Bill says, "Let them eat cake!"

Well qtech, MS may sell software, but through all the connections with computer manufacturers they force you to buy new hardware. Other than we geeks, what "regular users" upgrade their computers? And with "optimum" specs like the above, who could upgrade? The "upgrade" would require all new hardware, sheesh!

Jon

"...through all the connections with computer manufacturers they force you to buy new hardware. "

Back in the old days, they would call that racketeering and extortion.

Today though, you have a choice.

If only AMD would commit to the dark-side.

q

If you treat your beta-testers as if they're your most valuable resource, they will respond by becoming your most valuable resource.

we are stuck with windows apps. we run W98SE, even when we buy new hardware.
but our file storage is linux, our firewall is linux, and our jukebox runs linux too.
we are using hardware up to 7 years old without a care in the world by switching over to client server stuff and its saving the cash.

drlizau, didn't you hear that W98SE is old; it's dead; MS won't support it any longer; it's not possible to run a business with old software

This idea that a person or a company simply must have the most recent software is silly. I just met a new client that I'll be working with for the next couple months doing some fixin' and cleanin' up. They use W98SE also. My main client (and former, former, former employer (don't ask)) has an application operating system that's over TWENTY YEARS OLD and it still runs just fine thank you.

There is a lot to be said for older OSes. For one, if proper firewalls and routers are in place the threat of viruses is reduced 'cause the new script-kiddies don't know anything about "the old school".

Back to my new client. I plan on evaluating their situation and seeing if putting in a carefully placed Linux system or two might be helpful to them. From my initial discussion, it appears that they don't have a lot that requires MS. But if they do have some proprietary apps, they might just have to sit on one system, or perhaps store the files on a server.

If I can put in a file server, backup system and maybe a desktop that runs Mepis it might be received nicely. However, I think they will need to do some hardware upgrading. But they certainly won't need to get a bazillion GigaHURTS CPU with one TeraGalaxy of RAM to run a web browser

It's nice sometimes to have a mixed environment.

Jon

"drlizau, didn't you hear that W98SE is old; it's dead; MS won't support it any longer; it's not possible to run a business with old software "
We got this lot (and then a RH6.0 server) in time for Y2K. Our old system did collapse on Y2K because it went back to 1980. Its OS was called THEOS (but it wasn't any great Greek god).

I may get flamed for this, but I think that MS has reached their peak and is showing signs of "maturity". The new-kid-on-the-block aspect of MS, "Gosh! They have a new Operating System!", is gone.

MS-DOS is/was good for simple, small, fast dedicated systems.
W98SE is/was good for nice GUI and simple networking capabilities (behind a firewall) for single users.
W2K Pro is/was good for better networking and semi/multi-user capability that's stable and reasonably fast.

I'm sorry, did I miss MS Bob and ME

Now, I'm giving my opinions from the perspective of personal and business use, not the gaming, multimedia, and hard-core geeky programming perspective.

BUT, because MS has consistently isolated personal from business use, then joined them (kinda), then separated them, hell it's difficult for we folks in The Industry to figure out what's going on! How's a "regular user" supposed to make sense of it. Are you aware that the new MS Vista may come out in SEVEN DIFFERENT VERSIONS? Sheesh! I can see a Personal, Professional and Enterprise or Server edition, but that's the limit of my imagination.

Now the complaint that I've heard, trying to tie this to Linux, is that, "Well, Linux has all these 'distributions'; how's someone to make sense of that?". However, the distinction, and beauty of Linux IMHO, is with Linux you can try before you buy! Of course, you have to get your hands dirty, but you have the ability to get a bunch of different CDs load them and see what works. When was the last time you could go out and "sample" a PC with Windows XYZP Super-Premier Universal Embedded Edition for a month and return it or replace it if it didn't work for your situation? AND, with XP and their ilk, you are prevented from changing ANYTHING once you've made your "bad" decision. I'm sorry, who owns this computer?

Gee, I guess I've been reading too much Dvorak today, so I'm bolding random sections.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1858101,00.asp

Thank you for listening; I'm done with my rant

Jon

I am sorry i dont agree with what has been said above. We are missing the whole point here by 180 degrees.
Problem is not that Microsoft is coming out with new heavy duty windows (which will be good for hardware industry as well which is in pits), problem is Linux community is unable to make a solid stand. It is just getting fragmented day after day. There are over 500 linux distros available. Maybe 200 people advocate Mepis another 400 advocate Mandriva and so on. Now end user who is not geek, finds it lot confusing and in a world where you have to compare features and then buy, comparing 500 distros is not easy task. Moreover a lots of linux installation guides recommend to have windows installed on machine before installing linux. Now if i have to have windows installed, then why in name of hell do i need linux.

Secondly, Bill Gates is businessman. He is doing business from day one, when he bought DOS and tweaked it and presented it to IBM.
So he needs new OS every few years to keep the show running. Here we are complaining about 7 different versions(95,nt,98,ME,2000,XP,2003) of windows available, but has anyone noticed RedHat linux or Suse. They come up with a new version every 6 month.
Furthermore, whatever our developer community admire linux for, but fact remains that till today it is unable to present 'setup.exe' like installations on linux (some will cry RPM here, but they are too 'hit or miss' lots of times). And more, most of the application vendors are providing source code instead of binaries. (how many end users will compile source code and find dependencies over internet for hours and then recompile them just to play a game of tetris!!!). Some sites even mark that, binaries may be procured from different sources at users risk. These kind of statements certainly dont encourage any lay person to use linux.
Regarding GUI, windows XP desktop or Mac OS desktop are no doubt miles ahead of what linux offer. And with end user 'face value' do accounts for first impressions.
And finally since Linux community fails to take a unified stand so there is no aggressive marketing or awareness generation programs. In short, Linux has what it takes to be no 1 but it lacks will.

World is moving towards 64 bit computing and I can only see more chaos in Linux community in next two years.
I am great fan of linux myself but i dont believe in blind worship.

I am sorry if any feelings are hurt here, but fact remains that Linux is out there for longer time then any of windows 32 bit versions, but yet linux has yet to make an impression with end user.

If you are short on chops then break a neck with MEPIS

Do you troll often Linux sites? If you do so please make sure you adapt your material to the target: "some will cry RPM here, but they are too 'hit or miss' lots of times" Forgive me but Mepis doesn't even use RPM as a default format.

"Linux is out there for longer time then any of windows 32 bit versions".
Are you kidding, do you really compare Linux with Windows NT in 1993!!! It's like saying that Windows 64bit is a brand new operating system while Linux is old since 1991, I think that's not quite a fair comparison.

"Regarding GUI, windows XP desktop or Mac OS desktop are no doubt miles ahead of what linux offer."
I for one find KDE much better than Windows (didn't try Mac OS long enough but I liked it less than KDE too)

"Moreover a lots of linux installation guides recommend to have windows installed on machine before installing linux. Now if i have to have windows installed, then why in name of hell do i need linux."
Most of the guides EXPLAIN (not recommend) how to do install it when you have Windows because generally people do have Windows preinstalled. As for why the hell do they want Linux when they already have Windows, I don't know, you have to ask them why do they go through the pain of installing another OS if Windows works fine for them, I can't talk for them. I can talk only for myself and the answer is: because Linux is better, it's safer, it's cheaper, and it's free (as in freedom) -- that's good enough for me.

If it's not enough for you, please use whatever OS you like: BeOS, BSD, MacOS, including Windows, I for one I'm not going to cry if you do so and no intention to convince you not to pay money to Microsoft although I know many people on this site don't agree with me and will jump to say something to the effect of "please, please, don't give money to those bastards". I'm only content with the fact that my money stay in my pocket not in Bill Gates'. I don't care if to Bill Gates' Billions you add $199 (or how much Vista will be) from your pocket.

--
Post questions on www.mepislovers.org too -- very helpful community

when windows offers multiple desktop's, then when can talk about who as the best GUI.

And to think I just upgraded my Linux box by upping the RAM to 768 PC133 and adding an ATA133 IDE card for my "new" 60GB hard drive! I didn't have to do this... I just thought my 5 year old Tyan Trinity 400 motherboard with Pentium III/1000 deserved a little attention.* Plus, since my motherboard can take either Socket 370 OR Slot 1, when Slot 1 comes back I'll be ready!

*Did I mention that my computer already runs very fast with Linux?

If windows are so great, why waste time with linux?

Windows ARE great! When it's hot I'll open them to let a breeze in. When it's cold I'll look out of them and watch the trees.

However, Windows, the operating system, IS okay if you don't mind buying a new computer and new software for every upgrade... and then there's those nasty viruses/spyware/bots!

I use Linux, so I don't consider my time wasted. You, on the other hand, don't like Linux... so why are you wasting your time posting to a Linux forum? Child.

My post was in reply to vineet.

well i guess i offended lots of Linuxers or Linuxians. But sadly, once again none of you could see the point i was trying to make. I emphasized in beginning and also in end that Linux community is getting fragmented every day and is unable to make a strong unified stand. But all people here have read is my appreciation for windows and Mac OS.
Infact people have read too much between the lines. Please be more open minded, that is all i suggest. You are not looking into gravity/reality of situation. Despite so much hue and cry made against MS , fact is that MS still rules. And with all that criticism of windows, Linux community has done more harm to Linux over the years than MS can ever do.

It is amusing at times to see that Linux community can't breathe without saying f*** MS, but windows community dont even give a damn about Linux despite all the viruses and spywares.
So guys please let us save our energy and work together towards betterment of Linux.

an interesting article if you would like to read from Theo de Raadt of OpenBSD. Some of you may hit the roof and beyond but yes he is speaking the truth.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2005/06/16/linux-bsd-unix-cz_dl_0616theo.html

If you are short on chops then break a neck with MEPIS

" I emphasized in beginning and also in end that Linux community is getting fragmented every day and is unable to make a strong unified stand."

I think the power of Linux stay exactly in this "fragmentation" people can use whatever they want and developers have fun developing what they want and how they want... I can hardly imagine all the developers working hapily for Ubuntu or Red Hat.

Besides there's a survival of the fittest here, the distro that deserve attention will remain, also the features of one distro can be very easily implemented in other since most are free and GPLed.

I'd rather have 1000 distros than only 10 -- but that's a personal opinion. Anyway, I'm more afraid of having only RedHat or Ubuntu as "Linux" than to continue to have Microsoft selling overpriced crap around...

--
Post questions on www.mepislovers.org too -- very helpful community

Hey, let's give vineet_all a break here. He's just voicing his opinion re Linux's imperfections. And we all know that Linux is not perfect, even if we can't agree in which ways it is imperfect

Not that I think Windows is perfect!

OTOH, vineet, that article is nothing but one man's opinion. He might actually be right, but he didn't back up his argument with much. I suppose I could try comparing Linux and OpenBSD source code...

Be sure to keep an eye out for airborne swine, eh?

Andy

I'm sure it's a very well balanced opinion of a very unbiased person

--
Post questions on www.mepislovers.org too -- very helpful community

Where to begin....? Allow me to break down your comments by paragraph and try to fairly address your opinion by responding with my thoughts (topics that I feel have no relevance I will not comment on at this time, but I do reserve the right to address these topics at a later date when I have more time to fully take this in and think about this topic):
"I am sorry i dont agree with what has been said above. We are missing the whole point here by 180 degrees.
Problem is not that Microsoft is coming out with new heavy duty windows (which will be good for hardware industry as well which is in pits), problem is Linux community is unable to make a solid stand. It is just getting fragmented day after day. There are over 500 linux distros available. Maybe 200 people advocate Mepis another 400 advocate Mandriva and so on. Now end user who is not geek, finds it lot confusing and in a world where you have to compare features and then buy, comparing 500 distros is not easy task. Moreover a lots of linux installation guides recommend to have windows installed on machine before installing linux. Now if i have to have windows installed, then why in name of hell do i need linux."

One of the most difficult problems software engineers face every day is knowing how to deal with legacy vs cutting edge requirements. I think the linux model fits best with the over all plain of existing hardware to date. Mepis is a fine example of this. The Mepis model is sticking to satisfying the needs of those who have legacy devices and those who need a server based OS. Mepis includes the older 2.4 based kernel and the newer 2.6 based kernel. I could go on, but I think I have made my point. Ask yourself this: Does Microsoft truly support or maintain its legacy products?

When you look at these new minimum requirements that Vista includes, you must keep in mind that, unlike Linux, Microsoft wants to play nice with all of the hardware vendors so that it can keep its installation aggreements with the large vendors. The more Microsoft pushes increased hardware requirements, the more money they make. Linux does not follow this model because profit is not a factor when it comes to the base product. Profit is more about the support of the product. With Microsoft products you pay for the software and the support.

"Secondly, Bill Gates is businessman. He is doing business from day one, when he bought DOS and tweaked it and presented it to IBM.
So he needs new OS every few years to keep the show running. Here we are complaining about 7 different versions(95,nt,98,ME,2000,XP,2003) of windows available, but has anyone noticed RedHat linux or Suse. They come up with a new version every 6 month.
Furthermore, whatever our developer community admire linux for, but fact remains that till today it is unable to present 'setup.exe' like installations on linux (some will cry RPM here, but they are too 'hit or miss' lots of times). And more, most of the application vendors are providing source code instead of binaries. (how many end users will compile source code and find dependencies over internet for hours and then recompile them just to play a game of tetris!!!). Some sites even mark that, binaries may be procured from different sources at users risk. These kind of statements certainly dont encourage any lay person to use linux."

Now on the subject of the fragmentation of Linux, I must agree with Adrian on this matter. The model of Linux and its multiple vendors ensures that every niche is filled and ensures that conformity is not the norm. With Microsoft you must conform to their licence, their hardware requirements, etc, etc., an example of this being support for hardware that is not part of their hardware compatibilty list. Another example being the Hardware Abstraction Layer issues involved with changing a processor, or hardware devices, and then needing to contact Microsoft to recertify your copy of Windows. I personnaly do not want to conform to this or any model and prefer the way Linux gives you open opportunities.

Now lets look at the business model you mentioned. Yes, Microsoft is a business and must make a profit. Yes, Microsoft has several versions of Windows out, and so does Linux, but I am not sure that is a relevant point. The relevant matter is the release cycle. Windows comes out with new versions often, whether it be the home based products (9X, XP Home) or the professional/businees products (NT, 2000, XP, Vista/Longhorn). They also end support of these and other products in a somewhat speedier fashion than say Redhat or Suse. Redhat's release and support cycle for their enterprise products is approximately 5 years (the 6 month release cycle you are referring to are the community releases, not the enterprise versions). And this includes in most cases anything new that may be coming out in a new release can be installed in an older release. This is not the case with Windows. For example, look at IE. The new enhancements of IE cannot be installed into 2000 Pro, 98, etc. I could point out more example, but I believe I have made my point once again.

As far as installing software goes, in many cases the distrubtions already come with everything an end users needs, it is free, and in most cases, updating is very easy. I will admit that the Debian based products may seem a bit daunting at first to those not familiar with apt, but once they learn how to use it they are very happy with the results. We cannot forget about updates and security errata. In many cases Microsoft will deny they have a security problem when one is found, and then when they finally admit they have a probelm it takes six months for a fix to come out. This is not the case with Linux. Many eyes see the code, and many times those that find the problem offer the fix. With Windows you are bound to the coders at Microsoft and cannot do a thing to change the code, look at the code (legally and without reverse engineering), and must wait until they are ready to release a fix.

"Regarding GUI, windows XP desktop or Mac OS desktop are no doubt miles ahead of what linux offer. And with end user 'face value' do accounts for first impressions.
And finally since Linux community fails to take a unified stand so there is no aggressive marketing or awareness generation programs. In short, Linux has what it takes to be no 1 but it lacks will."

The GUI of Windows is basically the same as it has been for several years. Yes, Vista is supposed to change somewhat, but I think the 3D desktop says much about Linux. I also think that many of the things you find in Windows these days could have been found in Linux much sooner and the implementation is Linux is always better. OS 10 has a great GUI, but i can't say that it is all that much different from what you can find in the Linux world. Plus, bear in mind that OS 10 and all of the flavors of it are UNIX based.

Let's look at Linux making a stand. You think Linux needs marketing? Then explain to me why Microsoft's CEO on occasion has said that Linux has hurt their marker share. Think about the billions that Microsoft spends every year on marketing and then look at how far Linux has made it by word of mouth and simple grass roots support. Many argue that Linux needs to take a step farther in marketing in order to expand. I do not totally agree with this, but I can see a need for some marketing in order to keep the vendor's product moving ahead. Vendors must finance their efforts in some way to keep growing, but Linux itself is built upon plain grass roots support. To sum this up, I think Linux has made its stand on quality and not quantity.

You say Linux has not made an impression on the end user. Are you an end user? You are commenting, whether it is bad or good. Apparently Linux has made some sort of impression on even you. It is also obvious that Linux has made an impression on Microsoft. Look at the fact that when it comes to cross platform support with UNIX/Linux based products, Microsoft is going to drop the ball in its future releases. The CEO has stated his concerns about Linux. Microsoft is trying to hire Linux developers. The list goes on and on, but I think I have made my point yet again.

In closing, I think I have made my opinion clear and I have offered some support of my opinion; granted I have not posted links to every last piece of information I have read, but the support is out there. I think the most important thing to think about is the bottom line. How many companies are going to buy all new hardware to install the new Vista? How many companies want to spend a fortune retraining thier employees to use the new Office platform, which was announce to be a total revamping of its user interface? How many end users are going to spend the money to make the change to Vista? I have a house full of computers running everything from Windows, to Sun Solaris, to many Linux flavors, but I do not own a thing that will support Vista. Do you think I am going to give up everything I have now to make the change? Better yet, are you? We are not talking about buying a new video card so that you can play the latest game. We are talking about an entire new system and purchace of the new OS, a new OS that may have limited cross-platform support and may have an office sweet that does not support open documents, etc. Think about it.

Joe Pearce

The student is not above the teacher
The servant is not above the master
The student shares the teacher's fate
The servant shares the master's

http://www.joepearce.com

vineet said:
Furthermore, whatever our developer community admire linux for, but fact remains that till today it is unable to present 'setup.exe' like installations on linux (some will cry RPM here, but they are too 'hit or miss' lots of times).
********

Not quite true. Star Office suite had a setup routine for Linux that was almost indistinguishable from a normal Windows setup back in the 1990's. OpenOffice still uses the same setup routing when it installs in Windows! LimeWire also had one for a while, and so do a number of other apps I have installed.

It is not that the decvelopers cannot, it is that they prefer the main packaging systems, and for that matter, so do many of us users. I have newbie customers that are fascinated at the ease of use of synaptic or kpackage.

You do raise some good points, although some people will see the whole thing as trolling, but it still comes down to the fact that we have always had multiple operating systems available, even well before Microsoft.

In my day, we had Unix, and various proprietary operating systems, then cp/m which tried to be a 'one size fits all' system. Back around 1980, if you got a cp/m program written for a different computer, you could use an app called alien to convert it. 25 years later, if you have a Linux rpm and you need a deb package, you can use an app called alien to convert it!

Even since MS and the IBM PC was launched, we have always had alternatives. I used Digital Research DOS, because it ran Windows a lot better. Many people used Macs because they could do things that Windows users couldn;t. Big companies used Unix. I used OS/2, because, well, OS/2 Warp can still do things that not even Windows XP can do.

In fact, the Linux community reminds me of the fledgeling OS/2 Warp movement.

The thing I was beginnig to hate about computing was that it had stopped being FUN. Linux has made it fun, not only for old codgers like me, but for heaps of newcomers to computing.

I just hope it keeps up. There is a move to low spec, cheap new computers at the moment for third world countries. Let's hope some of that sense rubs off on the rest of the world.

RossD.

Bravo Ross!

Joe Pearce

The student is not above the teacher
The servant is not above the master
The student shares the teacher's fate
The servant shares the master's

http://www.joepearce.com

I agree with you that OS/2 was a better operating system than windose. I still tinker with Warp 4 some. And its not Dead as Bill has been saying since 96. Although I think it will die when 64bit comes in unless Netlabs can make a free OS/2 64bit clone based on Linux. OS/2 was a bit harder for most people than windows too, but only cause it did so much more. But, this post is about Linux and Mepis. While I agree that having many Linux distro's is a good thing, in that we have people like Warren who make an distro that is very easy to use. So with all the distros out there, there are a few, that are just better for the new users. Not to mention people who just want every thing to work. However, having that many distro's, is like a double edge sword, it cuts both ways. As in it takes a long time to find a good distro, when u download or buy the ones that never seem to quite get it right for your computer. Sometimes I wonder if many don't give up after just a few, and go back to the Blue Screen of Death.

You said;

"I emphasized in beginning and also in end that Linux community is getting fragmented every day and is unable to make a strong unified stand."

If you mean by 'fragmented' do you mean as the 'world is fragmented'? If that be the case, WE ARE BLESSED *BECAUSE* WE HAVE MANY DIFFERENT FLAVORS OF LINUX INSTEAD OF A STATUS QUO!
If by 'fragmented', do you infer that a 'unified Linux' would be better... like some damned idiotic 'New World Order'? If so, I repeat, WE ARE BLESSED *BECAUSE* WE HAVE MANY DIFFERENT FLAVORS OF LINUX INSTEAD OF A STATUS QUO!

A unified 'New World OS' would be just as ridiculous, worthless, asinine, and evil as a 'New World Order' would be. (A 'New World OS is EXACTLY what MS has been trying to initiate for years... and it just gets WORSE as it (sic, ahem) 'evolves'.)

There are over 500 linux distros available. Maybe 200 people advocate Mepis another 400 advocate Mandriva and so on. Now end user who is not geek, finds it lot confusing and in a world where you have to compare features and then buy, comparing 500 distros is not easy task. Moreover a lots of linux installation guides recommend to have windows installed on machine before installing linux. Now if i have to have windows installed, then why in name of hell do i need linux.

You're not preaching anything we haven't heard or read before, that's why we recognize that you are just mimiking what you've read on some Windows fan site like Forbes. You could just as easily quoted George Ou, or Ron Enderle, or our favorite, Laura Idiot.

But, just on the outside chance you are not an astroturfing Billy-fanboy, you should understand that in the Linux community choice is still an option. There is more than one Linux distro available because there is more than one opinion of what a Linux distro should be like. And, unlike Windows, a person has the legal right, thanks to the GPL, to modify the GPL components of a Linux distro and improve on them to create a different distro, if they have the skills. Some distros, like "DSL","Puppy" or "Dynix" fill such a special need that their numbers will never reach the popularity of a "Top 10" distro like MEPIS, but they DO fill a niche and their makers and users are happy. You'll never use them so why should you care?

You should also understand that there is only ONE Linux kernel and it comes from only one source. Because of that the many "versions" of Linux available are more compatible with each other than the versions of Windows Microsoft has released. The fact that there is more than one desktop to ride on top of that Linux kernel is a benefit. You, yourself, no doubt appreciate the fact that there are several vendors for about each kind of 3rd party software available for Windows, until Gates "Partner's" with them and rolls their app into the Windows kernel. 3rd party? Of course! The Linus Torvolds

You ask, "Now if i have to have windows installed, then why in name of hell do i need linux."? On the outside chance that wasn't a rhetorical question let me answer it, without calling on the dwelling place of demons.

I used to use Windows on my PCs. I have a T-shirt which declares I was one of the first 10,000 to download "Internet Explorer" (what a big mistake that was). On Dec 29th, 1997 I purchased a brand new Sony VAIO with Win95 preinstalled. To my dismay it was crashing several times each day and I had to reinstall Win95 FIVE times in the next 4 months. Then, I saw a book in B&N called "Learn Linux in 24 Hours" and it had a CD in back which had RH 5.0 on it. I installed that OS in dual boot mode. I discovered that the Sony was rock solid stable when RH5 was running, but continued to crash frequently when I was running Win95. Two years later I installed Linux as the sole OS on that box and never looked back. Every computer I've purchased since then has had Linux as the sole OS on it.

I am writing this msg on a laptop that dual boots with XP. Why does it have XP on it? Because the XP side has an application (IQANDESIGN) installed on it that is available only for Windows XP. The individual who paid for that application, and this laptop, wanted me to use it to write a program that will control a tractor he is designing.

When I am not using that application I use the MEPIS side because I want to use an OS that is fast, stable and secure, and one which has a large collection of programs that are freely available. And, there are applications I use which are not available on Windows. I DON'T want my use of this computer restricted by people who didn't pay for it. I don't want the software I use to spy on me, sending reports of the things I do with this computer back to Redmond. I don't want Gates to track where I go or what I buy on the Internet. My business is MY business. It is NONE of his business. Many individuals, businesses, local, state, federal and foreign governments have come to the same conclusion and have adopted Linux as their official OS, reducing or removing the need for Windows. The numbers taking this step are growing exponentially.

And, because you are lurking at a Linux website, you are more than likely on the verge of trying Linux, if not switching to it. Welcome aboard!
--
GreyGeek

Haha...it's rather interesting to note that Damn Small Linux is currently #6 on DistroWatch, one spot behind Mepis. I think it's the most universally useful distro out there. I don't know anyone who actually runs it, but when they see how easily I can rescue data from a FUBARed Windows machine with it, they add it to their arsenal. I also use the Mepis live CD in a similar fashion, but DSL has the advantage of copying to as little as 128MB of RAM, freeing up the CD to do a little burning.

By the way, GreyGeek...you're right on the money. I work for a network support company that specializes in Windows and Citrix...and my workstation is running CentOS 4.2. I run Mepis on the main box at home, and whatever on the others (mostly running through various distros quickly to get a feel for them), and I don't miss Windows a bit. I love Linux...there, I said it. Fine, I'm a zealot. But, I'm a zealot with a killer machine and no virii.

After using all versions of Windows over the past 6 years, I find the K desktop to be really beautiful. Plus I can have 16 desktops, which is amazing. I love the bouncy icon next to the cursor when the system is busy, and I love countless other things about it that Windows cannot possibly do.

One brilliant feature of Mepis etc is that a maximized window can be dragged by the title bar immediately. In windows you have to restore down before you can drag a window. There are just SO many things, large and small, which make MS Windows look truly lame.

Linux Mepis 6 is now within the grasp of any intermediate or higher Windows user - people should try to set up a dual boot system. At last, I can surf the web and do e-mail with total peace of mind. Viruses and script attacks just bounce off Linux. Surfing on Linux is truly like being in a tank - the attacks just bounce off...

Dominic

Uh-oh!

Dead Threads do rise to walk again!

"You have two labs?"
"Each has its place. At the university, I try to please the Federal Government. Here, I negotiate with God."

But then, this is Halloween EnigmaOne. BTW, what are you going to dress up as?

Jon

I thought I'd dress up as a spherically-compacted mass of navel lint.

"You have two labs?"
"Each has its place. At the university, I try to please the Federal Government. Here, I negotiate with God."

I am just rising from my bed, and walking out the door. I look like the dead when I wake up. No need for makeup or masks.

Joe Pearce

The student is not above the teacher
The servant is not above the master
The student shares the teacher's fate
The servant shares the master's

http://www.joepearce.com