|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
posted November 05, 2009 08:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Multi-user environments suck.
No, get a proper argument instead.
Single user environments suck because:
*Security issues
*Lack of proper permissions
Quote:
Quote:
Why is Windows better? I need a proper argument.
Because it's security relies on less user experience than Linux. Same thing can be done in Linux but it needs more technical experience, that's why. 
To get anything done in Windows you need to know how to read hex, and to have a very good idea of the register. How does that qualify as "good"?
And what is this "technical" you speak of? I demand to know.
Quote:
Quote:
I use this method:
1. Hit alt+f2(hotkey)
2. Write parts of the app name and hit tab to get the auto completion working
3. Hit enter and the application starts.
Needs keyboard, too slow to move the hands to type when my hand was on the mouse. 
Mouse? That slow ineffective thing? The only need somebody ever got for a mouse is:
*Games
*Applications with bad design
Quote:
The irony here is that Windows wasn't very secure but due to huge targets against it
You call that an argument? Windows suffer from viruses(as in NOT trojans) because of 2 reasons:
*Single user environment
*Propitiatory blackbox
The combination of these is what gave Mac OS their virus problems back in the days, by removing point 1 of this list they are pretty damn secure.
____________
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 08:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You can have multi-user environment under Windows, but it's clear that should be a last resort and is NOT a desirable thing for normal users.
WHY?! I demand a proper answer. And how on earth can the user actually notice this?
Quote:
You know, people keep saying that Linux is hard to use. What they mean with that is not only the GUI
http://www.kde.org/
Quote:
the use of command line, or the learning of Linux commands.
Sadly, your wrong. The exact same applies to Windows, since you have to learn the commands.
Quote:
When people are presented to type "a root password", most of them begin to have second thoughts on using Linux.
Why??????? Root = admin
And what is bad about by default not being able to kill your own system?
Quote:
but having to learn stuff isn't really a good thing, even for experienced people.
If nobody learns, we would have been the stone ages.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 09:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
*Lack of proper permissions
Explain. How is this a good thing for normal users.
You see, here's the argument. Whether YOU like it or not or consider it trivial, even experienced users don't want restrictions. After all it's their bloody computer so why put permissions to access certain things? Of course it's done for security but that's what most people don't want, they want full access, no hassle.
Yes, logging out and in as admin IS a hassle, and you wonder why people say Windows is easier to use? It's because Linux PROMOTES the image with multi-users and hassle stuff when doing admin stuff (like installing drivers or something, I don't know how Linux handles it, so I could be wrong).
And as for the GUI, my WHOLE point was to say that it's NOT the GUI that's the problem with Linux (although most Windows & especially Mac fanboys won't admit it), personally I hate flashy GUIs in Vista myself so you can see I'm not suggesting the GUI is the problem. The problem is the mentality of Linux requiring a "admin" and "user" account for 1 person computers.
Oh and most people are used to Windows and DOS commands, that's why I said you have to "relearn" stuff. It's the way it is, you can't attract people by saying "make some effort and learn Linux as you learned Windows" because most people don't have the patience.
If you take proper measures, I haven't had a virus since never. Well, I did scan my computer, and it didn't act weird, so I assume it's clean. (of course there's always the chance that there could be some nasty hidden virus but then that's unprovable and frankly the same can be said about linux -- the stuff that is indetectable or has no symptoms is impossible to prove it exists also).
Of course people get viruses on Windows because they don't care or are too dumb. It's not like they would choose Linux anyway, given that they probably don't even know what root or admin is...
Quote:
And what is this "technical" you speak of? I demand to know.
knowing what an admin is, what passwords does, what logging in to an account does, permissions, etc... those are "technical" things for the average joe that gets viruses on Windows.
Sure, those are easy to understand for those who make a little effort, but those who make effort don't get viruses on Windows either, so...
Quote:
Mouse? That slow ineffective thing? The only need somebody ever got for a mouse is:
*Games
*Applications with bad design
LOL are you serious? The mouse is the greatest input device ever.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 09:14 PM |
|
Edited by Shares at 21:18, 05 Nov 2009.
|
Quote:
Mouse? That slow ineffective thing? The only need somebody ever got for a mouse is:
*Games
*Applications with bad design
It is apparent that you've never done any 3d modeling.
I just press start then a (all programs) and quickly scrolls to where I know where the app I'm looking for is. The apps I use regualarly is off course directly on the startmenu.
Quote:
Quote:
You can have multi-user environment under Windows, but it's clear that should be a last resort and is NOT a desirable thing for normal users.
Quote:
Sadly, your wrong. The exact same applies to Windows, since you have to learn the commands.
Not really, since the base user learned (most likely) their early computer knowledge in windows.
Quote:
Why??????? Root = admin
And what is bad about by default not being able to kill your own system?
Because it's annoying and slows things down, without adding any real safety. That's the thing with enviroments that soppisedly supports several kinds of users. The users all need different things and the things added that you don't need is just in the way.
Quote:
If nobody learns, we would have been the stone ages.
That's kinda stupid. If you have to relearn things all the time, we'd never even reached the stone ages!
Quote:
LOL are you serious? The mouse is the greatest input device ever.
Apparently you've never done any modelling either... the mouse lacks a dimension!
We're really building up quotes here!
____________
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 09:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
*Lack of proper permissions
Explain. How is this a good thing for normal users.
A normal user could care less. But when you get onto a higher level, its really good.
Quote:
they want full access, no hassle.
I had that mentality 1 year ago, then I switched over to GNU/Linux. You got full access, there is a standard logical hierarchy on the folder setup, there is no idiotic popups without a reason, AND:
"restriced" in Windows != "restricted" in Linux
Restriced in Windows is done in such a idiotic way its laughable. I run on my "normal" account under GNU/Linux. When I install OR do some "high level" cluttering because I CAN, then I need admin powers. Usually done by sudo or gksu.
Quote:
Yes, logging out and in as admin IS a hassle, and you wonder why people say Windows is easier to use?
The last time I relogged? I think that when I created a normal user account under Archlinux, and that is the only time I have done that.
Otherwise I just use sudo, gksu or equals of that.
Quote:
It's because Linux PROMOTES the image with multi-users and hassle stuff when doing admin stuff (like installing drivers or something, I don't know how Linux handles it, so I could be wrong).[/
......The problem is the mentality of Linux requiring a "admin" and "user" account for 1 person computers......
.........It's not like they would choose Linux anyway, given that they probably don't even know what root or admin is.
Now.... As you stated you got no clue on what your rambling about.
Installing Ubuntu works like this:
1. Enter user password
2. Enter root password(you can't login or use root as an actual account)
3. When needed(installing applications 99,9% of the time) you must enter the root password to do this task
So there is 1 account, and 1 lock to keep the system in check under YOUR control. Root is nothing BUT a lock, not an account. Using it as an account is bad, and no "friendly" system allows the root powers to be an account.
Quote:
Quote:
And what is this "technical" you speak of? I demand to know.
knowing what an admin is, what passwords does, what logging in to an account does, permissions, etc... those are "technical" things for the average joe that gets viruses on Windows.
Give your grandparents a friendly Linux distro, and in 99% of the cases everything work out of the box and there is no questions asked. Did they learn anything? No. Did they get a new OS? Yes.
Quote:
LOL are you serious? The mouse is the greatest input device ever.
Quote:
Apparently you've never done any modelling either... the mouse lacks a dimension!
Mouse = extra precision. Most of the time its slow and ineffective, when its not needed.
I have done 3D, and I should have written that sentence in a less careless way.
Quote:
Not really, since the base user learned (most likely) their early computer knowledge in windows.
I doubt and question that statement. There is few people with knowledge of DOS, I would claim 95% of the userbase has never touched DOS except in the cases of I.E: Dosbox. Where they don't bother with jack either.
"Early computer knowledge" and the standard teachings is invalid crap that should have been condemned by law. Everything is done by GUI anyhow, the exceptions is "How to" where just random cmd lines is ages faster than finding all the buttons and parameters.
Quote:
Because it's annoying and slows things down, without adding any real safety. That's the thing with enviroments that soppisedly supports several kinds of users. The users all need different things and the things added that you don't need is just in the way.
From my experience: A single user system with no folder system is the worst thing ever.
Quote:
That's kinda stupid. If you have to relearn things all the time, we'd never even reached the stone ages!
Whats bad about learning more? And what is bad about figuring out how much blood tainted the grass is on the other side?
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:10 PM |
|
|
I agree with Death. *shocked gasps all around*
Quote:
When needed(installing applications 99,9% of the time) you must enter the root password to do this task
So it's like UAC, but even more annoying. Great!
Just face it, Windows XP > Linux.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:12 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 22:14, 05 Nov 2009.
|
Quote:
So there is 1 account, and 1 lock to keep the system in check under YOUR control. Root is nothing BUT a lock, not an account. Using it as an account is bad, and no "friendly" system allows the root powers to be an account.
I can imagine when you need to do more maintenance what a pain that can be to enter root password all the time, since you can't "log in" or so you said. 
Quote:
Apparently you've never done any modelling either... the mouse lacks a dimension!
Yes it's called the mouse button and keyboard hotkeys (how fast). Pressing for example will move in the 'depth' direction (left-right mouse buttons in respective directions). Zbrush is a sculpting program for example.
The mouse + easy keyboard shortcuts are the perfect tool for 3D cutting in low-poly meshes as well, not just for sculpting.
What other method do you want, a mouse used in the air? Trust me, while you may think it looks cool, you will get tired holding your hand in the air pretty quickly...
Quote:
So it's like UAC, but even more annoying. Great!
Oh yeah I absolutely hate UAC in Vista, worst thing EVER. 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Just face it, Windows XP > Linux.
Sorry but no. Windows XP is good for some things that Linux isn't good at and Linux is good in things that Windows XP aren't. I was using Linux for about a year or so and I only have good things to say about it. For starters, it's much faster than Windows XP.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Sorry but no. Windows XP is good for some things that Linux isn't good at and Linux is good in things that Windows XP aren't. I was using Linux for about a year or so and I only have good things to say about it. For starters, it's much faster than Windows XP.
I disagree. Yes Linux can be much faster if properly configured, but so can Windows if you configure it properly. nLite it like I did, and you reduce it and make it slim, with classical GUI (not stupid 'themes') and all updates integrated in the Setup CD/USB/whatever. 
I don't really have a preference on Linux or Windows from a neutral POV (from a 'familiar' POV of course I prefer Windows...), the only one that truly sucks for me is a Mac.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:17 PM |
|
|
You haven't yet used Linux have you, TheDeath? When you have, then please let me know what you think.
And yes, Macs are completely ****house.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You haven't yet used Linux have you, TheDeath? When you have, then please let me know what you think.
I was actually basing it on statistics I read, since let's face it, home computers always vary on boot-up time depending on so many factors, for example my current XP boots as slow as my older one (even though it's MUCH more light and the whole rig is MUCH faster), because I noticed it "halts" before even loading from the HDD for some reason.
BIOS also halts, I guess it's because of doing some tests for ECC RAM memory to see it's proper or something.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I can imagine when you need to do more maintenance what a pain that can be to enter root password all the time, since you can't "log in" or so you said.
Why use pure invoked sudo for managing?
Use su or start the file manager with sudo.
Quote:
Quote:
When needed(installing applications 99,9% of the time) you must enter the root password to do this task
So it's like UAC, but even more annoying. Great!
No. UAC is a big annoying BUG! It bugs you every time you start something, and it keeps on nagging.
Sudo is elegant and powerful.
Quote:
I disagree. Yes Linux can be much faster if properly configured, but so can Windows if you configure it properly
You can't get the optimization boost in Windows, and you can't get a light enough system either. So its inferior.
____________
|
|
emilsn
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 10:49 PM |
|
|
I really enjoy 7. it's better than Vista and I haven't had a bad experience with it yet.
And I still run with the free version
____________
Don't walk behind me; I may not
lead. Don't walk in front of me;
I may not follow. Just walk
beside me and be my friend.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 11:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
UAC is a big annoying BUG! It bugs you every time you start something, and it keeps on nagging.
I've used Linux. And it's exactly the same as UAC, but even more annoying, because you have to input your password.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 11:30 PM |
|
|
mvass you can not have an opinion about flying in general after 12 hours in the simulator. Think about it ...
____________
The empty set
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 11:34 PM |
|
|
Corribus, I am not talking about being a computer nut. I am asking you this with the same idea that you have in mind; which is your most valuable resource: FREE TIME.
So, if you have a separate machine for work, then I agree with you; you shouldn't have dual boot. But I guess I am pointing somewhere else ...
Anyway, I have not used W7, but if you have Vista my suggestion is re-install XP and those two problems will be reduced.
However, I am not convinced you should prefer Windows to Linux and I am talking about you specifically.
____________
The empty set
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 11:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Corribus, I am not talking about being a computer nut. I am asking you this with the same idea that you have in mind; which is your most valuable resource: FREE TIME.
I know, I meant to imply that I just want something simple to use. Which I figure is what most people want. They don't really want to think about all the details, even if they know a bit about computers.
Quote:
So, if you have a separate machine for work, then I agree with you; you shouldn't have dual boot.
Yes, I have a different machine for work, and it has XP on it.
Quote:
nyway, I have not used W7, but if you have Vista my suggestion is re-install XP and those two problems will be reduced.
I would love to, but unfortunately I don't have my XP disk any longer, so that's not an option unfortunately.
Quote:
However, I am not convinced you should prefer Windows to Linux and I am talking about you specifically.
I ran a Red Hat Linux machine long time ago and I was never convinced it was worth all the trouble. I've also used a lot of UNIX (Silicon Graphics) workstations in the past and found them to be a pain as well. Perhaps things are different now.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted November 05, 2009 11:55 PM |
|
Edited by dimis at 23:59, 05 Nov 2009.
|
Death,
For once man, G E T R E A L.
No reboot for 6 years due to installation ? Have you not experimented with some software for 6 years ? Do you want a public vote to see how many people believe in you (apart from you) ? Should I divide 6 by 3 ? That sounds more reasonable (but still not for the majority of users that YOU support).
I have not really talked about pros of multi-user environment. If you go back, I never mention that, because for most users this is irrelevant (in the beginning of course).
You want to talk about apps that don't exist under Linux ? Why does that happen then ? Is it because MS requires programmers to write with specific libraries that are not portable in many cases ? I mean seriously, if you are a company that wants to make money (the obvious!) for which platform would you develop ?
As for the good answers on anti-virus software and anti-spam and extra firewalls give me some because I don't get it. And in the end justify me please what is the purpose of all these when you actually get a virus
What forceful use of multi-user under linux man ?
As of the people who "complain" about linux, they are NOT willing to spend the time they spent for Windows and most of the times there is no other "friend" near by to show them their way. So yes, Linux hard. In fact it is impossible.
As of Windows XP memory requirements, I agree; it rocks! What about Vista which is more recent ? What about Windows 7 (here I am guessing; I have no clue) ?
Man, have you ever had a working Windows installation with less than 1GB ? Again, G E T R E A L.
Crashing: How many days can you leave your Windows machine turned on without restarting ?
Office is not entirely different from Windows, but we agree ...
TeX LaTeX
____________
The empty set
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 06, 2009 12:12 AM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 00:14, 06 Nov 2009.
|
Quote:
Death,
For once man, G E T R E A L.
It seems to me you are living in fantasy. Oh and the reality is that Windows has around 90% of computers. (see below what I mean with it)
I'm not using that as an argument. I'm saying that you, instead of living in your illusion, GET TO SEE WHY PEOPLE PREFER WINDOWS. Yes some are unconvertable, some have stupid reasons (and I agree), but when I outlined some arguments, THOSE ARE WHAT SOME PEOPLE THINK, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. That's not gonna change "the reality". And neither you bashing Windows' will change people's perception on Linux -- worse, they will get away from it seeing as how Linux guys speak nonsense, they may as well not trust them.
Because let's face it, it was YOU who say Windows is weak, crashes, and whatever. So it's you who starts bashing nonsense without proof, how about you get real, what kind of NORMAL people leave their computer on for months? Is that an argument? What the hell man, get yourself PRACTICAL and down to earth, not hypothetically speaking as if every freaking person is running a 24/7 server!
The apps that don't exist under Linux, have you ever thought that maybe they would need a dramatic change in app architecture to make it work? The ONLY stuff that "needs a restart" is when it installs critical services, but even that is very rare as most services can be started on-the-fly, in fact, I installed 8 different apps needing services, NONE of them required a restart. (most of my apps don't even need services).
But those things don't even exist in Linux. If they did, the app wouldn't require a restart anyway.
I mean for goodness' sake all I see pro-Linux people speaking nonsense about Windows hoping (probably) to make other people realize how great Linux is. Here's why this is utter failure. When people like you tell WINDOWS USERS how much THEIR computer crashes and needs a restart, when they know it doesn't because THEY USE IT EVERYDAY, what kind of image do you think it creates around yourself for them? They will think you're speaking bullocks -- that's NOT a way to convince people. Imagine someone going in your house and saying "Dude, did you know that Linux crashes 3 times a day? Get yourself a Mac!", how do you take this person when you know it hasn't crashed once (I assume)?
One thing is for sure, if the linux boys have only illusionary people like you dealing with all Linux advertising, I'm starting to see PERFECTLY why Linux is not as popular as it should be despite the fact that it's free... the advertising is crap and full of nonsense 
So for once you Windows bashers just get real and stop spreading nonsense.
Quote:
Man, have you ever had a working Windows installation with less than 1GB ? Again, G E T R E A L.
I have one right now and is the best rig I ever had. Of course it's a bit more than 1GB because of the video drivers which are pretty big (that's not Windows' fault, it's Nvidia's). But BEFORE installing the drivers it was somewhere around 1GB (less but let's just say it was 1GB).
But you know, keep bashing! I'm sure that's gonna change and make Windows operate worse!
EDIT: suffice to say, of course, that I'm talking about Windows XP, not Vista...
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted November 06, 2009 12:20 AM |
|
Edited by dimis at 00:21, 06 Nov 2009.
|
Quote:
Could someone run down the advantages and disadvantages of 32bit vs. 64bit? For example, why would I not install the 64bit version? After all, bigger number is better, no?
Simple answer, yes. For the same reason that we once went from 16bit to 32bit, we are now moving from 32bit to 64bit.
The first question is, does your processor support 64 bit ?
The second question is, are you sure all your devices have drivers written in 64bit ? Are all the programs that you want to use supported under 64bit ? As you can understand, in transitional periods there are always "compatibility" problems.
Given the experience of others here, move on to W7. It seems that there is nothing worse than Vista. So, you can not go wrong.
____________
The empty set
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
