I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
are concerned.

Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
Windows XP.

In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
the market.

The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If
you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
world.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support
he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I
can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
market may be a slight battle but...

I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
this has to be like this. It's apalling!

Josh.

I disagree.
I've just installed Mandrake in 20 minutes for a friend the other Sunday.
Quicker than XP.


Josh has offered us the following clue :

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 
> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.
> 
> In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
> systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
> attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
> to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
> of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
> procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
> open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
> the market.
> 
> The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
> goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If
> you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
> those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
> of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
> world.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support
> he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
> given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I
> can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
> to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
> market may be a slight battle but...
> 
> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!
> 
> Josh.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:27:38 -0800, Josh wrote:

> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!

Not enough information in your post to comment. Why Fedora? Which version?
What were your needs? I'm certain others will have their questions.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:27:38 -0800, Josh wrote:

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 
> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.
> 
> In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
> systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
> attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
> to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
> of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
> procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
> open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
> the market.
> 
> The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
> goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If
> you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
> those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
> of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
> world.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support
> he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
> given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I
> can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
> to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
> market may be a slight battle but...
> 
> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!
> 
> Josh.

First of all, you can't compare XP to Linux and Linux to XP they are not
meant as replacements for each other. 2. The only distros that are a
little tricky are debian and slack, most of them are as easy as windows.
3. If you do opt for an advanced install at least you can leave out
browsers and media players if you want. 3. There's no frickin' registry,
thank God.

Why not Fedora? I spent a day looking for a suitable free OS to
download. This one seemed to be suitable. I could have spent all year
if I had looked at every option and flavour.

Again, I would point out that the average new PC user does not have the
time and resources to do this.

As for Mandrake taking 20 mins to install, this does not disprove the
point I'm trying to make. I'm not trying to deliberately stir up a
hornets nest and I'm sure everyone has a different opinion on their own
chosen OS and flavour. Would you argue that my brief introduction to
the world of alternative operating systems is flawed? My knowledge is
considerably more than the average PC user. If you don't agree with
this, I would make the point that too many people are assuming that all
PC users are techies. They are not.

Keep it going though. I am genuinely interested in your opinions.

Shortly, I hope to be a MCDST (MS Certified Desktop Technician). I need
a justified opinon on this subject. I'd hate to be seen as one of
Bill's buddies without a good argument.

LOL!

Josh.

No registry - that's a good point! I concur.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:27:38 -0800, Josh wrote:

<snip>

Please don't feed the trolls.

-- 
Munging lets the terrorists win...

http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/

Josh wrote:

Tell me, Josh - do you hide under bridges, waiting to pop up and scare
people?

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I

You are trained in Microsoft products.  Congratulations.  This does not
qualify you for evaluating Linux.

> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 
And you show your dedication by working with Microsoft products?

> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.
> 
Actually, this isn't the case.  For one thing, it is difficult to even
contact Microsoft with any feedback.  For another, many people have simply
become resigned to an inferior operating system and do not bother to
comment.  Microsoft doesn't receive a fraction of the complaints they
should.

> In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
> systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
> attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
> to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
> of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
> procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
> open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
> the market.
> 
You gave it a whole week?  How long did it take you to learn your *first*
version of Windows?  True, when you upgrade from, say, Win98 to XP, the
leap isn't too difficult.  There are new features to learn, some choices
and options to figure out.  I doubt most people figure these out in a week
anyway, but the difference isn't great.

But to learn an operating system from scratch, requires more than a cursory
glance at it.

The fact that you couldn't pick it up in a week is no indictment of Linux. 
It simply means that Linux is a full operating system, not a Windows clone
or some toy OS.

> The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
> goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If

Yes.  If you're moving from Microsoft product to Microsoft product, then of
course it's far easier to work with.

If you move from Fedora 2 to Fedora 3, you'll find that the move is much
easier, than going from Fedora to Windows.  You are comparing apples and
oranges, and coming up with a highly skewed conclusion.

> you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
> those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
> of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
> world.
> 
This is a fallacy, a veiled attack on the person, if they don't agree with
you.

As I said, you're learning a new OS, not simply trying out a Windows clone. 
It's *different*, not necessarily more complex.  When a new user tries
Windows, he must learn large number of tasks and ideosyncrasies to make it
work.  He must learn about file systems, shortcuts vs. files, programs vs.
data, highlighting and selecting, and on and on and on.  Once he has done
this, the *next* version of Windows is much easier.

Similarly, with Linux you have the same issues.  File systems, symlinks,
etc.

If you want to use Linux in ways comparable to what is available in Windows,
you need not bother with any complexities.  Turn it on and go.

The complexity arises when you want to do things not usually available to
Windows users.  Then, of course, you do need to learn more, and it can get
very complex indeed.  For a power user, it's truly complex.  But this is
because Linux comes with more features and more powerful options.  At
least, Fedora distros do.

Yes, it's a bit more trouble driving an automobile, than riding a bicycle.

> Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support

Yes, you are.  You're a troll.  Lucky for you, I like to feed the trolls...

> he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
> given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I

After a few days of research, you are in no position to form any reasonable
conclusion whatsoever.

> can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
> to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
> market may be a slight battle but...
> 
We'll see.

When I installed Windows XP on a computer that I left connected to the
Internet (DSL), I couldn't complete the installation before I was infected
with a worm.  I never got a chance to install a firewall or antivirus
software.  The worm trashed my computer, requiring me to reinstall.

I don't have this problem with Linux.  I've never had a worm.

> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!
> 
It has to be like this because you haven't learned how to use Linux.  You
didn't learn Windows in a week.  You shouldn't expect to learn Linux in a
week.

> Josh.

Is that a verb?

-- 
One Page Principle:
        A specification that will not fit on one page of 8.5x11 inch
paper cannot be understood.
                -- Mark Ardis

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 06:08:01 -0800, nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:

> Again, I would point out that the average new PC user does not have the
> time and resources to do this.

The "average" user is never presented with the choice.

> Shortly, I hope to be a MCDST (MS Certified Desktop Technician). I need
> a justified opinon on this subject.

I fail to see the connection. If you're *actually* interested in Linux?
There are plenty of resources that explain it's various aspects.

Josh scribbled:

> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.

[...]

> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!

Whenever you try to do something resource expensive on your XP system,
you will notice how difficult it is to run more than that one
process. I see this everyday. When I compile a large project (C/C++),
the computer becomes almost unusable. The process scheduling just
sucks.

There is also a problem with all the viruses and trojans. You can try
this: install a clean windows XP system and connect it to the
Internet. In a few minutes, it will be infected and is already
spreading to the next innocent victim.

To get the best of two worlds, I suggest you try a new Mac. They are
increadible! Mac OS X is probably the most elegant and usable user
interface ever created, and the whole thing runs with FreeBSD in the
background :-)

-- 
Daniel

Josh wrote:

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician.

But what are your Acronyms of Attribute? Real 'qualified Microsoft technicians'
always use their Acronyms of Attribute. Are you an MCDST? How about MCDST (I
wonder who really sponsors these funny trolls)?

> I 
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.

Standard disclaimer.
> 
> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.

They don't receive enough complaints because many don't bother to complain about
them.

> 
> In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
> systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
> attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
> to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
> of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
> procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
> open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
> the market.

What?!? You didn't get a new computer with Fedora PRE-INSTALLED? No wonder
you're so confused.
> 
> The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
> goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If
> you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
> those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
> of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
> world.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support
> he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
> given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I
> can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
> to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
> market may be a slight battle but...
> 
> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!
> 
> Josh.

On 18 Jan 2005 03:27:38 -0800, someone posing as Josh chisled in the wall:

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 
>> 
> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!
> 
> Josh.


I'm assuming you're not the character on Dora who hangs out under the
bridge, so I'll answer your question. 

I'll hand you my credentials - NMCAA (No Microsoft Certification At All).
Actually, I've been using Windows since '92, administering NT (and LanMan)
since '94, and have been programming in VB since '93.  

Okay? Yes, I think I know Windows. IMO it was a decent workgroup OS and
even advocated it to replace Netware for small LANs when 4.x started to
prevail back in '96/'97 and NT 4 came out. 

I'm now at the point where I will never install NT 5.1 (a.k.a. XP) on any
system in my house.  Why? NT has not managed to keep up with the times.
This has nothing at all to do with a personal opinion of Bill G and his
tactics. I have disliked them for a long time but am not inclined to make
an OS choice on values alone. I do credit him for giving the software
industry a huge kick in the pants. Even before the IBM PC was out, I was
using MS Basic on my TRS-80. I realize this.

I will also partially validate your argument - choice can be a bad thing.
Joe user doesn't want to have to choose between SuSE, Red Hat, Slackware,
XP, Gentoo, Macintosh, or Debian.  He wants to buy a system, plug it in and
use his apps.  Though choice can be a good thing, too much can also serve
to create more FUD in the marketplace. One front-runner will always be
present. That front-runner may change, but this will only occur when there
are fewer choices. Just look at personal music devices - currently there is
the iPod and everyone else. In home PC's this is the same and always will
be. If, however, a Novell, or IBM manages to put enough money behind a
given Linux distrobution, that one may come out on top and even surpass MS
in desktop dominance.  Remember cars went through a similar phase. First
there was Ford in the US. Then there were several dozens of car makers in
the US. Eventually they whittled down to around three, including Ford. Now
there are more, which include very solid options from European and Asian
importers. In fact, the long-time front-runner, GM, is being given a run
for their money by importer Toyota. 

Though I don't know FC3, I use SuSE at home on an almost full-time basis.
I have purposely made the switch to get away from an unreliable
time-consuming OS, which has a terrible TCO level.  I do dual-boot to
Windows 2000 on occasion, but that is becoming less-often. Here at work,
I'm advocating replacing as many of our WinXP systems (~16,000) with Linux
as possible.

Here's why: 

1. You setup the system for Joe User and forget about it. Centralized
administration is built-into almost all Linux distributions.  

2. Ease of use when using a desktop GUI is the same or better than for
WinXP. I particulaly like KDE but Gnome is an option as well. 

3. All apps needed by a given worker are included with the system at no
extra charge. These include word processor, spreadsheet, several browsers,
email clients, and the various utilities often used by workers.

4. Viruses are almost non-existent and aren't likely to become as pervasive
as those on Windows. (Just try to install Win2K or XP on an unprotected
system - you get hammered in seconds. Even with a NAT router, IE disabled,
AGV anti-virus and Outpost firewall, my wife managed to infect our W2K
system with a few viruses in the two weeks since I last did a full system
scan.)  Linux is simply designed from the ground up to interoperate with
other systems and is built with security in mind. 



-- 
kai - perfectreign at yahoo dot com
www.perfectreign.com

In fact I have been blown up ridiculously often, shot at, insulted,
regularly disintegrated, deprived of tea, and recently I crashed into a
swamp and had to spend five years in a damp cave.
- Arthur

*******************************************************************

This is my joint response to many of the comments I have received in
response to my single comment first made on this forum earlier today.

Your belief that I am your enemy (also known as a "Windows Troll"
apparently) is mistaken, misguided and even suspicious. Your responses
do nothing to promote the just cause of advocating the installation and
use of alternative operating systems such as Linux. Instead they
discriminate against those who either innocently seek information or
are somewhat new to IT (noobie as you like to call it).

I began teaching IT ten years ago and my goal has always been to cut
through the crap and bring the benefits of computing to all (despite
the lessons to be learnt from The Matrix, AI and of course Terminator
- don't laugh - you know it's quite likely to happen).

Yes, unsurprisingly, the world I was innocently introduced to was the
world of Microsoft Windows (3.1 back then). Here I am, ten years later,
attempting to break into the world of experienced and qualified IT
support which I have been moving towards for the past 4 years.

I would hope that it is not a surprise to you that this involves
supporting Microsoft Windows XP simply because this is the main
operating system that nearly every employer in my region of the world
runs on their desktop.

The fact that this is the case is has nothing whatsoever to do with my
choice. It is the IT world which I have been born into.

This leads me to my original posting under this article where I
attempted to be given reasons why alternative operating systems are
worth pursuing. Don't tell me that this was in any way provocative.
Consider what I have already told you. Then read it again. Tell me you
still don't understand?

Instead, (in most cases but not all thankfully), I have been insulted
and completely pushed away from any positive thoughts toward
alternative operating systems and the "so-called" community which
advocates to supports it.

Call me a troll or whatever you like. I know the truth. If you don't
want to believe me than put it down to ignorance. Let's face it,
you're likely to do one of the two aren't you?

My conclusion to this sad day is that although alternative operating
systems still have some serious issues to overcome, some of the worst
may originate from the users who supposedly support it.

Thank you to those who were constructive and compromising. Shame on the
rest of you. You know who you are. Make your choice and live with it.

I'm signing out. I won't be posting anymore. Be good.

Love you all anyway!

Josh (Windows Troll? - I'd never heard of that term before today),

X

*******************************************************************

SORRY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO REPLY TO ANY FURTHER RESPONSES

I APPRECIATE THOSE WHO HAVE MADE A SINCERE EFFORT
*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

This is my joint response to many of the comments I have received in
response to my single comment first made on this forum earlier today.

Your belief that I am your enemy (also known as a "Windows Troll"
apparently) is mistaken, misguided and even suspicious. Your responses
do nothing to promote the just cause of advocating the installation and
use of alternative operating systems such as Linux. Instead they
discriminate against those who either innocently seek information or
are somewhat new to IT (noobie as you like to call it).

I began teaching IT ten years ago and my goal has always been to cut
through the crap and bring the benefits of computing to all (despite
the lessons to be learnt from The Matrix, AI and of course Terminator
- don't laugh - you know it's quite likely to happen).

Yes, unsurprisingly, the world I was innocently introduced to was the
world of Microsoft Windows (3.1 back then). Here I am, ten years later,
attempting to break into the world of experienced and qualified IT
support which I have been moving towards for the past 4 years.

I would hope that it is not a surprise to you that this involves
supporting Microsoft Windows XP simply because this is the main
operating system that nearly every employer in my region of the world
runs on their desktop.

The fact that this is the case is has nothing whatsoever to do with my
choice. It is the IT world which I have been born into.

This leads me to my original posting under this article where I
attempted to be given reasons why alternative operating systems are
worth pursuing. Don't tell me that this was in any way provocative.
Consider what I have already told you. Then read it again. Tell me you
still don't understand?

Instead, (in most cases but not all thankfully), I have been insulted
and completely pushed away from any positive thoughts toward
alternative operating systems and the "so-called" community which
advocates to supports it.

Call me a troll or whatever you like. I know the truth. If you don't
want to believe me than put it down to ignorance. Let's face it,
you're likely to do one of the two aren't you?

My conclusion to this sad day is that although alternative operating
systems still have some serious issues to overcome, some of the worst
may originate from the users who supposedly support it.

Thank you to those who were constructive and compromising. Shame on the
rest of you. You know who you are. Make your choice and live with it.

I'm signing out. I won't be posting anymore. Be good.

Love you all anyway!

Josh (Windows Troll? - I'd never heard of that term before today),

X

*******************************************************************

SORRY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO REPLY TO ANY FURTHER RESPONSES

I APPRECIATE THOSE WHO HAVE MADE A SINCERE EFFORT
*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

This is my joint response to many of the comments I have received in
response to my single comment first made on this forum earlier today.

Your belief that I am your enemy (also known as a "Windows Troll"
apparently) is mistaken, misguided and even suspicious. Your responses
do nothing to promote the just cause of advocating the installation and
use of alternative operating systems such as Linux. Instead they
discriminate against those who either innocently seek information or
are somewhat new to IT (noobie as you like to call it).

I began teaching IT ten years ago and my goal has always been to cut
through the crap and bring the benefits of computing to all (despite
the lessons to be learnt from The Matrix, AI and of course Terminator
- don't laugh - you know it's quite likely to happen).

Yes, unsurprisingly, the world I was innocently introduced to was the
world of Microsoft Windows (3.1 back then). Here I am, ten years later,
attempting to break into the world of experienced and qualified IT
support which I have been moving towards for the past 4 years.

I would hope that it is not a surprise to you that this involves
supporting Microsoft Windows XP simply because this is the main
operating system that nearly every employer in my region of the world
runs on their desktop.

The fact that this is the case is has nothing whatsoever to do with my
choice. It is the IT world which I have been born into.

This leads me to my original posting under this article where I
attempted to be given reasons why alternative operating systems are
worth pursuing. Don't tell me that this was in any way provocative.
Consider what I have already told you. Then read it again. Tell me you
still don't understand?

Instead, (in most cases but not all thankfully), I have been insulted
and completely pushed away from any positive thoughts toward
alternative operating systems and the "so-called" community which
advocates to supports it.

Call me a troll or whatever you like. I know the truth. If you don't
want to believe me than put it down to ignorance. Let's face it,
you're likely to do one of the two aren't you?

My conclusion to this sad day is that although alternative operating
systems still have some serious issues to overcome, some of the worst
may originate from the users who supposedly support it.

Thank you to those who were constructive and compromising. Shame on the
rest of you. You know who you are. Make your choice and live with it.

I'm signing out. I won't be posting anymore. Be good.

Love you all anyway!

Josh (Windows Troll? - I'd never heard of that term before today),

X

*******************************************************************

SORRY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO REPLY TO ANY FURTHER RESPONSES

I APPRECIATE THOSE WHO HAVE MADE A SINCERE EFFORT
*******************************************************************

Thanks for your comments.

Josh.

:)

I'm not sure.

In comp.windows.x.kde, nicedreams@gmail.com uttered these immortal words:

> Your belief that I am your enemy (also known as a "Windows Troll"
> apparently) is mistaken, misguided and even suspicious. Your responses
> do nothing to promote the just cause of advocating the installation and
> use of alternative operating systems such as Linux. Instead they
> discriminate against those who either innocently seek information or
> are somewhat new to IT (noobie as you like to call it).

Ok. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you posted in
good faith. You say you aren't aware that wintrolls post to Linux
newsgroups to stir up arguments. Unfortunately the "tone" they set in their
posts and the sort of comments they make are almost exactly the same as
your post. Just look at the subject line you chose for God's sake! That
just screams "troll" to anyone who has been around the groups for any
length of time!

I (generally) ignore what I perceive to be a troll, some toy with them, some
set them straight so newbies reading these groups are duped and others rise
to the bait hence the reaction you got.

Given the above maybe you can appreciate why people jumped all over you.
Trolls spoil these groups (and Windows, Mac and other groups to some
extent) for everyone.

Plenty of newbies receive help in these groups. Plenty of people get their
opinion across without sounding like trolls.

-- 
Andy.

Josh wrote:
> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 
> Microsoft receive more than their fair share of complaints regarding
> the complexity and stability involved with both installing and using
> Windows XP.
> 
> In fairness, I recently decided to evaluate open source operating
> systems and settled on a closer look at Fedora 3 and KDE (as an
> attractive offering). Having spent the last week doing so, I have come
> to the conclusion that I'm barking up the wrong tree. The complexity
> of information regarding the choices to be made and the installtion
> procedures are astounding and to be quite honest I am astonished that
> open source developers are at all surprised that Windows XP dominates
> the market.
> 
> The many interfaces look great, but as far as ease of use and choice
> goes, the Microsoft route in comparison is far easier to work with. If
> you don't agree with this, I can only conclude that you must be one of
> those users who spends far too much time playing with the complexities
> of computing rather than using them for practical reasons in the real
> world.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not slagging anyone off here. I fully support
> he concept of open source software and would love to see Bill Gates
> given a run for his money. But after just a few days of research, I
> can only conclude that Bill Gates must be quietly laughing to himself
> to see that his competition have no chance whatsoever. Yes, the server
> market may be a slight battle but...
> 
> I'd love to hear comments on this issue as I am so baffled as to why
> this has to be like this. It's apalling!

You remind me of Molly Ivins' comment on George Bush:

"He was born on third base and thought he hit a triple."

It's really easy to speak with the power of monopoly behind you. If you
really think you're such a genius at usability, then try adding some of
your features to an open source project and see how many users adopt them.
Then you'll be judged in a truly open marketplace of ideas with no monopoly
behind you, just the quality of your ideas. Microsoft blows a lot of air
about "innovation". From what I can see, they mostly spend money on buying
innovation that was developed by smaller, more nimble companies. The recent
Microsoft spyware program is a prime example. You guys couldn't develop one
yourselves? With all of your resources? Nope. You had to buy one that
somebody else made. Even Internet Explorer began as a purchased product. 

Meanwhile, what are some of your open source competitors doing? Firefox is
kicking your butts when it comes to features people want. And they're
gaining ground on you with virtually no marketing budget, and certainly
without astroturf campaigns from Waggoner-Edison. Just today, I converted a
coworker to Firefox, because he couldn't get a spyware ad to stop appearing
in Internet Explorer. He was amazed to find that he didn't need some add-on
product to prevent pop-up ads.

As for KDE, I would agree with you that it has complexities that can be mind
boggling for a new user. But new users to KDE quickly learn how to use the
features they need most. Besides, do you think the average user really
needs all the features of Microsoft Office and the cluttered toolbar that
goes with it? My wife adapted to KDE in a flash. The biggest hurdle with
new users is getting them past the fact that things look different. If you
look at KDE closely, you'll see that Konqueror is far superior to Windows
Explorer as a file manager. And as a browser, its multiple bookmark
pulldowns are a real time saver. KDE also offers interactive spell-checking
in every KDE application. I have yet to see a user who didn't appreciate
this feature when filling out Web forms. KDE also gives me a view of the
weather in the task bar. I would only get that in Windows by adding on some
spyware. I could go on and on about features that KDE offers and are
missing in Windows XP. You may answer that there is no user demand for
them. But you don't know unless you put them out there. 

Anyway, let me just end by saying that I could make a whole career out od
explaining the supposedly "intuitive" features of Windows XP. I get called
on by coworkers all the time to change this setting or that. So, if it's so
intuitive, why do they all run to a dedicated geek like me?

Josh wrote:

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician. I
> support the cause of open software, especially where operating systems
> are concerned.
> 

I'm a trained, experienced bluff caller, and you've just been called.


-- 
"I marry Calculon, divorce him, take half his money, and turn back into a
guy - it's sort of a two-person pyramid scheme." --Bender

nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:

<stuff>

Not too bad, you might actually convince someone. (Mostly those with Down
Syndrome, though)

-- 
"I marry Calculon, divorce him, take half his money, and turn back into a
guy - it's sort of a two-person pyramid scheme." --Bender

Jim wrote:

Jim, I'm sorry, I'm going to have to disagree with you here.  Microsoft
didn't buy all of its innovative products.  You're just plain wrong.  They
stole some of it, too...

> Josh wrote:
> <snip> 
> 
> of air about "innovation". From what I can see, they mostly spend money on
> buying innovation that was developed by smaller, more nimble companies.
> The recent Microsoft spyware program is a prime example. You guys couldn't
> develop one yourselves? With all of your resources? Nope. You had to buy
> one that somebody else made. Even Internet Explorer began as a purchased
> product.
> 



-- 
"The last time somebody said, `I find I can write much better with a
word processor.', I replied, `They used to say the same thing about
drugs.'
                -- Roy Blount, Jr.

nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:

> *******************************************************************
> 
> This is my joint response to many of the comments I have received in
> response to my single comment first made on this forum earlier today.
> 
> Your belief that I am your enemy (also known as a "Windows Troll"
> apparently) is mistaken, misguided and even suspicious. Your responses
> do nothing to promote the just cause of advocating the installation and
> use of alternative operating systems such as Linux. Instead they
> discriminate against those who either innocently seek information or
> are somewhat new to IT (noobie as you like to call it).
> 
Well, Josh, it's like this.  Speaking for myself, I have seen several
hundred posts in Linux NG's, starting out with, "I'm a Microsoft ____, and
I like Open Source.  I tried Linux ______ for a day/week/month, and I can't
understand why anyone would use it.  It's too _______".  Fill in the blanks
with whatever you want.  It's a template that is repeated endlessly, so
when I see posts in this form, I simply chalk it off as a troll.

<snip>
> 
> Call me a troll or whatever you like. I know the truth. If you don't

OK.  You're a troll.

> want to believe me than put it down to ignorance. Let's face it,
> you're likely to do one of the two aren't you?
> 
You're not very credible, Josh.

> My conclusion to this sad day is that although alternative operating
> systems still have some serious issues to overcome, some of the worst
> may originate from the users who supposedly support it.
> 
Ah, yes.  Come here, troll, get your bottom kicked, and run away claiming
it's all our fault for using Linux.

Linux has serious issues to overcome, true.  It's not perfect, and never
will be, because this is an imperfect world.  But it's a damned sight
better than Windows ever was, and unless one or the other OS has a major
change, it will remain better.  It is more stable and more secure, period -
and that's not entirely due to the lack of numbers hacking on it.

> Thank you to those who were constructive and compromising. Shame on the
> rest of you. You know who you are. Make your choice and live with it.
> 
Yes, I know who I am.  And so do you, Josh.  Shame on you for trotting out
this tired old routine yet again.

> I'm signing out. I won't be posting anymore. Be good.
> 
Don't let the door hit you, Josh.  Perhaps you could learn something about
computers, and then give Linux another try.  Most people don't need to do
this, but... everyone has different abilities.

> Love you all anyway!
> 
> Josh (Windows Troll? - I'd never heard of that term before today),
> 
> X
> 
> *******************************************************************
> 
> SORRY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO REPLY TO ANY FURTHER RESPONSES
> 
> I APPRECIATE THOSE WHO HAVE MADE A SINCERE EFFORT
> *******************************************************************

Thanks.  My effort came straight from the heart...

-- 
God is a comic playing to an audience that's afraid to laugh.

nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:

> Shortly, I hope to be a MCDST (MS Certified Desktop Technician). I need
> a justified opinon on this subject. I'd hate to be seen as one of
> Bill's buddies without a good argument.
> 

Your examination of alternate OSs was seriously flawed. I am at a total loss
as to what you found to be so complex. You can get a number of distros like
Mandrake Move or Knoppix that you just put the Cd in the drive and boot. At
the most you have to choose the language. You dont have to install them or
make partitions or choose whether to upgrade or install or anything; You
dont have to find or install drivers for your sound card modem printer or
Graphics card or scanner. You dont have to install any software as
music/video/DVD players/rippers/writers are all included as are Office
packages etc. I'm afraid that XP just does not compare anymore and falls
further behind linux by the month.

Sure there are lots of options in the control-centre for those that want to
customise and tailor their system but you dont have to use any of them. In
reality the XP control-panel and Administration console are MUCH more
complex its just that you are familiar with them.
I supply 20 computer systems a week and in the last year I have only
supplied 35 copies of XP as no-one wants it after a 5 minute demo of what
they can have for free. Only business users who were not authorised to
choose an alternative Office system declined but they are fading away with
OpenOffice and Koffice advancements not to mention crossover. Telstra, the
Australian telecom authority trialled 100 linux systems and is changing
over to linux as is Quantas and numerous Governments and businesses in
Europe.
      It is only in the US where money speaks louder than anything else that
linux is a bit further behind.
Linux is spreading like wildfire through schoolkids despite MS spending
millions on child psychology and marketing to try to stop it and as they
come of age then the tyranny of corporate imperialist monopolism will
thankfully die.

As a closing comment though; How is it that someone who teaches IT for 10
years needs to PAY for such a useless qualification as a desktop technician
or are you just joking that such a "qualification" even exists? I employ
schoolkids to do that; it hardly requires much in the way of training. This
is another money-sucking area that MS has created that has unfortuneatly
caught on in linux; Paying for useless qualifications that should be second
nature to anyone with any sort of tertiary qualification. Thankfully in
this country at least MS certification is treated with the ridicule it
deserves and the same will happen with Redhat, Mandrake and the rest. A
computer engineer should be able to do everything from networking to
problem solving and training; Specialisation is for insects.
 

-- 
regards,
andrew

DanielEKFA scribbled:

> nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> <stuff>
> 
> Not too bad, you might actually convince someone. (Mostly those with
> Down Syndrome, though)
> 

Do you really think this comment is appropriate? Remember that
everything you post to the usenet is archived, probably longer than
your entire lifetime.

-- 
Daniel

Daniel Lidstr�m wrote:

> DanielEKFA scribbled:
> 
>> nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>> <stuff>
>> 
>> Not too bad, you might actually convince someone. (Mostly those with
>> Down Syndrome, though)
>> 
> 
> Do you really think this comment is appropriate? Remember that
> everything you post to the usenet is archived, probably longer than
> your entire lifetime.
> 
<Gasp> A permanent blemish on an otherwise perfect record!

Maximust wrote:

> Daniel Lidstr�m wrote:
> 
>> DanielEKFA scribbled:
>> 
>>> nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> <stuff>
>>> 
>>> Not too bad, you might actually convince someone. (Mostly those with
>>> Down Syndrome, though)
>>> 
>> 
>> Do you really think this comment is appropriate? Remember that
>> everything you post to the usenet is archived, probably longer than
>> your entire lifetime.
>> 
> <Gasp> A permanent blemish on an otherwise perfect record!

:D 


-- 
Why do cats jump out of Windows? Because it sucks!

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 06:08:01 -0800, nicedreams@gmail.com wrote:

> Why not Fedora? I spent a day looking for a suitable free OS to
> download. This one seemed to be suitable. I could have spent all year
> if I had looked at every option and flavour.
> 

But you as the technician are *expected* to have a thorough knowledge of
the alternatives.  That you only spent a day looking says something you.

If you really support open source, I would expect that you do take the
time and learn the alternatives.  Especially if you want to be in the
field.

> Shortly, I hope to be a MCDST (MS Certified Desktop Technician). I need
> a justified opinon on this subject. I'd hate to be seen as one of
> Bill's buddies without a good argument.
> 

So this is what it comes down to.  You want some arguments as to why you
should recommend Windows without seeming like you are ignorant of the
alternatives....  "well, you know, I tried linux and it's just too
complicated for ordinary users."

Heck, my 70-something parents went from Win9x to Linux to OS-X without a
blink.  I could't explain to them that OS-X wasn't really that much
faster, but that there really wasn't much of a comparison between a p-150
and a brand new MAC.

Linux is as easy to use as any other system for the basic user.  The
installation requires a bit more knowledge, but to a tech it should be
trivial.  The most technically sophisticated question you need to know is
if you use DHCP or fixed IP....  Windows assumes absurd defaults, then
blows up when systems are added to the mix....  Don't even get me started
on the non-sense of Windows XP, and its 'easy' GUI....

Dear Josh,

Although there are some advantages of windows (which I list at the end 
of this message, there are several reasons for me to use linux:

- I own three computers and I just don't have the money to legally have 
windows installed on all three of them. Linux is free, so no money 
problem...

- Once in a while it happens that, for whatever reason, I just want to 
know about the exact working of some aspect of some program (e.g. once I 
wanted to know for sure if 'diff' really does a byte-to-byte compare on 
binary files). Then I can just have a look into the source code, which 
is not possible with windows.

- Linux allows me to mount a partition through a loop-device, which can 
perform actions on the data. I couldn't find a way to do that in windows.

- I have everything completely under my own control. I decide and 
control whatever the computer does or can do at any moment, and if 
unsure about something I can look into the source. I don't like OS 
behaviour unknown to me. Windows is too self-willed and stubborn for me, 
the OS tries to control me instead of letting me control the OS.

- Several strange crashes caused NTFS partitions to get corrupted. These 
corrupted partitions couldn't be recognized anymore by Windows, but 
linux had no problem at all reading the data from to partition allowing 
me to save it to an ext2/3 partition. Because of those crashes I just 
don't thrust windows with NTFS anymore, and now I'm using ext3.


Well, one of my computers is still dual-boot, because there are a few 
advantages of windows, which I sometimes need :

- Color-management works better for me in windows (I'm using a 
calibrated monitor for professional photo editting). I got photoshop 
running in linux, but I didn't get color-management at the same level as 
in my windows installation yet.

- msn-messenger with decent webcam (and game) support :)


OK, I have to admit, installing linux (I'm using Gentoo) takes some more 
effort than installing windows. Linux is not for complete dummies yet 
(although I believe there are already a few distributions which have in 
installation as easy as windows).
But, if one wants to in in control, one has to make some effort. The 
control and configurability of linux, and the advantages listed above, 
are worth the installation effort for me.


I'm looking forward to your reply.

Best wishes,
Casper

Dear Josh,

Although there are some advantages of windows (which I list at the end 
of this message, there are several reasons for me to use linux:

- I own three computers and I just don't have the money to legally have 
windows installed on all three of them. Linux is free, so no money 
problem...

- Once in a while it happens that, for whatever reason, I just want to 
know about the exact working of some aspect of some program (e.g. once I 
wanted to know for sure if 'diff' really does a byte-to-byte compare on 
binary files). Then I can just have a look into the source code, which 
is not possible with windows.

- Linux allows me to mount a partition through a loop-device, which can 
perform actions on the data. I couldn't find a way to do that in windows.

- I have everything completely under my own control. I decide and 
control whatever the computer does or can do at any moment, and if 
unsure about something I can look into the source. I don't like OS 
behaviour unknown to me. Windows is too self-willed and stubborn for me, 
the OS tries to control me instead of letting me control the OS.

- Several strange crashes caused NTFS partitions to get corrupted. These 
corrupted partitions couldn't be recognized anymore by Windows, but 
linux had no problem at all reading the data from to partition allowing 
me to save it to an ext2/3 partition. Because of those crashes I just 
don't thrust windows with NTFS anymore, and now I'm using ext3.


Well, one of my computers is still dual-boot, because there are a few 
advantages of windows, which I sometimes need :

- Color-management works better for me in windows (I'm using a 
calibrated monitor for professional photo editting). I got photoshop 
running in linux, but I didn't get color-management at the same level as 
in my windows installation yet.

- msn-messenger with decent webcam (and game) support :)


OK, I have to admit, installing linux (I'm using Gentoo) takes some more 
effort than installing windows. Linux is not for complete dummies yet 
(although I believe there are already a few distributions which have an 
installation as easy as windows).
But, if one wants to be in control, one has to make some effort. The 
control and configurability of linux, and the advantages listed above, 
are worth the installation effort for me.


I'm looking forward to your reply.

Best wishes,
Casper

Casper Doppen wrote:
>  Dear Josh,
> 
[snip]
> 
>  - I have everything completely under my own control. I decide and 
>  control whatever the computer does or can do at any moment, and if 
>  unsure about something I can look into the source. I don't like OS 
>  behaviour unknown to me. Windows is too self-willed and stubborn for me, 
>  the OS tries to control me instead of letting me control the OS.
[snip]

Amen to that! And the MS-knows-better-what-the-user-wants-than-the-
user-himself is even worse with MS Office. Unfortunately OpenOffice
thought that it was a good idea to introduce some of the same 
wizard-thinking into OO.
I say: Wizards are OK but please NO WIZARDS BY DEFAULT!
eg.: Installation asks: Do you want wizards with your fries?
Yes or No
If you hit "No" you still may use the wizards out of a menu.
If you hit "Yes" you still may disable all wizards later by means
of a menu item.

Another "gimmik" of MS-Windows which enrages me frequently is the 
notorious redraw of windows and lists. Working on a list of tens or
even hundreds of files Windows never lets you stay on the file you
worked on last but it redraws the file list and you need to keep
pencil and paper notes on which file you touched last.
KDE keeps the last file marked and brings the view of the list back
to where I was. Takes a second longer to rebuild the list but saves
me a lot of hassle and saves MY time.

The two complaints I have about KDE is that (1) kpilot completely 
sucks.
The last time I had to restore the addressbook of my trusty old
PalmIIIxe with kpilot I got either none of the categories back
or I had addresses double and triple in the PDA. If I want a 
restore I want a restore and nothing else, especially I don't
want the empty PDA synchronized to the PC before the restore is
performed. Fortunately I still had a usable backup on an XP-box
with Palm Companion. Fortunately too that my old-old PDA needed
a hard reset only once in 5 years.
Please have a look into the backup and restore of PalmOne s/w.
That is functionality I would like to have copied into KDE. It is,
however not a MS product.

(2) Icon placement on the desktop used to suck with MS Windows.
It got better lately - now it sucks with KDE. I hope it will be
better with 3.4.

Kind regards, Eike

Eike Lantzsch, ZP6CGE wrote:

> Casper Doppen wrote:
>>  Dear Josh,
>> 
> [snip]
>> 
>>  - I have everything completely under my own control. I decide and
>>  control whatever the computer does or can do at any moment, and if
>>  unsure about something I can look into the source. I don't like OS
>>  behaviour unknown to me. Windows is too self-willed and stubborn for me,
>>  the OS tries to control me instead of letting me control the OS.
> [snip]
> 
> Amen to that! And the MS-knows-better-what-the-user-wants-than-the-
> user-himself is even worse with MS Office. Unfortunately OpenOffice
> thought that it was a good idea to introduce some of the same
> wizard-thinking into OO.
> I say: Wizards are OK but please NO WIZARDS BY DEFAULT!
> eg.: Installation asks: Do you want wizards with your fries?
> Yes or No
> If you hit "No" you still may use the wizards out of a menu.
> If you hit "Yes" you still may disable all wizards later by means
> of a menu item.
> 
> Another "gimmik" of MS-Windows which enrages me frequently is the
> notorious redraw of windows and lists. Working on a list of tens or
> even hundreds of files Windows never lets you stay on the file you
> worked on last but it redraws the file list and you need to keep
> pencil and paper notes on which file you touched last.
> KDE keeps the last file marked and brings the view of the list back
> to where I was. Takes a second longer to rebuild the list but saves
> me a lot of hassle and saves MY time.
> 

Even worse with Windows, try copying a bunch of files into a folder. Then,
in the folder you're copying to, start editing a file or folder name. Don't
hit enter. Once the files have copied and the progress window closes,
whichever file/folder was copied last gets the name you were writing, NOT
the actual file/folder you were renaming. This bug is soon to be 10 years
old, hasn't been addressed yet. Like so many other bugs in Windows. What
does it tell us anyway? That object orientation is a concept lost on
Microsoft.


> (2) Icon placement on the desktop used to suck with MS Windows.
> It got better lately - now it sucks with KDE. I hope it will be
> better with 3.4.
> 

True, they change all the time.

-- 
Why do cats jump out of Windows? Because it sucks!

Oh, and what about the annoyances in Windows, zip files as folders, the
parsing of video files, that you have to hack the registry to get rid of
because they bring your state-of-the-art computer to its knees?

These things exist and are even more functional in KDE (like resting your
cursor on top of a movie file, watching a frame and listening to the sound
play), and they work quickly and without side-effects.

And what about copying a picture to a folder where there's a file with the
same name? A dialog with both pictures + statistics about them appears with
easy to understand choices. How cool is that? Some with sound files, only
here you have two player bars that you can use to listen to each file. How
cool is that? I tell you how cool it is: It kicks asssssss! :)

People keep saying, "Linux isn't ready for the desktop". Which desktop would
that be? KDE is a better, more user-friendly and more versatile desktop
than Explorer ever was. And that's a fact.

:)


-- 
Why do cats jump out of Windows? Because it sucks!

Oh, oh, and what about Explorer, move some files out of a directory you're
working in. Start renaming a file or folder while it progresses. You better
have fast fingers or a slow harddrive, because if you're still typing when
those files have been moved, what you wrote will be discarded and the
original name restored.

Or try to rename a folder, and have Explorer tell you afterwards that you
can't rename it because some application is using the folder. And then it
reverts to the old name without giving you a chance to at least Ctrl-C what
you wrote. And 9 times out of 10 the "application using the folder" is
really Explorer itself, leaving a file locked because it's buggy as hell.
And there's only one cure other than a system reboot, which is, Task
Manager > Explorer: End Process > Run: explorer.exe. Pathetic.


-- 
Why do cats jump out of Windows? Because it sucks!

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:27:38 -0800, Josh wrote:

> I am a trained, experienced and qualified Microsoft technician.
<snip>

Bullshit. You're troll & have posted this crap in other groups. 

Eike Lantzsch, ZP6CGE wrote:
> ...
> (2) Icon placement on the desktop used to suck with MS Windows.
> It got better lately - now it sucks with KDE. I hope it will be
> better with 3.4.
> ...

There was a bug with the placement
of icons at login which has been hunted
down and killed :)

If that is your problem, then you should
get happy with 3.4... if not, make a wish
with a detailed description of your desired
behavior: http://bugs.kde.org

RU,
Andreas

I may be a few days late in adding my two cents worth, but considering
that I work for a small university (with an equally small budget), I
feel I have a voice in this.  I am responsible for maintaining the
computers and related technologies for the library.  In order to meet
the needs of our users, I have designated several groups of computers,
each for different functions.   A large portion is for the computer
lab.  Two smaller groups of computers are for public internet access
and for our online databases (including our online card catalog).

Up until this past December, all the computers were running Windows
2000 with roaming profiles downloaded from a central server.  A couple
months before that, however, the profiles would fail to download.  A
quick search of the Knowledge Base on the Microsoft site told me that
this was a known issue with Win2K and that a patch was ready but would
NOT be released until the next Service Pack (which, I found out later,
isn't going to be an SP anymore, but that's another issue).

Since I have to run Windows in the computer lab because of various
software programs being used, I left those alone (for now).  However,
there was nothing to prevent me from changing the other computers over
to Linux, which I did.  Now, I have sixteen computers that I don not
have to worry about being infested with viruses, worms, or spyware.
Oh, I should mention that the workstations that access our online
databases have to be restricted to a select few domains, which is
easily done with the help of some free software.

Granted, I have to sit down and research how I was going to set up the
computers, and the necessary software, for the various tasks, including
how the desktops would look like.  Once done, all I had to do was roll
up the files into a tarball and unpack them on the various machines.
Of course, that whole process is part of my job.  Now, I have sixteen
computers that not only run Linux and are immune to the problems that
plaque Windows systems, but that the users cannot change do to
customization done on my part.  Do the users care?  Appartantly not,
since they're using the workstations (and Firefox, of course) without
any help or question whatsoever.  Thus, I have plans for more use of
Linux in our library in the future.

So why do I use Linux?  Let's see:

1) Immune to Windows vulnerabilities (including viruses, worms,
trojans, and especially spyware).
2) Freedom to customize the system to meet varying needs (workstations,
web servers, file servers, etc.).
3) Price savings in software.
4) Stability.

And the distro I use?  Debian Sarge.