Why Linux will never be mainstream

[Kickass Joe...................]

Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is

no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything

different. They barely can operate what they paid good money

for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database

running, but do something different the the whole thing

crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take

chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.

It's a unique bunch and always will be.

[Beowulf]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:04:15 +0000, Kickass Joe...................

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. ...

People need help with Windows because it is a defective OS. My cousin used
to be high placed in Microsoft Tech Suppport, now he runs his own
consulting company and has plenty of business helping people using
Windows. He switches many clients over to Linux.

My 11 year old niece uses Ubuntu linux.

[kurt]

Post by Beowulf
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:04:15 +0000, Kickass Joe...................

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. ...

People need help with Windows because it is a defective OS. My cousin used
to be high placed in Microsoft Tech Suppport, now he runs his own
consulting company and has plenty of business helping people using
Windows. He switches many clients over to Linux.
My 11 year old niece uses Ubuntu linux.

And my 7 year old has been using XP since he was 5. The truth is, there
are good and bad about both. I agree with the OP that most Windows users
can't figure out anything that involves any more than a mouse-click, and
for that reason, they're not likely to ever use anything but Windows.
There are some great Linux distros that provide easy-to-install
binaries. And if all you need is what's included in the distro, all is
well (even with those users spoken of). But need to install something
that doesn't have an rpm? Compile from source? Find and install the
dependencies? Not those Windows users! And that includes about 98% of them.

[Dick Sutton]

Post by kurt

Post by Beowulf
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:04:15 +0000, Kickass Joe...................

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. ...

People need help with Windows because it is a defective OS. My cousin used
to be high placed in Microsoft Tech Suppport, now he runs his own
consulting company and has plenty of business helping people using
Windows. He switches many clients over to Linux.
My 11 year old niece uses Ubuntu linux.

And my 7 year old has been using XP since he was 5. The truth is, there
are good and bad about both. I agree with the OP that most Windows users
can't figure out anything that involves any more than a mouse-click, and
for that reason, they're not likely to ever use anything but Windows.
There are some great Linux distros that provide easy-to-install
binaries. And if all you need is what's included in the distro, all is
well (even with those users spoken of). But need to install something
that doesn't have an rpm? Compile from source? Find and install the
dependencies? Not those Windows users! And that includes about 98% of them.

But you know what? Most people are interested in doing their 'job'.
Not playing with os's. Only us 'geeks' find playing with either or both
an end in itself. Most people want a system that simply works when you
turn it on.

As an example, most carpenters are interested in completing their
projects or building their house, etc. They could care less what brand
of hammer or electric drill they're using: much less argue about.

Dick

[caver1]

Post by kurt

Post by Beowulf
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:04:15 +0000, Kickass Joe...................

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. ...

People need help with Windows because it is a defective OS. My cousin used
to be high placed in Microsoft Tech Suppport, now he runs his own
consulting company and has plenty of business helping people using
Windows. He switches many clients over to Linux.
My 11 year old niece uses Ubuntu linux.

And my 7 year old has been using XP since he was 5. The truth is,
there are good and bad about both. I agree with the OP that most
Windows users can't figure out anything that involves any more than a
mouse-click, and for that reason, they're not likely to ever use
anything but Windows. There are some great Linux distros that provide
easy-to-install binaries. And if all you need is what's included in
the distro, all is well (even with those users spoken of). But need to
install something that doesn't have an rpm? Compile from source? Find
and install the dependencies? Not those Windows users! And that
includes about 98% of them.

But you know what? Most people are interested in doing their 'job'. Not
playing with os's. Only us 'geeks' find playing with either or both an
end in itself. Most people want a system that simply works when you
turn it on.
As an example, most carpenters are interested in completing their
projects or building their house, etc. They could care less what brand
of hammer or electric drill they're using: much less argue about.
Dick

That shows how much you know about us carpenters.:)

[Kai-Martin Knaak]

But need to install something that doesn't have an rpm?

Who cares for rpms, debs are the better alternative ;-)

But seriously: Nowadays, decent distros contain pretty much everything Joe
Average will ever need. Can you name a single application, he will most
likely want badly, but is not included in Ubuntu, and does not comes as a
self installing one stop package (think googlearth)?

Compile from source?

BTDT, but these days are long gone. Even on my geeky desktop system with
3D-CAD, EDA, accounting, fax-server, and a host of network services, there
is not single piece of software that needed a local compile.

Find and install the dependencies? Not those Windows users!

They don't need to. It's all included in the distro, but I am going into
repeat mode...
IMHO the real obstacle is: Windows users are used to the notion of
expensive standard applications. They just won't believe that they can get
the same or better for free. Not the majority of them. Its psychology,
stupid.

---<(kaimartin)>---

[ray]

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

[Hadron Quark]

Post by ray

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

For most poeple I know, it is true.

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux is vastly easier than Windows. Most people never do any
configuring of Windows.

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

I have yet to have other than minor problems with any distro on
any computer, most of the time there is no problem, no further
configuring necessary after a basic install.

The first two computers on which I installed Linux mere my son's.
He is a programmer in a Windows environment and has installed both
Windows and Linux on many machines; he agrees that Linux is
easier. The two computers I mentioned had been damaged, and he
could not install Windows. I installed Linux without any problems.
On the second of those, a laptop, I recently installed Ubuntu. No
further configuration was required and my daughter has been using
it for a week without any problems. Her daughter also uses Linux.
(She has written more than 60,000 words of her novel on it so far
this month.)

Post by Hadron Quark
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

I realize that some people's experience is different, but the
problems are far from universal.

[Dan C]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray
I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

It certainly is true, at least with the people I know. Perhaps you should
get to know some smarter people...

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Horsepucky.

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

See above, regarding smarter people.

Post by Hadron Quark
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Your claims have all the marks of a Win-troll. Why is it that you
disguise (hide) your newsreader in your post headers? Could it be that
you are posting from Windoze, and don't want anyone to know?

[Hadron Quark]

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray
I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

It certainly is true, at least with the people I know. Perhaps you should
get to know some smarter people...

I don't believe you. You are a liar. Even most real advocates recognise
the learning curve for most users to get to grips with Linux. How can it
not be so : Linux is missing SW for most day to day things in a base
install - codecs, decent fonts etc. Invariably uptodate SW has to be
compiled. Basically nulling anything you have to say on the matter.

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Horsepucky.

The facts and the adoption rate would indicate something else.

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

See above, regarding smarter people.

Your doctors?

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Your claims have all the marks of a Win-troll. Why is it that you
disguise (hide) your newsreader in your post headers? Could it be that
you are posting from Windoze, and don't want anyone to know?

You're an arrogant fuckwit. For someone who considers himself so clever,
you're a bit of a dick if you don't mind me saying so.

[BlackTopBum]

Hadron Quark was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Hadron Quark
Even most real advocates recognise
the learning curve for most users to get to grips with Linux

Applies to ANY OS - get real and get HONEST, Hadron.

[SINNER]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray
I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

It certainly is true, at least with the people I know. Perhaps you should
get to know some smarter people...

I don't believe you. You are a liar. Even most real advocates recognise
the learning curve for most users to get to grips with Linux.

Utter crap. Given the same time to learn and Linux as the beginning OS
Windows would be just as difficult. It is what you are taught that makes
learning something new yet similar more difficult. By Nature Linux is no
more difficult than Windows.

Post by Hadron Quark
How can it
not be so : Linux is missing SW for most day to day things in a base
install - codecs, decent fonts etc.

So is Windows. Most necessary Codecs are not included or auto downloaded
and Fonts? Please Windows has fint issues as well.

Post by Hadron Quark
Invariably uptodate SW has to be
compiled.

Total BS. And I mean TOTAL. Most Distros have methods of keeping up to
date that DONT require an activation and sixteen steps before you start
downloading, not to mention the 3 reboots necessary.

Post by Hadron Quark
Basically nulling anything you have to say on the matter.

Oh Contraire, I just negated everything you just said. Granny can
learn Linux just as quickly as she could Windows. The AVERAGE user cant
get through a Windows install any easier than a Linux install. If I
really felt like getting into it I would argue that Linux is easier to
install on Compatible hardware then Windows.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Horsepucky.

The facts and the adoption rate would indicate something else.

No, the Money that MS has indicates something else, it has nothing to do
with ease of use. This crap is meant for *.advocacy groups, perhaps you
should subscribe and lurk for a while.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

See above, regarding smarter people.

Your doctors?

No one is LUCKY with their hardware choice, they are STUPID if they
haven't researched it prior to installing something they know nothing
about and expect that their Windows experience will guide them.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Your claims have all the marks of a Win-troll. Why is it that you
disguise (hide) your newsreader in your post headers? Could it be that
you are posting from Windoze, and don't want anyone to know?

You're an arrogant fuckwit. For someone who considers himself so clever,
you're a bit of a dick if you don't mind me saying so.

While I wont be as vulgar, your opinion is nothing short of misguided,
which is sad considering you use the OS.

[Dan C]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray
I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

It certainly is true, at least with the people I know. Perhaps you should
get to know some smarter people...

I don't believe you. You are a liar. Even most real advocates recognise
the learning curve for most users to get to grips with Linux. How can it
not be so : Linux is missing SW for most day to day things in a base
install - codecs, decent fonts etc. Invariably uptodate SW has to be
compiled. Basically nulling anything you have to say on the matter.

Absolute crap. Most of the n00b-friendly distros are up to date and
require ZERO compiling. Your cluelessness speaks volumes.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Horsepucky.

The facts and the adoption rate would indicate something else.

There are a lot of other factors in the adoption rate, marketing and the
"droid" mentality being the biggest in keeping fools with windoze.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Your claims have all the marks of a Win-troll. Why is it that you
disguise (hide) your newsreader in your post headers? Could it be that
you are posting from Windoze, and don't want anyone to know?

You're an arrogant fuckwit. For someone who considers himself so clever,
you're a bit of a dick if you don't mind me saying so.

I don't mind you saying so. Not at all. You're a clueless Win-droid,
trolling a Linux newsgroup. It's quite obvious.

Now, want to try again to answer? Why do you hide your newsreader/OS ?

[Walter Mautner]

Hadron Quark wrote:

....
"learning curve"

Post by Hadron Quark
I don't believe you. You are a liar. Even most real advocates recognise
the learning curve for most users to get to grips with Linux. How can it

It may be steeper for windows users, because they already know "something"
about windows - at least they think, and feel somehow more cosy with it.
For a newbie, there is no difference, just more help from the community and
more insight thanks to open source and the "everything is a file" paradigma
unlike the registry.

Post by Hadron Quark
not be so : Linux is missing SW for most day to day things in a base
install - codecs, decent fonts etc. Invariably uptodate SW has to be
compiled. Basically nulling anything you have to say on the matter.

BS. You *may* compile for yourself to tweak it - but all software a normal
user needs is already there in packet manager formats. Importing windows
fonts, if necessary at all, is a breeze too.
Now, have you tried to play a dvd with barebone windows yet?

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by Dan C

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Horsepucky.

The facts and the adoption rate would indicate something else.

Well, salesmen want to sell something, and linux operating system is not as
salesman friendly as windows. You are dreaming the dreams of a salesman,
therefore.
Have you ever tried to setup K|X|U|buntu, or Mandriva, or Simple Mepis, as
examples? Light years ahead of windows ...

[Wretched Soul]

snip

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray
I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Yup. The nix neckbeard's are clearly clueless (as most software
weenies) as to what user friendly means.

That's why Steve Job's was rated one of the worst bosses for flogging
his staff into making something useful.

That's why it took Shuttleworth's millions to make Linux into
something usable like Ubuntu.

The argument that Windows users are too lazy simply ignores the what
the Linux crowd just can't deal with: proprietary drivers will always
be, software installation has to be easy, and you have to have useful
and polished apps.

WS

[BlackTopBum]

Wretched Soul was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Wretched Soul
That's why it took Shuttleworth's millions to make Linux into
something usable like Ubuntu.

You're just stupid - I, and my family of NON-techies, have been using
Linux since 2001 ... time people get over it - Linux is ALREADY prime
time even tho' some others are too stupid to use ANY computer (as OP
revealed).

Post by Wretched Soul
The argument that Windows users are too lazy simply ignores the what
the Linux crowd just can't deal with: proprietary drivers will always
be, software installation has to be easy, and you have to have useful
and polished apps.

Installing software is hard !!!???? Hm, I click on an icon for Synaptic,
enter a password, search for what I want, click it and an the install
takes place - WTF!!?? Is THAT hard?

NO polished apps ? - I suppose you're not referring to a food product <g>
- obviously you don't use Linux but you employ Forte. Go away poser !!

[Wretched Soul]

Post by BlackTopBum
You're just stupid - I, and my family of NON-techies, have been using
Linux since 2001 ... time people get over it - Linux is ALREADY prime
time even tho' some others are too stupid to use ANY computer (as OP
revealed).

Ah yes, the old "your just stupid" argument. Yup,your right, I'm too
stupid to use Linux. Sort of proves my point doesn't it?

Post by BlackTopBum
Installing software is hard !!!???? Hm, I click on an icon for Synaptic,
enter a password, search for what I want, click it and an the install
takes place - WTF!!?? Is THAT hard?

Uh, ever hear of dependency hell? Hmm, I must have been too stupid to
avoid that one. Guess I should get a high paying Linux guru to help
me out next time.

Post by BlackTopBum
NO polished apps ? - I suppose you're not referring to a food product <g>
- obviously you don't use Linux but you employ Forte. Go away poser !!

Oh gosh I've been found out, how will I ever live it down! A stupid
poser using Agent. Oh what a Wretched Soul I am! Too duh-um to use
Linux! Oh that will motivate me to try harder next time to avoid the
shame of Windows and embarrass myself at the altar of the superior
intellect of Linux users.

[SINNER]

[...]

Post by Wretched Soul
Uh, ever hear of dependency hell?

Yeah, it went out with the Dodo. DH is realativley uncommon with todays
package mangement systems, When was the last time you tried Linux, RH
4.2?

Post by Wretched Soul
Hmm, I must have been too stupid to
avoid that one. Guess I should get a high paying Linux guru to help
me out next time.

Or you could try a recent Distro.

[...]

[BlackTopBum]

SINNER was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

When was the last time you tried Linux, RH 4.2?

Interestingly enough, I put RH on a WFW 3.11 machine after briefly using
O/S2 Warp3 - circa 1994 - all without a guru around <g>.

[Wretched Soul]

Post by SINNER
[...]

Post by Wretched Soul
Uh, ever hear of dependency hell?

Yeah, it went out with the Dodo. DH is realativley uncommon with todays
package mangement systems, When was the last time you tried Linux, RH
4.2?

Post by Wretched Soul
Hmm, I must have been too stupid to
avoid that one. Guess I should get a high paying Linux guru to help
me out next time.

Or you could try a recent Distro.
[...]

I'm sorry, my bad. I should have tried Ubuntu like this dude:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=226660
He got it figured out way back in May.

or maybe
http://www.oreillynet.com/linux/blog/2006/06/the_new_rpm_hell_or_why_yum_an.html

Hmm, this guy says "Aside from redesigning the Linux kernel, there
are a number of software solutions. The following outlines a solution
using available software."
http://www.germane-software.com/~ser/Files/Essays/RPM_Hell.html

This guy way back in January has fun with about 21 files he figures
out for fun and profit:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/gvix/archive/2006/01/dependency_hell.html

Wikipedia figures the whole issue was figure out way back in October,
er well sort of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_hell


here's a couple of more at no charge --
http://lwn.net/Articles/198455/


6.3.2 APT upgrade troubleshooting

Package dependency problems may occur when upgrading in unstable or
testing as described in Upgrading, Section 5.3. Most of the time this
is because a package that will be upgraded Depends on a package that
is not yet available. These problems are fixed by using
# aptitude dist-upgrade

If this does not work, then repeat one of the following until the
problem resolves itself:
# aptitude -f upgrade # continue upgrade even after error
... or
# aptitude -f dist-upgrade # continue dist-upgrade even after
error

Some really broken upgrade scripts may cause persistent trouble. It is
usually better to resolve this type of situation by inspecting the
/var/lib/dpkg/info/packagename.{post,pre}{inst,rm} scripts of the
offending package and then running:
# dpkg --configure -a # configures all partially installed
packages

If a script complains about a missing configuration file, look in
/etc/ for the corresponding configuration file. If one exists with an
extension of .dpkg-new (or something similar), mv it to remove the
suffix.

Package dependency problems may occur when installing in unstable or
testing. There are ways to circumvent dependencies.
# aptitude -f install package # override broken dependencies

An alternative method to fix these situations is to use the equivs
package. See /usr/share/doc/equivs/README.Debian and The equivs
package, Section 6.5.2.

CVS, Wed Aug 16 09:30:24 UTC 2006



While it looks like it's greatly improved, "relatively uncommon" is
not a way I would describe it.

[BlackTopBum]

Wretched Soul was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...
Here's a testimony you can put in your pipe and smoke:
I've haven't had even (1) single error of any of those type at all
- ever - since using switching to Linux. That would be since Mandrake
Linux 7.2 - release date was 10/30/2000. For more on ML release dates read
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mandriva .

[Wretched Soul]

Post by BlackTopBum
Wretched Soul was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...
I've haven't had even (1) single error of any of those type at all
- ever - since using switching to Linux. That would be since Mandrake
Linux 7.2 - release date was 10/30/2000. For more on ML release dates read
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mandriva .

I had a Mandrake 10 install that went pretty well on a old PC. I
don't remember anymore what problems I had, I think the usual sound
problem. In the end it worked ok, but I lost interest in trying to
update the browser etc. I put Ubuntu 6 on the same PC and another
computer. To Ubuntu's credit, it worked with an old scanner that MS
would not without buying a driver. I did have to reload Ubuntu after
an update hosed the whole system however. And it wasn't the update
that Ubuntu had previously had problems with. But there is a lot to
like about Ubuntu.

I've also put on Linspire, Freespire and PCLinux and some old distros
years ago.

Linux has gotten better. I just dislike hunting around for correct
files to install and things that I've solved in the past. Seems to
take forever and never seems to be quite the same way twice. I
suppose if you do it often you become familiar. It's not bad if you
want to avoid the worsening MS license situation, I just don't have
any illusions about it's trouble areas. I don't see what point the
Linux community gets in pissing off mainstream users. It just seems
like the old Unix attitude to me. Fair and honest comparisons between
distros also seem to be lacking. They are either full of too much
bravado or seem afraid of pointing out shortcomings. To each is own,
but a zillion distros is just ego talking.

Some people don't seem to have any problems, I suspect that is still a
minority however when it comes to mainstream users. I have Linux
guru workmate. He can get anything working on Linux, but it
frequently takes awhile. I never had Windows or Novell problem I
couldn't fix. It usually is just a matter of how much time you have
and how many people you can find with the same problem.

WS

[BlackTopBum]

Wretched Soul was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Wretched Soul
Linux has gotten better. I just dislike hunting around for correct
files to install and things that I've solved in the past.

My experience tends toward non-RPM distros as being easier to set up,
update and add software ... two I prefer are Gentoo and most Debian-based.

[SINNER]

Post by BlackTopBum
Wretched Soul was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...
I've haven't had even (1) single error of any of those type at all
- ever - since using switching to Linux. That would be since Mandrake
Linux 7.2 - release date was 10/30/2000. For more on ML release dates
read http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mandriva .

<AOL>
Me Too
</AOL>

MDK 8.2 though

[SINNER]

Post by Wretched Soul
While it looks like it's greatly improved, "relatively uncommon" is
not a way I would describe it.

Should I go grab all the Windows issues from google too? Somehow I dont
think I can fit it all in one post though :/

[Dan C]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:36:38 -1000, Wretched Soul wrote:

<snip a bunch of useless win-droid drivel>

Post by Wretched Soul
The argument that Windows users are too lazy simply ignores the what
the Linux crowd just can't deal with: proprietary drivers will always
be, software installation has to be easy, and you have to have useful
and polished apps.

Software installation *is* easy, and there is no shortage of useful and
polished apps.

Now, bugger the fuck on out of here, Win-droid. You're just another
dimwit troll, like your pal "Handjob Qwerk". Get out, doofus.

[Walter Mautner]

Wretched Soul wrote:

[another advocacy thread]
....

Post by Wretched Soul

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Yup. The nix neckbeard's are clearly clueless (as most software
weenies) as to what user friendly means.

User friendlieness as defined by marketeers is defined in "feel cosy with
clicking, makes you feel like you are actually doing something and makes
your boss think the same unless he is really bright".
User friendlieness in programmer terms is more the "how to achieve the
maximum output with minimum input and requiring the least amount of moves
away from the keyboard".

Post by Wretched Soul
That's why Steve Job's was rated one of the worst bosses for flogging
his staff into making something useful.
That's why it took Shuttleworth's millions to make Linux into
something usable like Ubuntu.

Other linux distributions are just the same, maybe not as much simplified.
Ok. for a techie Ubuntu begins to appear dumbed-down at the surface :)

Post by Wretched Soul
The argument that Windows users are too lazy simply ignores the what
the Linux crowd just can't deal with: proprietary drivers will always
be, software installation has to be easy, and you have to have useful
and polished apps.

Software installation in linux _is_ easy, with packet managers.
Proprietary drivers are accepted when they do their job ... like, for
example, the nvidia drivers.
"Polishing" ... well, see "user friendlieness".

[William Poaster]

It was on or about Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:36:38 -1000, that Wretched Soul
posted:

<snip bullshit>

Another wintroll.

[John Hasler]

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user...

Linux is at least as easy to set up and configure (something most Windows
user never do to Windows).

Post by Hadron Quark
...if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux has not been widely adopted because it does not come preinstalled on
most computers.

[Hadron Quark]

Post by John Hasler

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user...

Linux is at least as easy to set up and configure (something most Windows
user never do to Windows).

ONLY if you are lucky with your HW. Most people are not. I have got 3
people to install Linux - all have had loads of problems. We stuck with
it and they are almost converted, but to deny issues is plain dumb.

Post by John Hasler

Post by Hadron Quark
...if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux has not been widely adopted because it does not come preinstalled on
most computers.

I'm surprised you believe that. And even if you did, there is a reason
for it. Linux was not ready for desktops in the same time frame as
Windows. It still isn't : multimedia can be a pain to setup, HW support
is flakey at best for ATI cards, gaming is not there and openGL needs
the boost that the PS3 might give it.

[BlackTopBum]

Hadron Quark was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Hadron Quark
ONLY if you are lucky with your HW.

Poor planning on your, or anyone's part, doesn't constitute a Linux
problem.

Ever try NT4 with non-NT4 approved HW? What about O/S2?

[SINNER]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by John Hasler

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user...

Linux is at least as easy to set up and configure (something most Windows
user never do to Windows).

ONLY if you are lucky with your HW.

WTF does luck have to do with it? If you install Windows on a MAC how
successful do you think you will be?

Post by Hadron Quark
Most people are not.

Again, luck is not involved, you check your hardware against a
compatibility list just like you do for Windows, if it isn't compatible,
you are asking for trouble. The fact that there may be LESS hardware
compatible with a chosen distro has NOTHING to do with luck.

Post by Hadron Quark
I have got 3
people to install Linux - all have had loads of problems. We stuck with
it and they are almost converted, but to deny issues is plain dumb.

To deny those issues occur in Windows isn't just Dumb, its FUD.

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by John Hasler

Post by Hadron Quark
...if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux has not been widely adopted because it does not come preinstalled on
most computers.

I'm surprised you believe that. And even if you did, there is a reason
for it. Linux was not ready for desktops in the same time frame as
Windows.

So?
Works just fine for me.

Post by Hadron Quark
multimedia can be a pain to setup,

Not at all, if you can read.

Post by Hadron Quark
HW support
is flakey at best for ATI cards,

So? Buy Nvidia if you want to install Linux....

Post by Hadron Quark
gaming is not there

This is somehow the fault of the OS? Gaming isn't there for the MAC
either....

Post by Hadron Quark
and openGL needs
the boost that the PS3 might give it.

The ps3? Scary that you even got it running based on all your bitching.

[Walter Mautner]

Hadron Quark wrote:

[another discussion belonging to the advocacy groups]
....

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by John Hasler
Linux is at least as easy to set up and configure (something most Windows
user never do to Windows).

ONLY if you are lucky with your HW. Most people are not. I have got 3
people to install Linux - all have had loads of problems. We stuck with
it and they are almost converted, but to deny issues is plain dumb.

Well, try to install xp on the same boxen, but forget the truckload of
cdroms and driver downloads that usually come with these pcs, when they are
new. Say you are in the rural, with no internet but a slow modem connection
if any, and you want to setup xp on a new hd, on someones computer, when
his old hd is toast, including the recovery partition (with all the drivers
as well) wisely pre-prepared on the same hd.
Wouldn't you rather pick a linux cd/dvd and be done 2 hours later (including
the configuration of modem, internet, mail, browser, dvd-player and
whatever)?
....

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by John Hasler
Linux has not been widely adopted because it does not come preinstalled
on most computers.

I'm surprised you believe that. And even if you did, there is a reason
for it. Linux was not ready for desktops in the same time frame as
Windows. It still isn't : multimedia can be a pain to setup, HW support
is flakey at best for ATI cards, gaming is not there and openGL needs
the boost that the PS3 might give it.

No OS is ever "ready". See Vista. Not even released, yet fixes in the row.
Once again: multimedia setup can be as much pain with windows, unless you
get that dreaded cd that came with your dvd drive and contains a player app
plus the codecs which windows will use as well for it's media player.
OpenGL works just fine, and compiz/beryl/xgl make windows users forget to
shut their mouths :)

[BlackTopBum]

John Hasler was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by John Hasler
Linux has not been widely adopted because it does not come preinstalled on
most computers.

Nor is the vast array of the public aware of Linux since there are no
advertisements for Linux in general.

[BlackTopBum]

Hadron Quark was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux is harder? Don't tell my 9 year old that ... he's been using
Linux (as a regular user) for about 6 years - yes, since he was three.

100% of the Winders users I speak with have never heard of Linux - I say
that's the largest reason.

Not wanting to offend you, Hadron, I think you're suffering
"transference" - you are expecting of others to have the difficulty you had.

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Lucky with HW? No - planning and purchasing accordingly; yes

Cuckoo? I know what time is - Linux is on a slow but continual growth
the last several years:

http://counter.li.org/

http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT7070519787.html

Hadron, get a grip and a prozac - damn, what's up with you lately?

[William Poaster]

It was on or about Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:33:32 -0700, that BlackTopBum

Post by BlackTopBum
Hadron Quark was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Linux is harder? Don't tell my 9 year old that ... he's been using
Linux (as a regular user) for about 6 years - yes, since he was three.
100% of the Winders users I speak with have never heard of Linux - I say
that's the largest reason.
Not wanting to offend you, Hadron, I think you're suffering
"transference" - you are expecting of others to have the difficulty you had.

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Lucky with HW? No - planning and purchasing accordingly; yes
Cuckoo? I know what time is - Linux is on a slow but continual growth
http://counter.li.org/
http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT7070519787.html
Hadron, get a grip and a prozac - damn, what's up with you lately?

In some other groups, he's regarded as a troll.

[Beowulf]

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Install and configure for linux is easy, given a user friendly distro
(Ubuntu, Linspire, Xandros, and others)-- AND if installed to a blank hard
drive without MS-Windows in the picture. Problem is most linux installs
are commonly done as dual boot, installing alongside Windows which makes
it tricker, but only if wanting Windows to co-exist.

[A. Nonymoose]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 19:40:39 -0600, Beowulf

Post by Beowulf
Install and configure for linux is easy, given a user friendly distro
(Ubuntu, Linspire, Xandros, and others)-- AND if installed to a blank hard
drive without MS-Windows in the picture. Problem is most linux installs
are commonly done as dual boot, installing alongside Windows which makes
it tricker, but only if wanting Windows to co-exist.

Actually, I found the install, even with a dual boot, to be incredibly
easy.

Where I find Windows to still be easier for me is in getting and installing
new software. With Windows, it's download, and double click. With LInux,
it's download which package: RPM, deb, gz, etc, etc.? Then, where am I
supposed to install *too*? (I still haven't figured this one out), then
how to actually install it - some of them even need to be compiled.

Luckily, the Suse YAST helps out a lot, but that is only a crutch - I'll
still need to learn how to install new software on my own. JMHO.

[J.O. Aho]

Post by A. Nonymoose
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 19:40:39 -0600, Beowulf

Post by Beowulf
Install and configure for linux is easy, given a user friendly distro
(Ubuntu, Linspire, Xandros, and others)-- AND if installed to a blank hard
drive without MS-Windows in the picture. Problem is most linux installs
are commonly done as dual boot, installing alongside Windows which makes
it tricker, but only if wanting Windows to co-exist.

Actually, I found the install, even with a dual boot, to be incredibly
easy.

It can be difficult for a novice to make space for GNU/Linux on the hard
drive, as microsoft out of default takes the whole hard drive and it's how
people seem to have things, one huge slice.

Post by A. Nonymoose
Where I find Windows to still be easier for me is in getting and installing
new software. With Windows, it's download, and double click. With LInux,
it's download which package: RPM, deb, gz, etc, etc.? Then, where am I
supposed to install *too*? (I still haven't figured this one out), then
how to actually install it - some of them even need to be compiled.

Most of todays distros has an installer that allows you to specify what you
want to install, and it downloads it and all the dependencies. The user don't
have to know where to download, don't need to double click and don't wonder
why the program don't work as there is some missing dll's.

Post by A. Nonymoose
some of them even need to be compiled.

But installing same program under microsoft requires you to download and
install gcc and then figure out how it works and finding all the headers and
libraries needed, at least GNU/Linux distros in general has those installed
for you.

Post by A. Nonymoose
Luckily, the Suse YAST helps out a lot, but that is only a crutch - I'll
still need to learn how to install new software on my own. JMHO.

Why use YAST then? There should be more intelligent installers from a such big
company like Novell.


//Aho

[Beowulf]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:41:49 -0500, A.Nonymoose inscribed to the world:
..

Post by A. Nonymoose
Where I find Windows to still be easier for me is in getting and installing
new software. With Windows, it's download, and double click. With LInux,
it's download which package: RPM, deb, gz, etc, etc.? Then, where am I
supposed to install *too*? (I still haven't figured this one out), then

...

I think that will improve with linux. There is a new packaging system,
this might be it
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2307
or something like it, that will improve the ease of installing software
with linux. I know when I installed e.g. Google Earth on my linux system
it was painless. Similar for Mozilla Suite, or Unreal Tournament; very
fluid and easy. More has to go similar routes instead of tarballs and rpms
and so on, which can be intimidating.

[Andy Fraser]

A. Nonymoose <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

Post by A. Nonymoose
Where I find Windows to still be easier for me is in getting and installing
new software. With Windows, it's download, and double click. With LInux,
it's download which package: RPM, deb, gz, etc, etc.? Then, where am I
supposed to install *too*? (I still haven't figured this one out), then
how to actually install it - some of them even need to be compiled.

This is partly a problem with being stuck in "Windows mode". Windows
users are used to having to google for software if they don't know
exactly which software they want or visit a web site if they do before
they download and install.

On my FC6 machine I just go to "Add/Remove Software", search there, tick
the package(s) I want and click "Apply". Not only that but software will
be kept up to date automatically, not just Windows via "Automatic
Updates", all of it.

What about RPMs? Just double-click them on FC6 and they'll install via a
GUI. Need non-free multimedia stuff? Download the Livna RPM,
double-click it and you're good to go and all of that software will be
updated automatically too.

Installing software isn't perfect and I have simplified it a little but
IMHO it's way better than the Windows way but it is a different
procedure.

[J.O. Aho]

Post by Hadron Quark

Post by ray

Post by Kickass Joe...................
They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

I've maintained for a number of years that anyone with room temperature
(farenheit) IQ can run Linux. It's no more difficult than MS - just a
little different - makes you wonder.

This is clearly not true.

At least among my friends and family this isn't true and all of them I would
class as basic end users, they have adopted GNU/Linux and loves it without
knowing how to tweak kernels or setup web-servers.

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Hmmm... turn on the computer, tray out on CD-Rom, insert CD and close the try,
let the computer boot the GNU/Linux and install it, after a handful easy
questions and 20 min later it's up and running, compare that to having to wait
a hour or more for microsoft. Even simpler to install is QNX demo.

The problem lies far in the different direction, in the pockets of some
wealthy people, they get discount for each OEM version of microsoft the bigger
volumes they do preinstall on their computers, so each machine they install
GNU/Linux on makes all the microsoft machines more expensive to sell.
There are also those quite shady contracts between microsoft and the computer
company which dictates that they have to install microsoft on all their
computers (confirmed by microsoft-sweden a couple of years ago).

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.

If you buy only hardware that has just been released really recently and the
company don't release any hardware specifications that can be used for the
drivers, then you are a bit unlucky. Companies do save a lot money on Linux
drivers, as they don't have to make themselves, as they seem to be all to
comfortable letting the end users do that for them.

On the other side, microsoft drops support for older hardware, try to use an
old ISA based network card with microsoft-vista, even if you find the driver
on the net it won't work as you have the wrong version of microsoft. At the
same time, compare the amount drivers you get with microsoft with the amount
of drivers included in a GNU/Linux dist.


//Aho

[Andy Fraser]

Hadron Quark <***@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Hadron Quark
Linux is generally a lot harder to setup and configure for the average
desktop user : if it wasnt it would be more widely adopted.

Shit, I must've been asleep for quite a while. When did Dell start
supplying PCs without the OS installed, just the Windows CD and drivers
CD in the box?

My point is, most average users don't have to setup and configure their
Dell with pre-installed Windows. They plug it in, switch it on and away
they go. If I install a Linux distro on a PC for someone, when they get
it back they just plug it in, switch it on and away they go. The
difference is I know what types of software they want so it'll even come
with apps and codecs and whatnot. No downloads, no trips to the shops,
just switch on and go.

I agree with others have said. If someone hasn't used a computer at all
before they'll face the same learning curve whether their first
experience is with Windows or a Linux distro. Windows users get freaked
because they're out of their comfort zone. Some people don't give
themselves time to adjust.

Post by Hadron Quark
Yes, some people are lucky with their HW and their distro choice, but
generally not.
To claim otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Again, I agree with others. It's not luck, it's planning. Even then I've
had quite a few very different PCs pass through my hands over the years
with very little problem at all with the hardware. I hand pick hardware
for all the PCs I build now so no luck required.

Most of the hardware problems I see these days relates to wireless
networking. That's mostly an issue with manufactures not supporting
Linux and not opening their specs rather than a Linux problem. Go bitch
at them if you have wireless problems.

[Darth Chaos]

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

Linux will never be mainstream because of how the mainstream media has
a hard-on for Microsoft and it's Bilderberger-in-chief Bill Gates. Bill
Gates is basically the American version of the Rothschilds and the
DuPonts. They are all greedy little bastards who use their ridiculous
wealth to make their own rules which get passed by paying off the
mainstream media and the politicians.

Bill Gates is a sorry, pathetic excuse for a human being. The only
reason he wanted wealth (and the power that comes with wealth) is
probably because he got his punk ass kicked on a daily basis by high
school jocks and he wanted to have the power to control his high school
bullies by the short & curlies. Bill Gates cares nothing about the
users of his products. He only cares about WEALTH and POWER.

[darklight]

Post by Darth Chaos

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.

Linux will never be mainstream because of how the mainstream media has
a hard-on for Microsoft and it's Bilderberger-in-chief Bill Gates. Bill
Gates is basically the American version of the Rothschilds and the
DuPonts. They are all greedy little bastards who use their ridiculous
wealth to make their own rules which get passed by paying off the
mainstream media and the politicians.
Bill Gates is a sorry, pathetic excuse for a human being. The only
reason he wanted wealth (and the power that comes with wealth) is
probably because he got his punk ass kicked on a daily basis by high
school jocks and he wanted to have the power to control his high school
bullies by the short & curlies. Bill Gates cares nothing about the
users of his products. He only cares about WEALTH and POWER.

I am not a windows lover the complete opposite but hay i i the kicked
about and ended up like him i would not mind and i use linux

[Alan Connor]

On alt.os.linux, in <zf57h.4941$***@trndny06>, "Kickass Joe..................." wrote:

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

[Kickass Joe.]
[ray ]
[Hadron Quark]
[Chris F.A. J]
[Dan C ]
[Hadron Quark]
[BlackTopBum ]
[SINNER ]
[Dan C ]
[Wretched Sou]
[BlackTopBum ]
[Wretched Sou]
[SINNER ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[Dan C ]
[John Hasler ]
[Hadron Quark]
[BlackTopBum ]
[SINNER ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[Beowulf ]


My my. Look at this pathetic troll make the linux runners above
dance like puppets.

Any windoze-weenie script kitty who can forge his User-Agent
header (which any 3rd Grader can do) and lacks a life, can
herd them like sheep.

Even when the troll uses an alias that screams: "I am an effing
punk troll."

"Kickass Joe..................."

Good grief.

Alan

[Alan Connor FGA]

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.
--
<article not downloaded:

Info about "Alan Connor"

Alan "The Usenet Beavis" Connor is a good friend of Bigfoot:
http://tinyurl.com/23r3f

A couple of years ago he was kidnapped and raped by Xena,
the Warrior Princess: http://tinyurl.com/2gjcy

Beavis believes that the MSBlast virus of yesteryear was explicitly
targeting him, for some inexplicable reason: http://tinyurl.com/ifrt

Beavis belongs to a UFO cult: http://tinyurl.com/2hhdx
Beavis's life in a UFO cult: http://tinyurl.com/24jqm
Beavis knows all about network security: http://tinyurl.com/5qqb6
And he's also a search engine expert: http://tinyurl.com/9pjnt

Alan doesn't believe in anyone else's existence ...

Alan accuses practically everyone of being a troll/spammer.
Apparently, Alan is the only real person in the newsgroups in which he posts.

http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/fga.shtml
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=MQ9uxRYAAAAX2tAp-itjMPAOxLgFwCc3_gRbb05PKyTO4L-MEqh3HQ&hl=en
http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Mail/challenge-response.html
http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/329.html#CR
http://www.gatago.com/authors_pgs/13650.html
http://blog.bananasplit.info/?p=84
http://tinyurl.com/ifrt
http://tinyurl.com/3h6a5
http://tinyurl.com/ys6z4

Also in the headers for alan to read.

[BlackTopBum]

Alan Connor was all like, you know, and then said something like a ...

Post by Alan Connor
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
[BlackTopBum ]
My my. Look at this pathetic troll make the linux runners above dance
like puppets.[...]
Alan

Alan, Ever occur to you that I MIGHT just want to have some fun with this
bunch of fools?

Socking news you should know: I don't get each day asking myself how I can
live to satisfy Alan Connor.

[Michael Heiming]

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is

And have problems tying their shoe strings, and can't even
handle the simplest waste separation. There is nothing new
about it or your trial flame attempt...

[..]

[sticky_keys]

Post by Kickass Joe...................
Have you seen the help desk traffic for MS Windows?
The newsgroup help groups, the IRC help channels?
It seems most people can't even run Windows. There is
no way these desk jocks will ever even consider anything
different. They barely can operate what they paid good money
for. Sure they can get help getting their game or database
running, but do something different the the whole thing
crashes around them. They don't dare make a move again.
It will always be the people who push the envelope, take
chances and have the intellect that will run Linux distros.
It's a unique bunch and always will be.
--
If you want to win a war you have to be worse than the enemy. Nice guys
come home in a box. America wants it's soldiers to be nice guys.
What kind of support is that?
Kickass Joe

______
/ \
.' PLEASE `.
| DO NOT | _____
| FEED THE | ,'.....`.
`. TROLLS ,' ,'........ )
\_ _/ |........ ,'
| | `. .... _/
| | ,'.,'-'
| | /../
| | ,'.,'
| | /../
. | | /..'
.\_\| |/_/,
___ | | ___
. `--' .