Virus, Virus, Everywhere!
in [Laptops]
|
From: Richard Bonner on 21 Jul 2010 07:58 John Doue (notwobe(a)yahoo.com) wrote: > I am surprised Richard did not mention DOS ... I seem to remember > he is a big fan of it. *** I am. I run my home, portable and work systems on DR-DOS, plus also incorporate 4DOS as a secondary command interpreter. I didn't mention DOS to the original poster because it's hard to get the point & click crowd to even give it a fair shake. As well, some popular software has not been made for the DOS operating system. Couple that with a more hands-on requirement to become a true power user, and most shy away. This is too bad because point & click has made offices far less efficient than they once were. Regarding my former point, I used to be a point & clicker, but realised how much faster and resource-frugal the command line is. I got to a point where I had scripted/batch-filed/aliased every operation, and realised I didn't need to point at pictures any longer. (-: > What would your stats be? :-). > -- > John Doue *** In what context? -- Richard Bonner http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/
From: BillW50 on 21 Jul 2010 08:24 In news:i26mte$f47$1(a)Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca, Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:50:06 +0000 (UTC): > BillW50 (BillW50(a)aol.kom) wrote: > >> Richard Bonner wrote: >>> If you decide to switch to a different operating system, I >>> suggest Debian or Linux Mint. Regarding the latter, last year two >>> friends of mine switched from XP to Mint and won't go back for any >>> reason, now. > > > (Snip) >> 4) Linux runs 5% of what I want to run. And Linux is also awful when >> it comes to running multimedia. As you need 3x more processing power >> than XP does on the same machine. Plus Linux support for different >> file types is very limited. > > *** Those were similar complaints from my friend until he installed > Mint. He had issues with wireless Internet as well, but none with > Mint. His wife ran XP all the time he had Mint on another system in > their home. She is an accountant, but yet she too, has switched > exclusively to Mint. Can you run the most popular games under Linux? Nope! When you buy new devices do you come with Linux drivers? Nope! When you buy a new digital camera with fancy software to edit video, does it run under Linux? Nope! Does your new scanner OCR software run under Linux? Nope! Hell I haven't even got my KW-TVUSB506RF-PRO USB TV tuner or Palm OS to work with Linux yet. Linux does so little it is almost completely useless to me. > Am I saying it, or any operating system, is for every user? No. > However, I urge people to expand their horizons and give other ones a > good run if they are unhappy with their present operating system. Apparently I am expanding my horizons far more than you or your friends. Because I know for a *fact* that Linux makes for a very lousy general purpose OS. Hell I am watching live TV right on my Windows right now with pause and rewind. You know how many years I would have to work and write my own code to get this working under Linux? It would take forever! So why bother? >> So when somebody brags about Linux, I want to challenge them and make >> them prove that Linux is worth anything for the 99% of the computer >> users that hate it! All it does is turn your powerful computer into a >> glorified PDA. >> -- >> Bill > > *** I am sorry that your Linux experience has not been a good one, > Bill. However, I belong to a computer group, of which more members > run Linux as compared to Windows. I also belong to a Linux-only > group. I don't see any of those users having the issues you describe. > Perhaps you are running software that requires Windows, but for > day-to day usage, Mint seems fine to me. I should also add that > several of the Linux users in these > groups are system administrators, and one is a retired IBM employee > with 35+years of experience. If Linux is that bad, I cannot see > persons with their experience sticking with such an operating system. That is because they don't do anything worthwhile with their computers! They just do the plain simple things that a PDA can handle alone. If you what to expand your horizons, Linux won't get you there. Hell Linux doesn't even have good IM software either. If you want to voice chat and webcam with your friends, the only one I know of that works under Linux is Skype for Linux. Well that is great, but what happens if your friends are using MSN, Yahoo, AIM, ICQ, or something else? You are screwed! And Skype charges you 10 cents to send a SMS text message to a cell phone. While the others do not and it is free. You just don't understand how limited your options under Linux really are, do you? -- Bill Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2
From: BillW50 on 21 Jul 2010 08:54 In news:i26llq$dmk$1(a)Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca, Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:28:59 +0000 (UTC): > Ron (ryon(a)dslnorthwest.net) wrote: > >> Richard Bonner wrote: > >>> Ron (ryon(a)dslnorthwest.net) wrote: >>>> I hate Windows XP but it came with the laptop. But the AV program >>>> that I use is AVG, but I can't use any program at all: >>>> *everything* I try to run causes a message saying the program is >>>> infected! Unless I get a better idea, I may have to do a root >>>> canal and replace the OS-- preferably with something more reliable >>>> like Windows 2k. >>> >>>> Ron >>> >>> *** I have a friend that swears by Win 2K. > (Snip) > >> Almost forever I've relied on NT-- 3.51, then 4.0, then to Win 2k-- >> and I always relied on its usually rock-steady architecture. Every >> time Microsoft gets cutesy, XP and Vista, there's always a disaster >> just waiting to happen. > > *** One of the things that bugs me about Microsoft is that they > never bother to perfect one of their operating systems. Once it's > out, they are working on the next less-than-compatible system. It's > always a moving target with them. That was one of the many reason I > dumped Windows and Microsoft for good in 1999. Oh that isn't so at all! As Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98SE, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2 are examples of all finished OS. All of them are superb OS in their own right. Hell Windows 3.1 had over 1000 features and bug fixes that many considered W3.1 as a whole new Windows version compared to Windows 3.0. It was nice that it wasn't, as Windows 3.0 users could upgrade to Windows 3.1 for a small fee. Now let's look are other developers of OS. They never had a single finished OS. Like GEM, GEOS, BeOS, OS/2, etc. There is a big difference! And it is my belief that Windows XP SP2/SP3 will go down in history as the longest widely supported Microsoft OS ever! As it is 8 years old now and still is the most used Windows OS in use today. No other single OS version has ever had such a ride and Windows XP is very far away from being dead. And I don't believe Microsoft will ever top the success that Windows XP has enjoyed. >> I have a Win 2k disk, but I lost the ID number somewhere. If I could >> ever find it, I would get rid of XP and stick with something I know >> is reliable. > > *** Your issue might be (as it is with my Win 2K friend) is that you > will be unable to get newer Windows software, along with some > hardware, to run on it. That should be no surprise using a 10 year old OS. You couldn't run many newer DOS programs using MS-DOS v1 or v2 ten years later either. But even being 10 years old, you still can do a lot of stuff with it even still. Far better than most 10 year old OS. -- Bill Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2
From: BillW50 on 21 Jul 2010 09:16 In news:i26ndj$f47$2(a)Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca, Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:58:43 +0000 (UTC): > John Doue (notwobe(a)yahoo.com) wrote: >> I am surprised Richard did not mention DOS ... I seem to remember >> he is a big fan of it. > > *** I am. I run my home, portable and work systems on DR-DOS, plus > also incorporate 4DOS as a secondary command interpreter. I didn't > mention DOS to the original poster because it's hard to get the point > & click crowd to even give it a fair shake. As well, some popular > software has not been made for the DOS operating system. Couple that > with a more hands-on requirement to become a true power user, and > most shy away. This is too bad because point & click has made offices > far less efficient than they once were. > > Regarding my former point, I used to be a point & clicker, but > realised how much faster and resource-frugal the command line is. I > got to a point where I had scripted/batch-filed/aliased every > operation, and realised I didn't need to point at pictures any > longer. (-: Gee ever use Windows without the mouse before? I have and there are lots of hotkeys to get around Windows without another input device. Plus you can do tons of things if you want to through the Windows command interface. It is all there to use if you want it. Although I do admit for some things a mouse is far faster too. Even in the BIOS Setup, it would be faster to use a mouse for that too sometimes. Moving diagonal is far easier with a mouse than using the keyboard alone, for example. And the great thing about a mouse too, is that I often can work for hours with the mouse alone, without even touching the keyboard at all. And speaking about keyboards, I have a very hard time using a non-multimedia keyboard. As I use the pause/play multimedia key a lot along with the volume up/down keys. Luckily my laptops have this too, but my netbooks does not. Good thing I also have a wireless multimedia keyboard and mouse too. ;-) -- Bill Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2
From: Bruce Burden on 21 Jul 2010 22:43
BillW50 <BillW50(a)aol.kom> wrote: : : Oh that isn't so at all! As Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98SE, : Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2 are examples of all finished OS. : What, exactly, do you consider to be a "finished OS"? I don't consider any piece of software to ever be "finished", due to bugs, new features, etc. that require changes to it. To me, software is like a language - if it isn't evolving, it is dead. : : And it is my belief that Windows XP SP2/SP3 will go down in history as : the longest widely supported Microsoft OS ever! As it is 8 years old now : and still is the most used Windows OS in use today. : Don't you mean 6 years old? XP SP2 was released 8/2004. : : No other single OS : version has ever had such a ride and Windows XP is very far away from : being dead. And I don't believe Microsoft will ever top the success that : Windows XP has enjoyed. : You are probably correct regarding success. But, was any of that really due to Microsoft? I would argue that it was less the doing of Microsoft, and more the price dropping on the hardware that propelled XP to where it is today. XP not being dead - again, is that because of Microsoft, or despite Microsoft? Vista is a bloated piece of code that has many incompatibilities with XP, and won't support XP drivers, devices or apps. Bruce -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes |