great. I think last weeks FOSS circle jerk has brought on a sudden onset of acute dementia. You're incapable of understanding really simple points. Perhaps I should start with picture illustrations or suggest a medical "

I've no idea what a foss circle jerk might be. Is it something they do in your village at full moon?

Regarding security through obscurity vs. security through openness, you apparently feel that you know some obvious and self evident truth. People who believe the earth is flat, at the centre of the universe and orbited by the sun feel the same way.

A good place to get some small actual understanding, or at least an indication as to why it's not as obvious as you think would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity

Another good introduction to some very basic principles would be http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0205.html#1 which takes you to "Secrecy, Security, and Obscurity" a very short essay by Bruce Schneier.

I doubt you'll read either. It can be more comfortable to blindly stick with the flat earth style interpretation of events that's served you so well up until now.

ghost of tom watson said...

You can safely ignore him and his like, you're not any less correct for not addressing him.

You are so right. In a civil society someone like Julian would be shunned; therefore, I think it appropriate we call shun him here.

Anonymous said...


Regarding security through obscurity vs. security through openness,

You're too stupid to understand either. The concept talks about design of the system being complex and hidden and thus "secure" This has nothing to do with disclosing vulnerabilities. Perhaps your deluded mind needs a break.


You're out of your domain here any any form of invective from your side wont change the fact. You're trying to use your toddler-brain to think about real world complex concepts.

Reporting vulnerabilities aims to do two things.

1> Make administrators aware about how critical the vulnerability is.


2> Provide information to secure their systems.

Things that should never happen:

* Allow attackers who otherwise would never have figured out how to exploit a system, the exact means to do so. Re: Closing bugs with patches tagged with specific vulnerabilities so that they can look at the exact piece of code and come up with a proof of concept attack in hours/days.



---
Upgrading the kernel, breaks things, Not upgrading, breaks them too !

http://forums.opensuse.org/archives/sf-archives/archives-hardware/343486-nvidia-broken-kernel-update.html

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=53376

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-wireless-networking-41/iwlist-broken-by-kernel-upgrade....sort-of-362917/

http://fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=180950

http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Ubuntu/2008-04/msg03094.html

http://www.r3uk.com/index.php/home/38-software/83-eeedora-wifi-fix

http://www.clarkconnect.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=46504&an=0&page=39

http://forums.opensuse.org/archives/sls-archives/archives-suse-linux/archives-desktop-environments/357114-init-5-x-broken-after-kernel-update.html

http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Fedora/2005-02/3358.html

http://lists.us.dell.com/pipermail/linux-desktops/2008-July/001699.html

http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?t=16987&view=next&sid=9a50ff97db91004081a15cd8bf1fc833

julian67 said...

"You can safely ignore him and his like, you're not any less correct for not addressing him.

You are so right. In a civil society someone like Julian would be shunned; therefore, I think it appropriate we call shun him here. "


Call shun him here! Call it from the rooftops!

I challenge you dumb fucking cunts not to reply.

Don't feed the troll.

ghost of an underpant stain you're such a muppet.

ghost of tom watson said...

It isn't something MS wants, but if you were HP and could "entice" another $25/machine by doing so, that's a LOT of money.

Not really. You'd first lose the revenue from the third-party software vendors that would more than make up that $25. Second, you'd increase your support costs because supporting Linux isn't the same as supporting Windows. Third, the HP folks developing their own Linux need to be paid.

It's not nearly as simple as just dumping Windows and saving $25.

Anonymous said...

What do I hear? A freetard google running freetard OS on all its freetard servers released a freetard open source browser. Uh! And their first beta version is even better than what MS has been trying to release for the last 15 years. And can you believe it, they are also planing to release that same browser for the freetard OS.

Anonymous said...


What do I hear? A freetard google running freetard OS on all its freetard servers released a freetard open source browser. Uh! And their first beta version is even better than what MS has been trying to release for the last 15 years. And can you believe it, they are also planing to release that same browser for the freetard OS.

Except. Google is never going to release the source code to their changes. If you think they run the same luser distro that you can get anywhere else your mind is mutilated beyond repair.

Looking at it from another point of view, I guess it takes Google 15 years to produce a decent browser? MS on the other hand has been shipping a browser with every OS since windows 95.

ghost of tom watson said...

Google is never going to release the source code to their changes.

Hell, Google's not even releasing the source code to Chrome. They've released the source code to Chromium and added proprietary mods, figuring the freetards wouldn't dare call them out on it.

Google 1, 'tards 0.

Anonymous said...

Google is never going to release the source code to their changes

Uh-huh! Like I said they should... And they are smart not to release the source if the license allows them. They just took a freetard OS and made billions out of thin air while losers on this freetard website are wasting their time flaming each other.

Go on, spend your precious time proving I'm wrong, I do not mind...

julian67 said...

"Google is never going to release the source code to their changes.

Hell, Google's not even releasing the source code to Chrome. They've released the source code to Chromium and added proprietary mods, figuring the freetards wouldn't dare call them out on it."


This is simply untrue.

You've said the same thing before and it's been pointed out to you that if you build from the Chromium source the only difference between Chrome and Chromium is in the trademarks, not the executable code.

How do google describe Chrome?

"..a new open source browser: Google Chrome" - http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/why.html?hl=en

What license(s) cover the Chrome binary?

http://www.google.com/support/chrome/bin/answer.py?answer=100336

Every single piece of code in Chrome is covered by one of the licenses listed there. Every byte. They are all open source licenses. All of them.

What are the conditions for modifying and redistributing Chrome (not Chromium, but Chrome)?

"#
Modification and redistribution under open license.

You may modify your copy or copies of the Program, and distribute the resulting derivative works, provided that you meet the following conditions:

* The copyright notice and disclaimer on the Program must be reproduced and included in the source code, documentation, and/or other materials provided in a manner in which such notices are normally distributed.
* You must clearly indicate the nature and date of any changes made to the Program. The full details need not necessarily be included in the individual modified files, provided that each modified file is clearly marked as such and instructions are included on where the full details of the modifications may be found.
* You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

"

There are no proprietary mods, plug ins or anything else non-free except Google's trademarks.

Perhaps someone would like to itemise these "proprietary mods"?

Let's see them.

Can anybody offer even a single verifiable fact to support ghost-of-an-ugly-abortion's assertion?

No you can't. Because it isn't true and anybody who can read English can read the licenses of the Chrome binary for themselves and know it isn't true.

ghost of tom watson you are a fucking slimeball. You're deceitful, dishonest, ignorant and so fucking stupid that you lie about something that can be checked and dismissed by anybody with an internet connection, a browser, and 5 minutes of free time. You stupid cunt.

You're a repulsive, lying piece of shit, lower than a fucking worm and not half as interesting. You're a shill, a scheister and a shitwit. Fuck off and die.

Anonymous said...


Hell, Google's not even releasing the source code to Chrome. They've released the source code to Chromium and added proprietary mods, figuring the freetards wouldn't dare call them out on it."

This is simply untrue.

We're talking about google's changes to linux.

Try to catch up.

julian67 said...

"We're talking about google's changes to linux.

Try to catch up."


I don't need to try to do anything, but you need to learn to read.

You're so fucking stupid you didn't notice this: "Google's not even releasing the source code to Chrome. They've released the source code to Chromium and added proprietary mods, figuring the freetards wouldn't dare call them out on it"

Idiot.

If Google use free software in-house and modify it to create their own custom software but don't distribute it they are under zero obligation to publish any changes. That's their right and their freedom. It's one of the benefits of free software.

You're not allowed access to Microsoft's source code or the source for the proprietary parts of Apple's OS or other UNIXs. You're forbidden from making any changes regardless of purpose, even for your own personal use.

But you are allowed to build your custom software from free software. If you build from non-copyleft licensed free software you can even make the result proprietary and distribute it or keep it free software and distribute it.

Google, unlike you tossers, are not a bunch of ignorant dipshits. They've made an informed choice.

Google aren't exactly forthcoming about their own custom tools but if they chose to build on GNU/Linux then that looks like a decent endorsement to me. They're wealthy enough to use whatever they like, they could go with UNIX or a commercial BSD or a free BSD or GNU/Linux or Microsoft or anything else out there. But apparently they chose GNU/Linux and associated free software to work with. Not some overpriced crap from MS.

Big fucking surprise.

Anonymous said...

@julian67
I think you've missed the point so many times, you should seriously take a break.

Nobody here says Google should be forced to reveal their code. Pointing out that they wont, doesnt mean that I am expecting them to. Stop with your penguin dance.


If you're a Researcher / Academic person you can sign and NDA with Microsoft and get the source code for the kernel for learning purposes.



But apparently they chose GNU/Linux and associated free software to work with. Not some overpriced crap from MS.

Maybe you need a bit of hand holding. Google has their own custom setup. MS doesn't target their software for custom setups, so even if they licensed it, they would have no use for it. OTOH, the choice of linux was more to do with getting stuff for free rather than anything to do with the qualities of the OS itself. There is nothing unique about Linux. The NT hybrid kernel design is more modular and advanced than linux can hope to be. Perhaps you don't know, MS has demonstrated that they can strip it down to around 45mb, AT LEAST. Obviously they want to maintain a tight control over the use of NT. Its making them billions and they dont care what you think.


Seriously, stop taxing your little toddler-brain.

rich11mm said...

It may not be that some people are not determined to use Linux; some people may be just bored with some of the Linux distros. I had erased my copy of Ubuntu on my computer because I was eventually bored with Ubuntu.

I had tried to install Linux Mint as second OS this past Friday, and it could not install because there was something wrong with the CD drive. I had a similar excuse from a Debian install in the past. I could not boot to Windows, nor could I boot to Mint without the CD. I had to reinstall Vista for the fourth time, and go through the updates et cetera to repair my computer.

I will keep experimenting with Linux, but to blame the novice for any problems that occur seems to be cop out by some Linux advocates.

julian67 said...

"Nobody here says Google should be forced to reveal their code. "

I didn't claim that that anybody said that Google should be forced to reveal their changes. Nor did I read anyone else make that claim.

What is it with you people that you can't read a simple sentence and accept that the author meant to write exactly what he/she wrote? Plain English does not need interpretation, it isn't the bible and it isn't encrypted.

"If you're a Researcher / Academic person you can sign and NDA with Microsoft and get the source code for the kernel for learning purposes."

Which is as relevant to developing custom software as sucking a lollipop. It's interesting you mention this (I knew governments get access to MS source but I hadn't appreciated that academics might be able to) but the fact that someone has to sign an NDA to be allowed access to the code they run on their own machine doesn't sound like a huge bonus to me.

"Maybe you need a bit of hand holding.Google has their own custom setup...."

Thanks for reading my post selectively and completely ignoring that I actually wrote:

"But apparently they chose GNU/Linux..." and "...custom tools but if they chose to build on GNU/Linux then that..."

I've added some italics there for clarity.

"Perhaps you don't know, MS has demonstrated that they can strip it down to around 45mb, AT LEAST."

OK this one made me laugh out loud. I had to read it twice just to check. They can strip it down to 45MB???

Pass out the smelling salts!

And the brandy!

The open the champagne!

The unmodified Debian Linux kernel on the regular centrino duo x86 machine I'm using now contains every driver under the fucking sun as far as I can tell. I haven't touched it except to add a virtualbox module. It weighs in at a whopping 57MB.

You people are great.

Thanks for the lolz.

I hate to break it to you but you can get a full OS with 2.6 kernel,regular GTK2 based graphical environment, GUI package management, virtual desktops, Firefox, media player etc etc which runs from a 25MB CD (using a compressed filesystem, expands to 80 MB on HDD install). This isn't some lab experiment or an OS for embedded devices, it's a real world OS, very fast and easy to use as a desktop or server or both.

http://slitaz.org/en/

"OTOH, the choice of linux was more to do with getting stuff for free rather than anything to do with the qualities of the OS itself."

You know this do you? You can offer some sort of supporting evidence for this odd assertion?

Let me see, one of the wealthiest corporations on the planet doesn't choose the tools that are best for their purposes but instead tries to save $45 per desktop or $90 per CPU/Core or whatever the going rate is, at the expense of their ability to develop and produce?

What a crock of shit.

Please do the honest thing show that your assertion has some truth and isn't just baseless nonsense, or withdraw it.

You seemed like an intelligent person. You can spell (or have mastered the spellchecker). Your vocabulary extends beyond 200 words and five grunts, which puts you well ahead of most people who post here. Your grammar is fine by blog standards.

But when you start defending Microsoft you lose your ability to read and comprehend simple sentences, important and meaningful words like "if" and "apparently" seem to get ignored or interpreted as "definitely"!

You make baseless, ridiculous, even laughable, assertions which, being without any foundation, appear disingenuous to say the least.

You make technical observations which reveal you might know something about Microsoft and NT but very, very little about competing technologies.

You seem clever but you do stupid.

As far as I can tell using MS products is neither here nor there. It's down to preference, familiarity, choice (or lack of, like at work) etc but defending or promoting Microsoft and slandering its competitors makes people morally and intellectually impaired. Best avoided.

Anonymous said...

Are you fucking awake? Pandejo. This is getting tiring. Maybe when you stop hallucinating you'll realize you're arguing with your own retarded brain.


Idiot.

If Google use free software in-house and modify it to create their own custom software but don't distribute it they are under zero obligation to publish any changes.

This is where you imply that I'm expecting google to disclose source. The original point was google choosing linux is by no means a win for gnu/linux as they wont ever contribute back any changes/improvements. maybe you should re-read the philosophy of gnu/linux before you do your penguin dance.



OK this one made me laugh out loud. I had to read it twice just to check. They can strip it down to 45MB???


I guess I cant expect more from luser retards. The point of mentioning that isnt to start a whose dick is bigger contest. You seem to have it in your toddler-brain that smaller = better. The 45mb contained the kernel, bootloader, etc and a webserver. If ms wanted, they could make a version light enought to run on a router. This shows that the despite lusers ranting about how bloated NT is, MS can strip it down to a tiny size, if they choose to do so. Another point missed.



Thanks for reading my post selectively and completely ignoring that I actually wrote:

"But apparently they chose GNU/Linux..." and "...custom tools but if they chose to build on GNU/Linux then that..."

Is it safe to introduce the difference between custom hardware and software to you? Probably not. Your toddler brain would overload into an infinite recursion of the penguin dance. We dont want you running out of stack space now do we?



Let me see, one of the wealthiest corporations on the planet doesn't choose the tools that are best for their purposes but instead tries to save $45 per desktop or $90 per CPU/Core or whatever the going rate is, at the expense of their ability to develop and produce?

Maybe you should be introduced to how companies work. All companies start with $0 and go from there. Another point missed. Cant expect much from lusers.



You're a clueless retard, whose only skill is searching on google. I'm sure you honed your skill getting your crapware linux box to work. I await yet another penguin dance.

julian67 said...

Are you fucking awake? Coño.

"You seem to have it in your toddler-brain that smaller = better. The 45mb contained the kernel, bootloader, etc and a webserver."

A bootloader huh? Fuck me that's impressive! A webserver? OMFG! An etc? Now I'm impressed with your vast reserves of knowledge....twat.

If ms wanted, they could make a version light enought to run on a router."

Of course they could, just as soon as they pass through the mirror to wonderland. It took them a fucking age to get XP scaled down to run on netbooks with non x86 architecture and limited resources. They actually can't scale Vista down to run on netbooks, which is why they've not killed off XP on schedule.

Could XP or Vista run on a router? You mean like Linux+BusyBox does on your router?

No fucking chance whatsoever, unless there's a new generation of router with x86 architecture and 256MB RAM that we've all failed to notice. Dumbass. And who in their right mind would want a router running something produced by Microsoft? Masochists?

On the other hand regular users can take their Linksys routers and install a variety of alternative free firmwares. Anyone with just a little experience or merely the ability to read a howto can take hardware much less powerful than modern netbooks, such as a NAS, and have an OS installed and running in a few hours. Complete with bootloader! Webserver! Torrent client! SSH server! Streaming Audio Server! And two entire etceteras! You twit.

"Is it safe to introduce the difference between custom hardware and software to you? "

You've discovered that hardware and software are different? Award yourself a whole entire intarweb.

Are you actually capable of expanding on that comment or are you just posturing and spouting more crap? Let me guess.....

"Maybe you should be introduced to how companies work. All companies start with $0 and go from there. "

You're right, there's no such thing as investment banking (might be true in the US by next week ha ha). Venture capital is a mere myth. All businesses are founded by penniless waifs and strays. And any business that starts with mimimal resources is condemned to be forever penny pinching even if it harms them? Please please fuck off. The only business you know about is the business end of your dad's prick.

Anonymous said...

Julian has not dissapointed me. His penguin dance is flawless.


Of course they could, just as soon as they pass through the mirror to wonderland. It took them a fucking age to get XP scaled down to run on netbooks with non x86 architecture and limited resources. They actually can't scale Vista down to run on netbooks, which is why they've not killed off XP on schedule.

This is so funny. Should I introduce you to the concept of kernel subsystems?


Nah. It would be a waste on your toddler brain.

No wonder you run against the facts. Your brain capacity has reached its limit.


Ms doesn't need the entire win32 subsystem to run on a router. Perhaps you are too retarded to know that, either way, you 100% confirmed your intelligence level is slightly above a chimpanzee. Either way you should seek out a mate at your nearest zoo.

julian67 said...

"Should I introduce you to the concept of kernel subsystems?"

Go on. Stop tantalising me with intimations of knowledge and actually display some. Oh...wait....you don't have any...

Please please please explain what use the NT kernel will be on a router with no win32 subsytem.

Why the fuck would anyone be interested? Who is looking to replace their router's perfectly decent OS with one with no user mode applications, no error handling, not even a fucking console? Why would someone choose this over what ships by default on the router, which is already superior? How do you think it compares to OpenWRT or DD-WRT? I'll fill you in: it's shit, it's a fucking terrible idea. You'll be the only fucker dumb enough to want to use it. The reason Microsoft will never bother trying to do it is because they know what you desperately don't want to know: NT doesn't scale as well as other kernels and isn't as portable.

When people are dissatisfied with the default firmware on their routers do you see them petitioning Microsoft to let them change it for an NT based firmware. No you fucking don't. Has Microsoft ever suggested this might be a good idea? No they fucking haven't. It takes a hopeless deluded fanboy to come out with such utter garbage. That would be you. Fuck fuck fuck fuckity fuck. Nearly finished swearing now. Fuck. You dumb cunt.

Done.

Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck right off.

That just slipped out, like your daddy's dick sometimes slips out of your ravaged ass.

I used to be quite polite but I've learned a lot of exciting new colloquialisms here at linux hater's blog. And they all seem to apply to you. You're an asshat.

Anonymous said...

Looks like the penguin dance is having an effect on your brain.

Please please please explain what use the NT kernel will be on a router with no win32 subsytem.



>Ms doesn't need the entire win32 subsystem to run on a router


Entire = All
Not Entire = Not all != None

Have you found your chimp mate yet?

julian67 said...

">Ms doesn't need the entire win32 subsystem to run on a router"

So please enlighten the world and point out the scaled down router OS built on NT with a partial Win32 subsystem.

Where is it?

What is it installed on?

What's the project name?

Who are the hardware partners?

What does it cost?

You've offer a grand total of zero real world examples to back up your cretinous assertions and ludicrous speculations.

Please just offer something real, something that exists beyond your own personal fantasy.

It doesn't fucking exist.

It probably can't be built to work on any actually existing devices.

If it can be built it will be be so shit and so expensive nobody will want it.

Where the fuck is it?

Well done for avoiding absolutely every issue, for failing to to offer even one piece of evidence, not even a fucking link to a blog about a man who once heard someone mention his colleague might have read something about it.

Nothing.

A forensic scientist couldn't glean any evidence of a real world example form the shit you write.


You get a grade A with distinction for your mental masturbation abilities but a ritalin fuelled retarded fail for everything else. The MCSE is in the post.

Anonymous said...

Awww the penguin is all worked up.

There are multiple examples of subset of the win32 api. One such example is Win CE.

Has the Toddler-brain reached its limit? /laugh

You have no clue about what I know. I'm just throwing scraps for you to do your little penguin dance. Very amusing.

Anonymous said...

You're a clueless retard, whose only skill is searching on google.

All freetards must develop that skill early ;-)

Never argue with an idiot.

julian67 said...

I wrote "Please please please explain what use the NT kernel will be on a router with no win32 subsytem. "

and

"So please enlighten the world and point out the scaled down router OS built on NT with a partial Win32 subsystem."

and your (totally predictable) reply :

"One such example is Win CE."

That's amazing news, except for one little inconvenient fact.

WINDOWS CE DOES NOT USE THE NT KERNEL.

And it doesn't run on routers but on game consoles and hand helds.

In case you missed it the first time around:

WINDOWS CE DOES NOT USE THE NT KERNEL.

You fucking idiot. You clueless cunt. You know-nothing numbskull.

"You have no clue about what I know."

Yes I do. Here it is:

Zip, zilch, zero, nada, nix, nothing, rien and fuck all.

"Never argue with an idiot. "

Amen.

btw you could have somewhat redeemed your sorry ass if instead of mentioning Windows CE you'd mentioned Windows XP Embedded. You'd have been able to show me a real answer to my question, a version of XP that can be as small as 40 MB while retaining full win32 application compatibility. But you don't have a fucking clue.

And in case you're wondering why vendors prefer other solutions, why your router ships with Linux+busybox instead of Windows Embedded here it is:

First, Windows Embedded only runs on x86.

Fucking masterstroke or what?

Second, you've seen all those corny pictures of ATMs, information kiosks, standalone displays, public payphone/smartphones which have bluescreened? they're running Windows Embedded. It's so fucking bad that it crashes on embedded devices. Just what every organisation wants. An expensive and broken customer interface that then costs them even more money in downtime and makes them look like idiots.

Third, add to all that the $90 payment the vendor has to make to MS for each unit shipped you can see it's about as useful as a tit without a nipple.

But apart from being horribly and famously unreliable, massively expensive ($90 is a massive cost when you're aiming for a retail price of between $100 and $500) and no fucking use whatsoever on the most common architectures for embedded devices?

It's a clear winner.

Oh...wait...

You are slightly less well informed than a weevil.

Anonymous said...

Typing long diatribes only makes you look more stupid. Also its a well known fact that repeating a dumb argument is the same as polishing a turd. You a turd too.

Even after spending hours on Google. You still have the wrong information.


WINDOWS CE DOES NOT USE THE NT KERNEL.

So? Why should a cellphone run NT? Are you dumb? (That was rhetorical) Do you know how ridiculously easy it is to run multiple subsystems simultaneously on NT? No, of cource you don't.


Fuck. Let me start at the beginning. Do you know the meaning of a subsystem? I expect some display of competence so I know your toddler brain can handle it. So far I have seen none.


In Windows CE the Win32 API is implemented using a Client/Server Architecture which is similar to the one used to implement the win32 api in NT. This makes it trivial to drop it into the NT kernel.


The thing is there is no need for running NT on a router. BUT IT CAN BE DONE. This was the fucking point.



and your (totally predictable) reply :

Everyone reading this thread will know that this is a lie. Nice bluff though.


First, Windows Embedded only runs on x86.

You obviously have no insights into NT. NT originally was a multi platform system, which is the reason they created the Portable Executable format.


They no longer ship on other platforms because Intel was the clear winner in commodity hardware. You think MS just dropped support? /laugh


Don't disappoint me Julian ! I'll pay good money for your penguin dance..

You may not continue running in circles..

julian67 said...

"So? Why should a cellphone run NT? Are you dumb?"

Apparently I'm dumb.

Now please remind me who it was that offered Windows CE as an example of a scaled down NT based OS?

It was you, you dumb cunt.

It's there on the page and it's not editable so live with it and stop squirming.

"Do you know how ridiculously easy it is to run multiple subsystems simultaneously on NT?"

Or in fact on any modern kernel? Idiot.

"In Windows CE the Win32 API is implemented using a Client/Server Architecture which is similar to the one used to implement the win32 api in NT. This makes it trivial to drop it into the NT kernel. "

Err right, you're going to replace NT's win32 subsystem with CE's win32 subsystem? Oh really? Why?

"The thing is there is no need for running NT on a router. BUT IT CAN BE DONE."

Not on any fucking router that anyone has actually ever manufactured it can't.

But probably you're right, it's a great idea to have to develop and maintain several different kernels because you can't make one that's stable, portable or scales well.

The UNIX vendors, the BSDs, Apple, Linux....how the fuck did they not come to the same brilliant conclusion? Those darn fools!They'll never get anywhere with this silly idea of a scalable, portable kernel which can run anything from a tiny embedded system through small embedded systems like routers and audio players all the way up to a supercompu.....oh...wait...

Apple will never make a successful embedded device like a cellphone unless they develop a completely different kern...oh wait..

It makes huge sense in terms of cost and efficiency to divide your valuable resources and expertise by maintaining multiple kernels instead of...oh...wait..

Here's a little challenge for you. Take your router or your ipod/archos/iriver/iaudio/whatever and install an NT based OS on it. Meanwhile I'll try to install a Linux based OS on the same devices.

I'll be done with both devices installed in about 30 minutes, maybe another 30 to set them up how I want. An hour total. You'll still be scratching your head and talking out of your arse (multi-tasking?) the same time next year having achieved precisely nothing.

The difference being that your claims of what might be possible don't pass the reality test. They're shit and so are you.

You win two intarwebs, 5 MCSEs and and a mail order degree in Computer Science from the University of Mogadishu.

Anonymous said...

Usually after 2-3 hints most people go back and read up on what it is they are actually talking about. Looks like you have no clue even after spending hours searching Google.


Not on any fucking router that anyone has actually ever manufactured it can't.

Wow you're fucking stupid. NT is a portable kernel, just as portable as Linux. Go read up on NT design. Retard. Talk to any OS theorist.


Now please remind me who it was that offered Windows CE as an example of a scaled down NT based OS?

It was you, you dumb cunt.



There are multiple examples of subset of the win32 api. One such example is Win CE.


Can you read? Too much to ask from lusers...


But probably you're right, it's a great idea to have to develop and maintain several different kernels because you can't make one that's stable, portable or scales well.

The subsystems in NT are interchangeable. Its one kernel. Thats the whole fucking point of the modular NT design. Can you read English?

So far all you have demonstrated is.. you know _nothing_
/laugh

And the NT kernel cant scale? LOL.
Its best not to open your mouth about NT design. You know nothing about it.

More flailing from the penguin.

You're intelligence has reached the local minima. You're now free to mate with the chimp you picked out at the zoo.

The Kitchen Sink said...

Sorry to drop in on things, but putting the NT Kernel to the side for a bit, dont lots of routers and smaller subsystems run on VXWorks?

I know its not an MS product, but it certainly isnt open source, or at least source isnt realeased unless an NDA is signed.

and why would you want the full blown NT Kernel on a router anyway? and is it really that critical to the world that a desktop/server OS is not able to run a computer which does not need to offer the functionality of either. Microsoft has simply made a business decision not to write a Microsoft Windows Router Edition 2007 simply because there is no need to.
Instead they are working on Windows Home Server, which is a cut down windows server for use as a NAS device, where a full blown OS has uses. (I am aware the WHS was buggy on launch)

(BTW i run, Mandriva 2008.1 Ubuntu 6.06 XP Pro, vista ultimate, and some secured 98se (for games) machines at home, if someone could find a good way of getting the latest java onto my dapper box for me in deb form that would be great)

julian67 said...

"NT is a portable kernel, just as portable as Linux"

It isn't. NT was slightly portable up to 4.0. NT 5 is in no way a highly portable kernel.

Perhaps you are confusing scalability with portability?

Here's the list (possibly incomplete0 of architectures supported by the Linux kernel:

DEC Alpha
Samsung Alpha CPU
Analog Devices
Blackfin
Argonaut RISC Core
Acorn Archimedes and Risc DEC StrongARM
Marvell
Sharp Zaurus
iPAQ
Palm Tungsten Handheld
GP2X
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet
Nokia N800
Nokia N810
gumstix
Nintendo DS via DSlinux
Sony Mylo
Psion 5, 5MX, Series 7,
Some Models of Apple iPods
OpenMoko Neo
Atmel AVR32
Freescale 68k architecture (68020, 68030, 68040, 68060)
Some Amigas: A1200, A2500, A3000, A4000
Apple Macintosh II, LC, Quadra, Centris and early Performa series
Fujitsu FR-V
Hewlett-Packard's PA-RISC family
H8 H8/300 & H8/500
IBM System/390 (31-bit)
zSeries and System z9 mainframes (64-bit)
Intel IA-64 Itanium, Itanium II
x86 IBM PC compatibles using IA-32 and x86-64 processors:
Intel 80386, 80486, and their AMD, Cyrix, Texas Instruments, IBM variants,entire Pentium series and variants
Intel Core processors + AMD 5x86, K5, K6, Athlon (all 32-bit versions), Duron, Sempron
x86-64:
AMD64
Intel64
Cyrix 5x86, 6x86 (M1), 6x86MX, MediaGX, VIA Technologies Eden (Samuel II), VIA C3, VIA C7 processors
Microsoft's Xbox
SGI Visual Workstation (Pentium II/III processor(s) with SGI chipset)
Sun Microsystems Sun386i workstation (80386 and 80486)
M32R from Mitsubishi
MIPS architecture:
Jazz
Cobalt Qube, Cobalt RaQ
DECstation
Godson (MIPS-like), Godson II, and Godson IIE from BLX IC Design Ltd (China)
Some PlayStation 2 models
PlayStation Portable Dreambox (HD models) OpenRISC open core
Power Architecture:IBM Servers
PowerPC: IBM's Cell, most pre-Intel Apple computers (all PCI-based Power Macintoshes, limited support for the older NuBus Power Macs)
Clones of the PCI Power Mac marketed by Power Computing, UMAX and Motorola
Amigas upgraded with a "Power-UP" card

AmigaOne motherboard
Samantha
IBM RS/6000, iSeries and pSeries systems
Nintendo GameCube
Project BlackDog
Sony Playstation 3
Virtex II Pro Field Programmable Array (FPGA)
Dreambox (non-HD models)
SPARC (32-bit) + Sun-4
SPARCstation/SPARCserver series
Enterprise systems based on the UltraSPARC T1 and UltraSPARC T2 processors
Sega Dreamcast
HP Jornada 680


Here's a list of architectures supported by NT 5:

x86
x86-64
IA-64

Did you spot the difference?

And you're asserting NT is just as portable. You're an idiot.

It's interesting to see you mixing quoting my posts (or very very selective parts of them) with your words without distinguishing them. Very classy.

"There are multiple examples of subset of the win32 api. One such example is Win CE."

So now Windows CE is merely a subset of the Win32 API?

That's an interesting and unique point of view.

You're a very stupid and dishonest person.

Anonymous said...


and why would you want the full blown NT Kernel on a router anyway? and is it really that critical to the world that a desktop/server OS is not able to run a computer which does not need to offer the functionality of either. Microsoft has simply made a business decision not to write a Microsoft Windows Router Edition 2007 simply because there is no need to.

Ack! Logic! Julian is immune to logic.

Seriously I don't know what hes on about. I already mentioned numerous times that there is no need to run NT on a router. This obviously means that MS is not going to port NT anytime soon. Eventually though I see the source being made public once they move onto a newer kernel architecture.. Or you can tinker with some code they made public on a research OS written in .net


Julian has assumed that Linux is the be all and end all of kernel designs (even though he knows nothing about it) and that there is no other modular, scalable , portable kernel.


In pure kernel design terms nobody can say one design is better than the other...

Anonymous said...


And you're asserting NT is just as portable. You're an idiot.

It is. MS is not going to spend money porting to insignificant platforms, when they can make billions off of x86. Is that too hard to understand? Fucking retard.

And Linux doesn't magically work on these other platforms. It requires hard work making sure the code compiles. Fucking retard.


So now Windows CE is merely a subset of the Win32 API?

The Win CE OS Implements a subset of the Win32 API. This was clear to everyone else reading but you.
You fucking retard.

More ! More ! More ! We want the penguin dance.

julian67 said...

It's heartwarming to know you're thinking of me but that post you're quoting isn't one of mine.

Anonymous said...


It's heartwarming to know you're thinking of me but that post you're quoting isn't one of mine.

Its obvious from the post that I know its not your post since I talk about you in the third person.

You're the worst kind of troll. You should take your chimp brain back to slashdot where it belongs.

Anonymous said...

@julian67: "Nobody is born knowing the Windows interface, tools, terminology. All that has to learned too."

Right. But the point is that it's ALREADY BEEN LEARNED by 90% of the user population. There's no need to go back and relearn everything, as you would have to do in order to use Linux. So, there's really no fucking point in using Linux. Why? For more "freedom"? Fuck that. People just don't care about the kind of "freedom" that you're trying to sell. They just want to use their computers to get their work done, play games, and entertain themselves. Windows is more than adequate for that purpose so, really, you lusers are going NOWHERE with desktop Linux...

Anonymous said...

@julian67: "t isn't. NT was slightly portable up to 4.0. NT 5 is in no way a highly portable kernel."

Thanks for writing this post. More than anything, it illuminates the fact that you really don't know a single thing about programming and kernel design. In your mind, the fact that something has been ported to a zillion architectures is what makes it portable, not the fundamental underlying design of the kernel. Ergo, the fact that it contains a ton of spaghetti logic to deal with platform differences doesn't matter, as long as it compiles on some fucking platform that nobody cares about. Here's a clue, little man: NT was designed from the very start to be -- and remains -- highly portable. The kernel is abstracted from the hardware with a component called the Hardware Abstraction Layer (or HAL). The HAL is the only piece of code that needs to be modified when you move the NT kernel to an alternate platform.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_Abstraction_Layer for more details, clueless one.

But, please, by all means keep writing. Keep defending Linux. Keep fighting on its behalf. Because you amuse those of us who DO write code for a living -- and who DO know better than you do how both Linux and Windows work. You clearly don't write code. It's obvious, based on your posts.

julian67 said...

"@julian67: "Nobody is born knowing the Windows interface, tools, terminology. All that has to learned too."

Right. But the point is that it's ALREADY BEEN LEARNED by 90% of the user population. There's no need to go back and relearn everything, as you would have to do in order to use Linux. So, there's really no fucking point in using Linux. Why? For more "freedom"? Fuck that. People just don't care about the kind of "freedom" that you're trying to sell. They just want to use their computers to get their work done, play games, and entertain themselves. Windows is more than adequate for that purpose so, really, you lusers are going NOWHERE with desktop Linux... "


That's fine but if you learn the Windows environment and find it doesn't offer what you want or need should you not look at alternatives?

I'd like to say a little more but I'm nodding off to sleep at the keyboad...time to go to bed.

Anonymous said...

That's fine but if you learn the Windows environment and find it doesn't offer what you want or need should you not look at alternatives?

Sure. Some people buy Macs. Only freetards switch to a crappy Linux system that does not work.

julian67 said...

"Sure. Some people buy Macs. Only freetards switch to a crappy Linux system that does not work."

Not being a 'tard of any kind, I switched to a system that does work.

Cunning as a fox, me.



Even Microsoft know when to switch.

Clearly after 7 years of customer testing and improvements XP became a stable system, no more blue screens, almost universal consumer device support via 3rd party drivers, a huge range of 3rd party software available, even one or two quite decent offerings from King Billy himself, and a massive 3 different architectures supported. So by 2007 they finally had it being something like it was claimed to be back in 2001.

It's obviously time to kill it and push some more crap out the door!

Vista.

The OS that's so great and so popular it needs the mojaveexperiment to try to convince unwary consumers that it isn't actually crap (MS are bright enough to only show it to the guinea pigs, there's no fucking way they let them actually use it).

Of course the mojaveexperiment had better not go offline. The make sure it's always acessible, never fails, stutters or chokes on its own steaming streaming bs.

So they don't let it near IIS.

They run it on CentOS and Apache:

Headers For: http://mojaveexperiment.com

Connection: close
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:53:51 GMT
Accept-Ranges: bytes
ETag: "27b85b4-bfc-62838080"
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS)
Content-Length: 3068
Content-Type: text/html, text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Last-Modified: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:30:58 GMT
Client-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:53:51 GMT
Client-Peer: 72.47.200.149:80
Client-Response-Num: 1
Title: The "Mojave Experiment"

The dumbasses got caught trying to promote their "awesome" products while themselves using a free, no-cost, Red Hat clone and Apache. At which point did they hanf their heads inshame and migrate to IIS? No, they spoofed the headers so now it looks like it runs on IIS. It still runs on CentOS and Apache, the dumb fuckers left port 22 (ssh) open and people could ping it. How many IIS boxes keep port 22 open and run an ssh-server?

I was quite surprised at this.

I knew Windows was still not ready for the desktop but I'd heard they made a pretty decent server.

Anonymous said...

Not being a 'tard of any kind, I switched to a system that does work.

Yeah. It works for you and for aound 1% of the population. And only after many sleepless nights.

Anonymous said...

Oh noes, the Mojave Experiment website runs on a Linux server. Too bad it's talking about *desktop* OS'es. When I buy my next server, I'll keep in mind that Linux and BSD and Solaris are all good options. But when I buy a laptop, I'll go for the OS that lets me plug in external projectors without rebooting, hibernates properly, and runs the apps I need (hint: Office, non-crashing Firefox, iTunes, and some decent email program).

Anonymous said...

@julian67: "e dumbasses got caught trying to promote their "awesome" products while themselves using a free, no-cost, Red Hat clone and Apache. At which point did they hanf their heads inshame and migrate to IIS? No, they spoofed the headers so now it looks like it runs on IIS. It still runs on CentOS and Apache, the dumb fuckers left port 22 (ssh) open and people could ping it. How many IIS boxes keep port 22 open and run an ssh-server?"

You keep making the same nonsensical arguments OVER and OVER and OVER again ... and you keep getting SLAPPED hard. This isn't even remotely relevant to the discussion of DESKTOP OSes. Nobody gives a crap about servers. If I need a SERVER, I'll shop for a server OS.

You are such a fucking moron.

Anonymous said...

@julian67: "That's fine but if you learn the Windows environment and find it doesn't offer what you want or need should you not look at alternatives?

There is an alternative. It's called OS X. Linux is NOT an alternative. It's a BAD IDEA.

I'd like to say a little more but I'm nodding off to sleep at the keyboad...time to go to bed."

Rrrrrright. Go empty your drool bucket...

Anonymous said...

tuomov: "Complexity contradicts that "Gradually the ideas that we can be more than mere unquestioning recipients/consumers of software". "

Julian isn't a programmer. He isn't in any position to use source code, other than to wipe his ass (poorly) with the print-outs. Anything he has to say about source code is useless.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous: "It is. MS is not going to spend money porting to insignificant platforms, when they can make billions off of x86. Is that too hard to understand? Fucking retard."

Exactly. Microsoft focuses on x86 and x64 exclusively because, like Apple, it reduces the size of the implementation and test matrix to a manageable size. Lusers don't get that. They think that putting Linux on every possible processor known to man is a "good thing"; all the while, trading off mediocre quality and unmaintainability for quantity of architectures. IMO, that is a poor tradeoff, and it exemplifies the kind of misdirected, scattergun thinking that permeates the Linux community. They don't want to focus on the RIGHT problems. They want to focus on the INTERESTING problems. And it's uncommon for the two to intersect. Software engineering is HARD and largely BORING. You can't solve fundamentals when you're not interested in solving HARD and BORING problems. But that's the nature of Linux, and it's the reason why it has FAILED. Commercial offerings overcome these problems because money fills the gap between HARD/BORING and INTERESTING. Create an economic incentive, and it almost doesn't matter how boring the task is. Somebody will do it. Not so with Linux. Even if you can somehow beg somebody to look at your problem -- which is unlikely, since Lusers tend to harshly criticize people who dare to enter bugs against their code -- the follow-through is pitiful. In the end, you have to pay somebody to fix it, and that kind of so-called "freedom" doesn't sound quite so free...

julian67 said...

"You keep making the same nonsensical arguments OVER and OVER and OVER again ... and you keep getting SLAPPED hard. This isn't even remotely relevant to the discussion of DESKTOP OSes. Nobody gives a crap about servers. If I need a SERVER, I'll shop for a server OS. "

It's not about the server. I'm not surprised you think it is because you're very very stupid.

It's about a company whose flagship product has been badly received. That company believes the product is good, that the customers are wrong. They mount a campaign in which those potential customers are not permitted to use the product, only to watch a company representative demonstrate it. That company, which is trying to restore customers' faith in their product, itself chooses to use a competitor's platform in preference to their own existing equivalent. They don't have faith in their own products and they don't respect their own customers. That's a product and a company with severe problems.

That was the point. Most people would have understood that, but you're too fucking dense.

"Rrrrrright. Go empty your drool bucket... "

A drool bucket? I don't know what culture you're from but I'm pretty sure your home smells a lot worse than mine.

"
There is an alternative. It's called OS X"


OS X is very nice but did I hear somewhere that OS X is tied to Apple hardware? Gosh I think I did. I don't run unlicensed software like you XP-piratebay-xtra-trojan-edition dimwits so it isn't really an option. Does OS X run well on AMD CPUs? You're an asshole.

"Julian isn't a programmer. He isn't in any position to use source code, other than to wipe his ass (poorly) with the print-outs. Anything he has to say about source code is useless. "

Wow another genius!

You have to be a programmer to use source code? You're another idiot.

You only have to be a programmer to write source code. Most GNU/Linux distributions are offered in binary form and the sources made available. Having the source is occasionally very useful for non-programmers. You might want to compile the appication differently than the distribution maintainer chose, to add or remove certain functions or to have the application install in a place other than the default. Maybe you want to strip the application down to bare bones for a tiny system, perhaps by removing the documentation or by compiling it without Gnome or KDE support because you don't use Gnome or KDE. Binaries are by their nature generic one-size-fits-all builds whether on Windows or GNU/Linux or anything else. 99% of the time that's fine but occasionally you prefer to have something work differently and if you have the source code, and the usual build tools you can do it, programming skills not required.

Some people produce applications but never release binaries, only source. I have a neat tool that lets me obtain h264 movies from BBC iPlayer. They offer non-drm h264 of decent quality for iPhone but only streaming flash for OS X, BSD and GNU/Linux and streaming flash/crappy drm'd flash for Windows Vista and XP (but not 64 bit XP). So some clever person wrote a small ruby application that spoofs the iPhone and allows anyone with ruby installed to obtain the h264. It's available as source. Of course a lot of windows users fill their underpants when they see the word source so eventually someone got around to making an .exe because actually having to type

ruby setup.rb config
ruby setup.rb install

to install it and

iplayer-dl sometvprogram

proved too challenging. But those simpletons had to wait a long time for a binary, everyone with the source code could use it from day one.

Another reason why having the source is useful:

Some people here will be aware of the fiasco over Creative Audio drivers for Vista last year. Creative crippled their drivers, giving the hardware less functionality in Vista than it has/had in XP in an attempt to force people into upgrading the hardware to get exactly what they had before. Features like Dolby Digital and DTS support were disabled. A hacker reverse engineered the drivers and restored the functionality and made the modified drivers available. Creative audigy owners with Vista were happy again. But he had no right to decompile the drivers, to make changes or distribute the modified versions. Creative banned him from their forums and forced him to take down the links on his website and cease modification and distribution. What's this got to do with source code and Linux? I was similarly dissatisfied with a recent Intel wireless driver. The old one had worked extremely well but Intel decided to rationalise their wireless drivers so they are easier to maintain and they solved some legal issues as well which affected distribution of a daemon. But the new driver wasn't initially very good and the old one has been dropped by most distributions as there have been a lot of changes to Linux wireless recently. You could no more install the old driver in an up to date system than you could install an Intel wireless Win98 driver in XP. What to do? Could I fix it all by myself? No chance. But I had the source code for the older driver which I legally obtained and am allowed to modify. It took me a few minutes searching online to find I wasn't the only person who preferred the old driver. Someone wrote a patch. I patched my old driver's source code and built the modified driver and everything worked beautifully. No legal threats, no take down notices, no forum bans, in fact I wrote a forum howto for the benefit of anyone else wanting to do the same (as an aside, a few weeks later Intel revised the new drivers and they work fine, all issues resolved. I've switched back to the new ones).

Before anyone bitches about Linux and wireless drivers or some such ill informed crap: the Windows Intel 3945 driver was not much good in Vista either despite being problem free in XP. I expect SP1 might have sorted that out but it would have been a long wait for some people.

So the next time you say that only programmers benefit from access to source code please remember this:

you're a fucking idiot and you don't know shit.

Anonymous said...

@julian67: "It's not about the server. I'm not surprised you think it is ..."

You're the one brought up the issue of the server platform, chimp brain.

It's about a company whose flagship product has been badly received.

No, it's about the worthlessness of Internet memes. Project Mojave perfectly illustrates how easily people swallow FUD when morons like you spread negative propaganda. Once they actually TRY Microsoft's flagship product, they realize that it's pretty much exactly what they wanted, in the first place.

"That company, which is trying to restore customers' faith in their product, itself chooses to use a competitor's platform in preference to their own existing equivalent."

Here's a clue for you, Julian. NOBODY CARES WHAT PLATFORM projectmojave.com IS RUNNING ON. That's a sleight-of-hand sideshow created by fucktwats like you who run WhoIs -- hoping against hope that Microsoft is using Linux somewhere -- so that you can claim some kind of non-existent moral superiority. If it makes you feel better to erect strawmen in order to avoid accepting that your desktop Linux advocacy is pure shit, then fine. Whatever. By all means continue your mental masturbation. We're not laughing with you, we're laughing AT you.

OS X is very nice but did I hear somewhere that OS X is tied to Apple hardware? Gosh I think I did.

You're yet another a misinformed Internet douchebag.

Review: EFiX Dongle Perfectly Transforms PC to Mac

http://gizmodo.com/5049756/review-efix-dongle-perfectly-transforms-pc-to-mac

You only have to be a programmer to write source code. Most GNU/Linux distributions are offered in binary form and the sources made available. Having the source is occasionally very useful for non-programmers. You might want to compile the appication differently than the distribution maintainer chose, to add or remove certain functions or to have the application install in a place other than the default. Maybe you want to strip the application down to bare bones for a tiny system, perhaps by removing the documentation or by compiling it without Gnome or KDE support because you don't use Gnome or KDE. Binaries are by their nature generic one-size-fits-all builds whether on Windows or GNU/Linux or anything else. 99% of the time that's fine but occasionally you prefer to have something work differently and if you have the source code, and the usual build tools you can do it, programming skills not required.

LMFAO! Listen, douchewad. You're not a dev, you'll never BE a dev, and you're not qualified to speak about development issues. So, piss off, you fucking poser.

What to do? Could I fix it all by myself? No chance. But I had the source code for the older driver which I legally obtained and am allowed to modify. It took me a few minutes searching online to find I wasn't the only person who preferred the old driver. Someone wrote a patch. I patched my old driver's source code and built the modified driver and everything worked beautifully. No legal threats, no take down notices, no forum bans, in fact I wrote a forum howto for the benefit of anyone else wanting to do the same

Which doesn't refute my original contention: You aren't qualified to write code. You rode on the back of some other jackass and, if that luser hadn't been interested in that issue, you would have been SCREWED. So, fuck you.

So the next time you say that only programmers benefit from access to source code please remember this

Julian, you can't do SHIT without some dev feeding you. So, blow it out your ass, douchebag.

Anonymous said...

Binaries are by their nature generic one-size-fits-all builds whether on Windows or GNU/Linux or anything else. 99% of the time that's fine

Now that's a nice estimation. I guess that's why Linux usage is still under 1%.

julian67 said...

"Once they actually TRY Microsoft's flagship ...."

Here's what you missed:

they don't try it.

In projectmojave at no pount is a single customer allowed to actuall use a computer. Aspects of it are demonstrated by MS proffesionals.

"NOBODY CARES WHAT PLATFORM projectmojave.com IS RUNNING ON"

Errr, that's what I said!

"It's not about the server. I'm not surprised you think it is because you're very very stupid."

And now you demonstrate that again.

"EFiX Dongle Perfectly Transforms PC to Mac"

You missed this: "I don't run unlicensed software like you....Does OS X run well on AMD CPUs? You're an asshole."

You're still an asshole.

"You're not a dev, you'll never BE a dev, and you're not qualified to speak about development issues. So, piss off, you fucking poser."

That's thrilling, and well done for expresssing it so well, but the entire fucking point is that I'm not a developer, yet I still get bebefits from access to source code.

learn

to

fucking

read

you

cunt

"So, blow it out your ass, douchebag. "

You blow douchebags out of you ass? And you're the same charmer who has a drool bucket he has to empty before going to bed........that has got to be one smelly slimy home.

Next time you fuck your mom ask her to clean up the trailer when you're done.

Anonymous said...

@julianna: "they don't try it"

I hate to burst your bubble, but Vista already has 15% of the OS market, behind XP which has 75%.

It's not about the server.

Yeah, no shit. But above, here's what you said...


Of course the mojaveexperiment had better not go offline. The make sure it's always acessible, never fails, stutters or chokes on its own steaming streaming bs.

So they don't let it near IIS.

They run it on CentOS and Apache:

Headers For: http://mojaveexperiment.com

Connection: close
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:53:51 GMT
Accept-Ranges: bytes
ETag: "27b85b4-bfc-62838080"
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS)
Content-Length: 3068
Content-Type: text/html, text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Last-Modified: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:30:58 GMT
Client-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:53:51 GMT
Client-Peer: 72.47.200.149:80
Client-Response-Num: 1
Title: The "Mojave Experiment"

The dumbasses got caught trying to promote their "awesome" products while themselves using a free, no-cost, Red Hat clone and Apache.


Remember typing that into your browser, dickwad? Typical luser bullshit tactics: Make an irrelevant, lame-ass argument about servers when we're talking about desktops, and then pretend you didn't say it. Even worse, criticize others for pointing out your own bullshit.

You missed this: "I don't run unlicensed software like you....Does OS X run well on AMD CPUs?

Yeah, as a matter of fact, it does. It's been working for a couple years now, dumbfuck.

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/10/26/5756

That's thrilling, and well done for expresssing it so well, but the entire fucking point is that I'm not a developer, yet I still get bebefits from access to source code

LOL. That's like saying "I'm getting a new car, as long as somebody gives me one first." Which ignores the fact that (a) people aren't interested in fixing YOUR problems, and (b) you have no guarantee of having your problems fixed. Asshole.

You blow douchebags out of you ass?

You're a chimp. Let's review...

"So, blow it out your ass, douchebag."

I realize that you're having problems understanding English, but this is what is referred to as imperative tense. It's a command. The statement is directed at you. Fucking moron.

Anonymous said...

看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,小套房,小套房,進修,在職進修,留學,證照,MBA,EMBA,留學,MBA,EMBA,留學,進修,在職進修,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,住宿,民宿,飯店,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,关键词排名,网络营销,網路行銷,關鍵字排名,关键词排名,网络营销,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,PMP,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,PMP,證照,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,網頁設計,網站設計,網頁設計,網站設計,网页设计,网站设计,网站设计,网页设计

Anonymous said...

Making habbo credits
is the old question : Honestly there is no fast way to make lots of habbo gold. Sadly enough a lot of the people that all of a sudden come to with millions of habbo coinsalmost overnight probably duped . Although there are a lot of ways to make lots of cheap habbo credits here I will tell you all of the ways that I know and what I do to buy habbo gold.

sm said...

網頁設計,情趣用品店,情趣用品專賣網

A片下載,成人影片下載
威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣,威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣
情惑用品性易購


免費視訊聊天室,aio交友愛情館,愛情公寓,一葉情貼圖片區,情色貼圖,情色文學,色情聊天室,情色小說,情色電影,情色論壇,成人論壇,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,情色視訊,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,視訊交友網,視訊聊天室,視訊美女,視訊交友,視訊交友90739,AV,AV女優


A片,色情A片,免費A片,成人影片,色情影片,a片免費看,情色貼圖,情色文學,情色小說,色情小說

kiloi said...

nike tnEnter the necessary language translation, up to 200 bytes winter, moves frequently in Chinanike chaussures showing that the deep strategy of the Chinese market. Harvard Business School, tn chaussures according to the relevant survey data show that in recent years the Chinese market three brands, Adidas, mens clothingpolo shirts Li Ning market share at 21 percent, respectively, 20%, 17%. The brand is first-line to three lines of urban competition for mutual penetration. Side of theworld,announced layoffs, while China's large-scale facilities fists. The sporting goods giant Nike's every move in the winter will be fully exposed its strategy. Years later, the Nike, Inc. announced the world's Fan

barry said...

Compaq 371785-001 battery
Gateway MX3562 adapter
DELL 710M battery
Gateway CX2610 adapter
Gateway M320 adapter
Gateway CX200X adapter
Gateway CX2618 adapter
Compaq Presario M2000 Adapter
Gateway 4540GZ adapter
Gateway M500 adapter
Gateway 3040GZ adapter
HP DV9000 Lcd
MK911 adapter
PA-1900-05C1 adapter
HP DV1000 Adapter
hp 375143-001 adapter
B154EW01 lcd screen
Apple M8943LL/A Adapter
Gateway CX2608 adapter
Dell Latitude D610 Adapter

Peejay Li said...

I would like to be the supporter of yours. Thank you for sharing such a nice article.
chaussures puma
puma speed cat
Nike Tn Chaussures
requin tn
nike shox
puma shoes
puma CAT
puma basket
puma speed
baskets puma
puma sport
puma femmes
puma shox r4 torch
nike air max requin
nike shox r3
shox rival r3
tn plus
chaussures shox
nike shox r4 torch
air max tn requin
nike tn femme
pas cher nike
tn chaussures
nike rift
nike shox nz
chaussures shox
nike shox rival
shox rival
chaussures requin
jeans online
cheap armani jeans
cheap G-star jeans

Peejay Li said...

I would like to be the supporter of yours. Thank you for sharing such a nice article.
chaussures puma
puma speed cat
Nike Tn Chaussures
requin tn
nike shox
puma shoes
puma CAT
puma basket
puma speed
baskets puma
puma sport
puma femmes
puma shox r4 torch
nike air max requin
nike shox r3
shox rival r3
tn plus
chaussures shox
nike shox r4 torch
air max tn requin
nike tn femme
pas cher nike
tn chaussures
nike rift
nike shox nz
chaussures shox
nike shox rival
shox rival
chaussures requin
jeans online
cheap armani jeans
cheap G-star jeans

ass said...

Present-day society, the rapid development of science and technology makes cell phones wholesale is no longer a simple phone communications equipment only. Wholesale cell phones have many features, entertainment, scalability, and so have a good expression of the discount cell phones will be to maximize the effectiveness of multimedia technology.Cell phones from simple communication became a full-featured entertainment terminal . Can be said that cell phone china new milestone in the industry. This fully demonstrates that, cheap cell phones entertainment has become the most sought after consumer applications and has become the focus of the mobile phones market.

ass said...

www.crazypurchase.com Web site for the majority of the china wholesalers, and buy products wholesale to provide information and buy wholesale from china information exchange platform dedicated to becoming China Wholesale.

Sneakers hobbies said...

we have lots of polo shirts
Abercrombie Fitch clothing
Abercrombie Fitch hoodile
ralph lauren shirts
Columbia Jacket
north face jackets
spyder ski jacket
polo shirts
polo shirt
spyder jackets
mens jacket
mens spyder jackets
spyder jackets for cheap
spyder ski jacket
womens spyder jackets
ralph lauren
spyder jackets cheap
spyder jackets for men
cheap spyder jackets
north face jackets
discount spyder jacket
the north face jacket
ralph lauren polo shirts on sale
discount ralph lauren polo shirts
ralph lauren polo shirts
ralph lauren polo wholesale
north face jackets
north face jacket
Columbia Jacket
ralph lauren jacket
Abercrombie Fitch hoodies
Abercrombie Fitch clothing
abercrombie fitch
abercrombie fitch
welcom to our store.

Sneakers hobbies said...

we have lots of polo shirts
Abercrombie Fitch clothing
Abercrombie Fitch hoodile
ralph lauren shirts
Columbia Jacket
north face jackets
spyder ski jacket
polo shirts
polo shirt
spyder jackets
mens jacket
mens spyder jackets
spyder jackets for cheap
spyder ski jacket
womens spyder jackets
ralph lauren
spyder jackets cheap
spyder jackets for men
cheap spyder jackets
north face jackets
discount spyder jacket
the north face jacket
ralph lauren polo shirts on sale
discount ralph lauren polo shirts
ralph lauren polo shirts
ralph lauren polo wholesale
north face jackets
north face jacket
Columbia Jacket
ralph lauren jacket
Abercrombie Fitch hoodies
Abercrombie Fitch clothing
abercrombie fitch
abercrombie fitch
welcom to our store.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 236   Newer› Newest»