Do any normal people use linux?

[james133]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

Not sure what you mean here, but Ubuntu reads and writes my Windows Vista disk quite nicely.

Sorry. I wasn't clear in summarizing. I have a Seagate 400 GB PATA internal hard drive in a USB/Firewire external enclosure, and I have an old desktop with Windows 98. (I have old language instruction software that will not run on any Windows OS newer than 98, nor will it run in Linux under WINE.) When I formatted the external hard drive, I chose either FAT32 or NTFS for its file system. There was no option to "format in OnTrack6" in the Seagate formatting utility that came with the hard drive. However, there was an option to "make all of the 400 GB accessible for older OSes such as Windows 98," which I wanted. Thus, the external hard drive was formatted in a file system usable by Linux (FAT32/NTFS) but with a modification that causes Linux to read it as incompatible (OnTrack6). There is a workaround to correct this, but it works only for a hard drive connected through the IDE bus. In other words, it works for the way you install a hard drive in a desktop computer and not for the way you connect that hard drive to a notebook.

Originally Posted by tomtyi

and finally Ubuntu has nothing to do with this recovery file, it can only mount if you plug in when Ubuntu runs. but if your pc can boot from usb things and the bios setup is good you could boot from usb hd. but the filetype of this recovery is not compatibile with Linux distros.

But you understand now that I was not trying to boot from USB. (Ubuntu 9.04, actually, was installed on this notebook via external optical drive, so boot-by-USB is certainly enabled.) I was trying to get Ubuntu to read an external hard drive in a modified FAT32/NTFS file system that it can be forced to read on IDE but not on USB.

Originally Posted by runningbird

Forgive the term "normal"; I mean, do people use linux who are not complete open source software fanatics? I actually only have linux on my computer myself, but I do not know how to do anything; I can't install any programs, mainly....It loads really quickly.

I like the cost and idea of open source software, but I will only think so long and so hard about how to do anything—for example, getting Ubuntu to read an external hard drive in a modified FAT32/NTFS file system that it can be forced to read on IDE but not on USB—before I return to the path of least resistance. Everyone draws a line somewhere.

I find installing programs in Ubuntu through Synaptic easier than installing programs in Windows. On the other hand, installing programs not in Ubuntu repositories is harder than in Windows. As an example of the latter, I screwed up trying to install Firefox 3.5, which is not available yet through Synaptic, using some cut-and-paste instructions because I didn't first read notes at the end of the instructions about deleting “Ubuntu Firefox” 3.0 before installing “Mozilla Firefox” 3.5. Fortunately, in addition to loading slightly faster than Windows, Ubuntu also installs and patches faster—much, much faster.

[Nex]

I screwed up trying to install Firefox 3.5

I went to firefox's page it had a huge "Linux 9MB" link, I downloaded the tar.bz2 file, since it had the classical compressed file icon I did right click to uncompress. A folder firefox3.5 was created, I then double clicked the filey that said 'firefox'. It was so hard.

Everyone can find absurd, extremely unlikely and most probably heavily microsoft dependent (words like FAT and NTFS hint that) examples of ubuntu not being able to do an extremely bizare task that nobody else needs to ever do and call it a magnificent example of how it will "never replace windows" . Of course, windows does have its own amount of bizare situations that it cannot support at all.

Windows took over the world in a state that was several times much less friendlier than even the current archlinux version. You needed tons of command line and DOS tricks just to start windows. People like to believe that "ease of use" and "usability" are more than just some myths and they love to believe they actually chose windows. The thing is, they didn't. Their PC company chose windows, their computer lessons took windows, and their software makers chose windows. What's worse is that all those third parties chose windows either because "everybody" runs windows or because of awful deals with Microsoft.

Users that think that familiarity is the law and that they are not ever supposed to learn again are part of the problem.

Good news is that the situation is improving. I don't really care how many windows zealots are so convinced that their way is the only way because it is TRADITION! to use windows and the task bar must be in the bottom of the screen not at the top or whatever. Ubuntu has been getting so easy to use lately, and it is a very useful tool, it costed me nothing. It of course causes me trouble every once in a while, but it is not like Windows XP was any better with all its damn problems that made me unable to use my computer for whole afternoons because of having to clean them.

Trivializing open source as just something few people care about is a bad sign. It is very important to have some responsibility and consciousness, even when running software. Proprietary software truly is an irresponsible choice, it sets you to an ethernal lock-in, it has tons of hidden costs and it even threatens the environment thanks to planned obsoloscence. It is easy to be lazy and decide you should never learn anything again and get conformed with the garbage that is thrown to you. But some of us just won't just accept that.

If no 'normal' users use it, I don't care, at least I do. And honestly, I 've been running it for 3 years in this computer, it feels great that I don't have to replace this 6 years old computer yet and can actually run Jaunty Jackalope and all of its NEWEST software versions without issues, what's more amazing is that ubuntu actually became faster, not slower after my most recent upgrade to the newest version. I can actually customize it and all. I fear no lock-ins. I am paying no expensive licenses neither am I breaking the law. I am not feeding monopolies that are harmful to people or the environment.

I still run windows XP sometimes. I happen to consider it one of the best Linux applications. As a compatibility bridge. Though I think the only reason I use it lately is for development and testing, if I wasn't such an advanced user I wouldn't need it and could use ubuntu just fine.

. (I have old language instruction software that will not run on any Windows OS newer than 98, nor will it run in Linux under WINE.)

Virtual Machines were invented a long time ago... I mean really, that's the sort of thing you have to learn to use Virtual Box for, even if you were on Windows XP and not Linux. To keep a whole computer dedicated to windows 98 is an enormous waste of time, if you need all of these things, use virtual box, install windows 98 on it.

I do not think Linux can take over the world soon. I think it could get a 5% marketshare. I also wish for it to be able to take 30% eventually. Like firefox in the web. I don't think more than that is needed. Companies wouldn't be able to make things windows only, and we would have a revolution.

It is like firefox, things like Opera and chrome wouldn't survive if it wasn't for all the barriers firefox had to broke. Thanks to firefox sites can't just disregard standards and make websites that run only in IE, now we got web standards and web developers have to be mildly serious about it.


I think that 30% dream is far away, but I disagree with people thinking that it is Linux's fault. It is due to the whole lack of standards and interoperability in anything, and it is due to Microsoft' s and other company's own incompetence (let's say it was not just plain malice). That you need specific drivers and software for each cellphone brand and number to ever communicate to a computer is a sample of the real problem behind it. As of now you can't just decide and make a good OS that could compete with windows, even if it wasn't voluntary based and you actually had enough money to invest in it and pay usability and ease of use experts of a great quality over Microsoft's. You just would have tons of trouble getting devices of all different brands to work.

Not to mention the HEAVY platform dependency of software nowadays. It is 2009 and we still are used to software that only works correctly in a single OS - architecture combo. It is so lame...

[runningbird]

Yeah, the whole ideal of open source software is a big reason I tried to make the switch. I think open source software is a great thing, and can (and is) helping society in some major ways. It's just that at this point; switching is a major commitment. I get by, but there are so many things I cannot do; I can't even open a zip file. It is indeed a revolutionary effort where many many people pour in much more than they get back in the return. But it just isn't practical for everyone to immerse themselves in it to the point of being completely competent, which may even extend to doing some developmental work when you hit a special need.

[ragtag]

CoolBee: First, the crashing had nothing to do with your OS, but with hardware. Either the machine was full of dust, or it simply was badly built and unable to cool it self down properly when it got to hot.

And secondly, to put on my geek fascist hat , people who don't know the difference between a steering wheel and a break pedal are not allowed to drive cars. Same should go for computer users, if you don't know the difference between a hardrive, CPU, Windows and MS Office, you should stick with pen and paper! Hackers around the world rely on incompetent computer users to run their botnets, which in turn can be used to bring down important servers and services.

( Don't take this post to seriously, it's all a bit tongue in cheek, although I do mean some of it).

[tomtyi]

ok

but finally i do not understand yet what you want to do with that recovery thing UNDER the Ubuntu. it is recovery for window$, the process of recover your window$-data is independent from Ubuntu. what did you decide to do with that from Ubuntu? I really do not understand that. I think it is similar to repairing Window$ from install cd. You can mount the cd in Ubuntu but what is the aim? You have to reboot with the cd in the cd-driver. Or did I miss something? would you explain?

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by runningbird

Yeah, the whole ideal of open source software is a big reason I tried to make the switch. I think open source software is a great thing, and can (and is) helping society in some major ways. It's just that at this point; switching is a major commitment. I get by, but there are so many things I cannot do; I can't even open a zip file. It is indeed a revolutionary effort where many many people pour in much more than they get back in the return. But it just isn't practical for everyone to immerse themselves in it to the point of being completely competent, which may even extend to doing some developmental work when you hit a special need.

you know zip is a proprietary format, the most of the Linux distros "zip-manager" program is not install by default. just like flash, mp3 and other player 'cos og the same reason. proprietary is not the devil itself but has copyright, and this kind of copyright is not matching to the free softwares. but some clicks and you have got them.
in Europe it is forsed to use free type file format to become independent especially from the M$. but it goes too far.

by the way ahve you read this post? old laptop reborn with puppy linux


ragtag

totally agree!

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by runningbird

Yeah, the whole ideal of open source software is a big reason I tried to make the switch. I think open source software is a great thing, and can (and is) helping society in some major ways. It's just that at this point; switching is a major commitment. I get by, but there are so many things I cannot do; I can't even open a zip file. It is indeed a revolutionary effort where many many people pour in much more than they get back in the return. But it just isn't practical for everyone to immerse themselves in it to the point of being completely competent, which may even extend to doing some developmental work when you hit a special need.

Runningbird, I get what you say but I'm not sure it is true.

Restore your PC to Windows; download and install Ubuntu next to it (dual boot) and off you go. No special competencies needed. Worst case if you really lack the competence to do this, is to get a geek to do it for you. Give him / her 100 USD / EUR / UKP and you're both happy.

[tomtyi]

i do not agree. just use window$. 'cos this kind of approach he could even not able to update the system 'cos it does not start in the back like automatic update in window$.
runningbird! if you do not want to think rather use window$ or going forward on this way: use a Mac! it is simlpe as a wooden peg.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by tomtyi

i do not agree. just use window$. 'cos this kind of approach he could even not able to update the system 'cos it does not start in the back like automatic update in window$.
...

Actually, it does, at least in Ubuntu you can set automatic updates just as in Windows. Fully automatic, or by prompting, or manually. Up to the user.

[nin64]

you know, the type who take their computers to well know pc superstores to have a virus scan and don't understand the simplest thing like how their 60-day free trial of MS Office actually stops functioning if you don't pay and who can't figure out how to change a printer ink and who don't know the difference between Windows and Word - ask em most normal people don't!

Hehe, this made me chuckle. My boss used to ask me things like "Are you any good at Microsoft?" (when she would mean MS Word or something)

roflmao.
BUT, they make such easy prey .
No, I never charge anyone to "clean viruses" by downloading Avira and run it on their PC, although, I kind of regret that I don't take the chance.
Most of my friends use PC to play games and watch porn and never bothered to build relationship with their computer.

they could if they weren't that lazy..

Linux is becoming more user friendly. Our world domination have already begun. Resistance is futile.

[themaster]

I kind of feel sorry for those that use linux.. they are insistent "there is another way.." and their not wrong.. it comes down to what you love and what you don't..

If you use linux and you have patience and tons of time to work every single issue then more power to you..

But to everyone else who can't do that.. you are taking the HARD path.. when the path of least resistance is clearly "windows" right now.. I do not claim that microsoft will have this path forever.. but for a competitor to win.. it must do everything’s windows does.. better, cheaper and easier.. and then microsoft will be no more.. until that all happens.. I will stay windows.. when 30% or more of the market uses "bla" I will switch.. when it is clear that it's on a uphill swing to 99% penetration..

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

Actually, it does, at least in Ubuntu you can set automatic updates just as in Windows. Fully automatic, or by prompting, or manually. Up to the user.

actually, you are right! i forgotthis option 'cos fortunately it is not default.


runningbird:
let us step a little back! you have written even a simple zip file you could not open. could you tell me what you can do with any window$ system without 3rd party progs or any additionally installed progs? you can use the very talented paint, wordpad, notepad, window$ media player. and more: a lot of free usable progs has bigger correlation with Linux than with m$-world 'cos of the free software origin.


themaster:
in a previous post I wrote about this: untill m$ dominates the developers develop onto window$, and an effect o fthis you and people use m$...
circulus vitiosus, isn't it?

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by themaster

I kind of feel sorry for those that use linux.. they are insistent "there is another way.." and their not wrong.. it comes down to what you love and what you don't..

Don't feel sorry. I'm quite happy with linux. If you're happy with windows, I'm not sorry for you either.

If you use linux and you have patience and tons of time to work every single issue then more power to you..

Have you ever counted the time you spent on making Windows work the way you like? I did. I spent way less time / year on making Linux work than on Windows. YMMV of course.

I am a Linux user BTW, I don't program, am not technically very advanced, I'm talking only in user's terms with respect to Windows / Linux.

[CoolBee]

Originally Posted by ragtag

CoolBee: First, the crashing had nothing to do with your OS, but with hardware. Either the machine was full of dust, or it simply was badly built and unable to cool it self down properly when it got to hot.

And secondly, to put on my geek fascist hat , people who don't know the difference between a steering wheel and a break pedal are not allowed to drive cars. Same should go for computer users, if you don't know the difference between a hardrive, CPU, Windows and MS Office, you should stick with pen and paper! Hackers around the world rely on incompetent computer users to run their botnets, which in turn can be used to bring down important servers and services.

( Don't take this post to seriously, it's all a bit tongue in cheek, although I do mean some of it).

re the crashing in the heat - I know several people here (Egypt - the one in Africa not US) with Linux machines and they ALL crash in the heat unless you keep fans focused on them 24/7 during the summer!

I entirely agree with your geek fascist hat thinking - I put in one of my posts I think people should have to take a test like a driving licence before they are allowed to buy a computer.

I have had my head done in by people who clearly never bother to use the Help menu, check Google, don't know the difference between a flowerpot and an OS! Dear God, I remember one secretarial temping job I had way back in the dim and distant (about 20 years ago) and the Chief Engineer said to me "Do I need to boot up BASIC before I start WordStar" even at that early stage I wanted to bang my head against a brick wall.

Having said that, while I'm prepared more than most to take the time to fix things on my computer, there are other areas where I just want to press the button and for things to work - like the microwave, like the vacuum cleaner - I don't want to become an expert in vacuum cleaner maintenance for example - life is too short! This is the experience most computer users want - put it on and it works and it is completely transparently obvious what to do, no fiddling around!

[tomtyi]

and do you have reference about window$ on this pc-s, or circumstances? 'cos on my boss's c2d asus a lot of BSOD happened and the reason of this was said the temperature. i checked it was about 60 Celsius (the processor, not the air ) on my simple asus (1,73GHz M530 proc) no crashes at even 65 degree. expert said it coud happen 'cos os the dust.

[Rose of Cairo]

Originally Posted by runningbird

Yeah, the whole ideal of open source software is a big reason I tried to make the switch. I think open source software is a great thing, and can (and is) helping society in some major ways

I agree.

It's just that at this point; switching is a major commitment. I get by, but there are so many things I cannot do;

When you first learned to use Windows, you did invest a lot of time and energy in doing so. Maybe you didn't realize because this happened in a natural and playful way when you were very young, or maybe because you thought it was "learning how to use a computer" when it really was "learning how to use Windows". But the fact remains that you did have a learning process.

So why aren't you ready to go through a similar learning process for Linux? I don't understand this attitude that many people have, like "I don't want to have to learn anything new in order to switch". Linux and Windows are two very different OS. You were ready to learn in order to use the one, why aren't you ready to learn in order to use the the other?

To me that's like someone saying "Ah, no! I already learned how to play soccer. I won't play tennis! It should be enough to know how to play soccer in order to play tennis.".

I can't even open a zip file.

It is very easy to open a zip file in Linux. I have no clue about ZenWalk. If you were using debian you could learn it in two minutes.

Isn't it funny that when some program isn't in Linux because it's proprietary software, people blame Linux instead of blaming the proprietary software.

It is indeed a revolutionary effort where many many people pour in much more than they get back in the return. But it just isn't practical for everyone to immerse themselves in it to the point of being completely competent, which may even extend to doing some developmental work when you hit a special need.

As it was already said several times, if you used Ubuntu you would not need to be completely competent at all! You can use Ubuntu happily without knowing one single shell command. The graphical user interface takes care of everything.

I had never heard of ZenWalk before so I can't know for sure but maybe it's just not the right OS for a beginner. If you're a beginner at weightlifting and buy a 100kg barbell and can't lift it, who is to blame? Weightlifting, or you? Maybe instead of saying that weightlifting is such a huge effort that you can't do it and that no normal people lift weights, you could buy lighter weights.

[runningbird]

OK - Cut it out everyone! This thread isn't titled "Convince me to use linux in 100 arguments or more". I was just bouncing a couple thoughts around. I do not wish to use it, okay?

To me that's like someone saying "Ah, no! I already learned how to play soccer. I won't play tennis! It should be enough to know how to play soccer in order to play tennis.".

It's like you are saying "You don't want to play tennis? Try a different racket, change your stance up, understand the tactics here. Learn it!"

[spirit4711]

Well if you start to open Pandora's box, it's not so easy to close.

Type:
$ rm -rf /

[tomtyi]

well, there are some people around there arguing your thoughts.
'cos the title was:
"do any NORMAL peolpe use Linux?"
after this title hwat did you expect? and it is very softly, kindly answered here.

[Rose of Cairo]

Originally Posted by runningbird

OK - Cut it out everyone! This thread isn't titled "Convince me to use linux in 100 arguments or more". I was just bouncing a couple thoughts around.

I couldn't care less whether you use Linux or not. I'm just discussing those thoughts about it that you are bouncing around. That's what we are here for.

For example you expressed the opinion that using Linux is extremely difficult for non-geeks because one needs to be completely competent in order to do so which takes a huge amount of effort etc.. To what I replied that some learning is necessary to use any OS, even Windows, and that moreover any noob can use Ubuntu without even knowing what "mount" means. It's not Linux' fault if some people pick a too advanced distribution for their level.

My point is not that you should use Linux. My point is that if you really wanted to, you could.

I do not wish to use it, okay?

Well, to me you come across as sending off mixed signals. You don't want to go back to Windows, but also don't want to use Linux, but would like to use it, but can't make it work, ... Until now I believed that you actually wanted to use it but needed some help with it.

Now if you really do NOT want to use it, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Buy an external hard drive, put your stuff on there, then format your hard drive and install Windows. Done. Nobody is trying to convince you to stick with Linux.

It's like you are saying "You don't want to play tennis? Try a different racket, change your stance up, understand the tactics here. Learn it!"

No. If you really don't want to play tennis, please, quit tennis. No problem. But if you say "I can't play tennis, because the racket is so heavy and I need to run too much. No normal person plays tennis.", then yeah, try a different racket, change your stance up, understand the tactics and practice. 'Cause you can.

What you are expressing in this thread is a bunch of limiting beliefs about why you cannot possibly use Linux. I don't agree with those. That's all.

[runningbird]

What you are expressing in this thread is a bunch of limiting beliefs about why you cannot possibly use Linux. I don't agree with those. That's all.

That isn't what I was expressing. I just wanted to make a few lighthearted comments. But, fair enough; I learned a few things from this thread.

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by runningbird

What you are expressing in this thread is a bunch of limiting beliefs about why you cannot possibly use Linux. I don't agree with those. That's all.

That isn't what I was expressing. I just wanted to make a few lighthearted comments. But, fair enough; I learned a few things from this thread.

it is just an other conversation about Linux.
not the same approach, not the same result

Have you ever installed linux or do you use it?

[StuartPE]

Ubuntu is cool and installing programs is not as hard as people think.

If you want to install it on top of Windows just to try it, use Wubi - Ubuntu Installer for Windows.

Linux in general though, with those commands and stuff, is an absolute nightmare. I'm a programmer and spent 6 months in a job that used Linux and still did not have the faintest idea how to use it.

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by StuartPE

Ubuntu is cool and installing programs is not as hard as people think.

If you want to install it on top of Windows just to try it, use Wubi - Ubuntu Installer for Windows.

Linux in general though, with those commands and stuff, is an absolute nightmare. I'm a programmer and spent 6 months in a job that used Linux and still did not have the faintest idea how to use it.

It's crazy! Do you think it is normal? You are a PROGRAMMER you have said. Is it difficult to use manuals first, or last: examine any source code what you can get free?

And what? commands and stuff, is an absolute nightmare? Have you ever heard about basicly the DOS, and ultimately the M$ PowerShell?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...l/default.mspx
"Windows PowerShell

Microsoft Windows PowerShell command line shell and scripting language helps IT professionals achieve greater control and productivity. Using a new admin-focused scripting language, more than 130 standard command line tools, and consistent syntax and utilities, Windows PowerShell allows IT professionals to more easily control system administration and accelerate automation. Windows PowerShell is easy to adopt, learn, and use, because it works with your existing IT infrastructure and existing script investments, and because it runs on Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows Server 2003. Windows PowerShell is now included as part of Windows Server 2008 and can be evaluated in Windows Server 2008 Beta 3. Exchange Server 2007, System Center Operations Manager 2007, System Center Data Protection Manager V2, and System Center Virtual Machine Manager also leverage Windows PowerShell to improve administrator control, efficiency, and productivity."

The ultimate basic of Linux is the CLI, what you can not do in CLI you can not do AT ALL! BUT nowadays you can do allmost everything using GUI. BUT the GUI is only for using the system more comfortably, but not the only and sometimes nor the best way.

[Lawliet]

So we've got people saying Linux is good because it makes you work hard... and then we've got people saying Windows is bad because you have to put effort into getting it the way you want. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. As I said somewhere earlier in the thread, it's funny how when there's a problem with Linux, it's your fault; when there's a problem with Windows, it's Windows' fault. Typical fanboy logic, I'm afraid.

And what is with this Nazi-like promotion of awareness in IT? Everyone's expected to learn C so they can patch their own software? Ridiculous.

I am an example of someone who chose Windows. When I first tried out Linux, all I saw was one confirmation after another that most things spoken about Linux are fanboy propaganda.

Windows... quick install, 10 minute download of a few patches and it's ready. You can go the extra inch if you want and check out your startups and services and turn off those you know you won't need so that you can save a bit on performance. That's it. You don't have to spend 40 years making the best of an OS that WILL eventually die or be hacked like *nixboys will have you believe. The people who come out with that stuff and then say "u just dnt kno linux" I'd bet don't know Windows.

Tip guys: turning file sharing on and having a "password" password on your admin account != good idea.

I suppose it's a bit different for me because I know how to look after my own OS. Back when I was using Windows 98 SE, I had a customized kernel and patched a few vulnerabilities that to this day Microsoft never patched (so I presume went undiscovered).

One thing I can say, though... Microsoft programming is truly awful - and that's back when Windows was ASM or a C-ASM hybrid. Now 99% of it is managed code... it does lose points with me as far as performance is concerned. A friend of mine has also told me there's a hidden process in Vista that you can use to apply for ring 0 privs which is potentially worrying.

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by Lawliet

So we've got people saying Linux is good because it makes you work hard... and then we've got people saying Windows is bad because you have to put effort into getting it the way you want. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. As I said somewhere earlier in the thread, it's funny how when there's a problem with Linux, it's your fault; when there's a problem with Windows, it's Windows' fault. Typical fanboy logic, I'm afraid.

And what is with this Nazi-like promotion of awareness in IT? Everyone's expected to learn C so they can patch their own software? Ridiculous.

I am an example of someone who chose Windows. When I first tried out Linux, all I saw was one confirmation after another that most things spoken about Linux are fanboy propaganda.

Windows... quick install, 10 minute download of a few patches and it's ready. You can go the extra inch if you want and check out your startups and services and turn off those you know you won't need so that you can save a bit on performance. That's it. You don't have to spend 40 years making the best of an OS that WILL eventually die or be hacked like *nixboys will have you believe. The people who come out with that stuff and then say "u just dnt kno linux" I'd bet don't know Windows.

Tip guys: turning file sharing on and having a "password" password on your admin account != good idea.

I suppose it's a bit different for me because I know how to look after my own OS. Back when I was using Windows 98 SE, I had a customized kernel and patched a few vulnerabilities that to this day Microsoft never patched (so I presume went undiscovered).

One thing I can say, though... Microsoft programming is truly awful - and that's back when Windows was ASM or a C-ASM hybrid. Now 99% of it is managed code... it does lose points with me as far as performance is concerned. A friend of mine has also told me there's a hidden process in Vista that you can use to apply for ring 0 privs which is potentially worrying.

so it is a "fanboy-propaganda" when I say I had no problems with Linux, it is far not slower than the XP, I had no crashes, the install with hunder of MB-s of net-update is quicker than the install of XP with SP2-3, 3rd party fw, antivirus, antispy, OOo, and so.
About speed:
1. On my mother-in-law's pc I upgrade the IE7 to IE8. Only this updgrade was about 20 minutes. The install of Ubuntu was about 30 minutes on this pc. The WHOLE OS not only one app.
2. My boss tried to open his web email account (his pc is 2 GHz C2D, 1GB RAM, XPSP3). the site is full of JavaScript. The login time (after name and pwd typed in) was 15 secs. I checked it: installed VirtualBox and in it run an Ubuntu LiveCD. On this system in Firefox it was 6 secs to make the same process. At home I also checked on Ubuntu (after permitting JS in FF): it was 1,5 secs. So what about speed?
I think it is ridiculous when you say Gentoo installing is slow because of the compiling. Install Window$ is slow 'cos I had to wait 8 years for Window$ 7, the install cd/dvd will be made somewhere, sent to the shop near me, I have to go to buy it, and finally I have to install it. It is slow. You see, amyone can tell silly things.

but I rather think you are joking and I LOL

[themaster]

Originally Posted by tomtyi

I had no crashes

A typical thing people will throw out is "I had no crashes" "I had no BSOD's" where I BSOD everyday on xp/vista/whathaveyou.. (for the record in using unix in the server environment I have had crashes)

Here's the thing.. first off I work in the computer repair business I know lots about it.. but let's skip that fact and move on to another more pointed argument.. this is a LOA forum.. so I'm going to talk about LOA.. if you believe like me that you create your own reality.. then you'll figure out that all these problems you have with a computer are mostly projections of "thoughts create reality"

My point is there is no random crash.. there is no motherboard that just burns out.. there is no BSOD without human thought.. all of it is created in the now.. my job creates said "problems"

So with that understanding said argument becomes no longer a argument

tomtyi I don't know you but.. I bet if you’re trying to force your experiments on operating systems on other people "common users" you’re not having much success and maybe even have to be there 24/7 tech support guy.. if linux gives you love passion and joy keep doing it.. but if you find yourself annoyed then you should stop

[tomtyi]

Originally Posted by themaster

A typical thing people will throw out is "I had no crashes" "I had no BSOD's" where I BSOD everyday on xp/vista/whathaveyou.. (for the record in using unix in the server environment I have had crashes)

Here's the thing.. first off I work in the computer repair business I know lots about it.. but let's skip that fact and move on to another more pointed argument.. this is a LOA forum.. so I'm going to talk about LOA.. if you believe like me that you create your own reality.. then you'll figure out that all these problems you have with a computer are mostly projections of "thoughts create reality"

My point is there is no random crash.. there is no motherboard that just burns out.. there is no BSOD without human thought.. all of it is created in the now.. my job creates said "problems"

So with that understanding said argument becomes no longer a argument

tomtyi I don't know you but.. I bet if you’re trying to force your experiments on operating systems on other people "common users" you’re not having much success and maybe even have to be there 24/7 tech support guy.. if linux gives you love passion and joy keep doing it.. but if you find yourself annoyed then you should stop

I never wrote I had crashes on Window$! on the contrary: I use my mother-in-law's pc for 6 years and there were only one crash after that had to reinstall the XP. We do not use cracked progs nor wareztorrent and so on.
And you are right: there is no random crash, and so.
I am a common user, no special experiencies. It was 7-8 years before I heard about Linux and I liked the system of it - or at least I thought about that system. Finally I met with Linux just 1,5 year before when I first install any Linux on my first notebook. I had no preconceptions, no expectations. And I was shocked how SIMPLE was the install, how simple and fast was the update via dsl, and how simple to use this system. that's all.
Closing for me:
The original question was: Do any normal people use linux?
My answer: Yes, a lot.

[Trezker]

In my time using Windows XP I installed tons of cracked games and programs and even a non cracked game with starforce. And I never had a single BSOD until my harddrive died. So generally I was able to abuse my windows installation to no end and it wouldn't **** anything up. I could even have it running 24/7 for several weeks without rebooting.

The reason I mowed to Linux is just that Microsoft quite bluntly and openly kept bugging me about installing software that spies on me, and that is something I just can't accept.

When I mowed I expected that it would be hard to solve endless problems to get Linux working smoothly as I wanted it. But I was wrong. Ubuntu was really easy, in many ways better than Windows, and the forums has simple solutions for most of my problems. As for the few things that were still hard, Ubuntu is evolving really fast, some things I had trouble with just a year ago work out of the box now.

The biggest issue for "normal" people is probably games. Wine is developing pretty fast, but there are still tons of games that just don't work. In my case I have accepted that top games are mosly not available and I can live with that. I will force the games industry to change by not buying anything until there's a Linux port.

[Adarius100]

I have been using windows for years, never thought of changing it and I am happy with it.

_____________
Budget planner