Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: xyle_one on 28 May 2003, 11:42
-
......whatever the hell you want.
check out this flash movie spoofing the apple switch adds. 'Switch To Linux' (http://www.ubergeek.tv/switchlinux/). its great
edit-it wasnt spooging, it was spoofing. :D
[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: ecsyle ]
-
LOL that's great. Did you see the Mac one? "My dad used to beat me with his PC" ROFLMAO!!!!!
[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
-
ROFLMAO that's a great clip! :D
-
lol funny. I like how the guy says he has to to all of this stuff and then says I don't see why everyone doesn't use Linux. We all know thats true too.
-
the mac one was hilarious as well (http://smile.gif)
-
Someone should make a "Switch to Microsoft BOB" campaign.
"I've been using a Mac since 1984. It was, like, really hard. I mean, I never understood those icon thingies... duuuhhhh... that dock is really confusing...
Then, a friend showed me MS BOB on his old Packard Bell. It's a GREAT interface. It's so easy, with that puppy guiding me around. I switched to MS BOB, and never looked back.
I'm looking forward to MS BOB 2.0, codenamed Longhorn, with all these windows flappin' and spinnin' around. An' I'm gonna be safe from all these dangerous hacker software, like Linux and Mozilla an' all that, thanks to Palladium!"
:D :cool:
[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7:
with all these windows flappin' and spinnin' around.[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
They forget to code underwear for it, or something?
-
Well, it *is* codenamed Longhorn for a reason! :D
-
quote:
Originally posted by Billy Gates: Mac Comrade Captain:
lol funny. I like how the guy says he has to to all of this stuff and then says I don't see why everyone doesn't use Linux. We all know thats true too.
He also says he only has to do all this stuff once or twice, not repeatedly. Remember, he's not saying Linux is hassle free, he's saying that all this extra stuff is a cinch because he is no doubt an evil genius(as a super villian).
So awesome power VS awesome user friendliness. (http://smile.gif)
-
Is it just me who sees them as making fun of Linux and Mac?
-
quote:
Originally posted by fett101:
Is it just me who sees them as making fun of Linux and Mac?
Oh, ummm that too! ;)
Yah I can tell they are poking fun at some of the downsides Linux has over Wind0ze, even with all the progress that had been made compared to a few years ago.
At the sametime, they are poking fun at the mentality of stereotypical Mac users.
Note:Is it me, or is that "Henchman with bad teeth" susposed to be Stallman?
Also check out the Intellitoast video.
-
ROFL!
Yeah that henchman had to be RMS. They kind of exagerated the "all you have to do is partition, compile binaries, do virtual linking bit..." but hey it's a spoof. Come on, Red Hat / Mandrake / Lycoris are nowhere near as bad as that. Still funny.
"My mac... I just wan't to hug it!"
-
quote:
Everyone always says "how much more powerful their PC's are than Macs"... I mean, they don't even match your socks!
:D
-
quote:
Originally posted by lazygamer:
Yah I can tell they are poking fun at some of the downsides Linux has over Wind0ze, even with all the progress that had been made compared to a few years ago.
name one.
i have yet to hear of a downside that linux has compared to windows (other than purely psychological ones, like companies being too scared to admit they use linux in house, so they release only windows binaries of all their stuff). Go ahead, name one.
In my opinion, they are poking fun at the stereotypical geek linux user, and they are poking fun directly at Apple for making commercials so obviously aimed at the less intelligent end of the "whatever" generation. At NO POINT did i see ANY indication that windows was IN ANY WAY advantageous over either of the two main alternatives, in fact i have yet to see any evidence of this on any site ever.
[ May 29, 2003: Message edited by: Calum ]
-
I cannot name a downside directly(well I can easily name one, however it's gonna get into some retarded debate, I'll name it anyways), but I have gotten the indication that Linux is not all it's cracked up to be(not that Linux is hype, but there are things that no one ever talks about).
For example, my bro is taking his first steps with Redhat 9. Quite a new experience for him, but he's having problems installing those Linux drivers from Nvidia. I can't remember all the details, but it's as simple as it was in Windows. To do it, he has to do SOMETHING(s?) that you would not do in Windows. Or maybe he did as he was susposed to, and there was a problem(probably not this). Perhaps he should check on Nvidia's website for support(if that exsists)... or maybe he did. Whatever the case, he probably has to learn more about Linux, although he can probably get some help on the net.
MES thread... (http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=001948)
This thread is a perfect example.
quote:
You cannot install a package for SuSE on Red Hat without worrying whether it will be compatible with other packages or not. Even apt-get does not solve this; it has to be all the same distribution. Even apt-get repositories are not completely compatible with each other (ex. fedora).
Another problem is that when you install a package, you don't know where to find it, especially if it comes from another distribution. The program does not always appear in the menu. This is without mentioning the different desktop environments (KDE menu, GNOME menu, Windowmaker menu, etc.)
quote:
Right now rpm is the easiest way to install, but an easier way (GUI) needs to be made to install packages and take care of dependencies. Other than that, everything is ok.
quote:
And jeez, how sloppily some so-called "desktop" distributions are put together, and then you use the programs and find the GUI text is full of typos, poorly constructed sentences and misspellings. And the missing software. I'd like to set up a dial-up account oh yea go to bash shell root vi /etc/ppp.00da ... hmh? Why isn't it printing this text? Ahhh... Or how about changing the resolution... /etc/X11/xf86.. oops, the GUI doesn't start up anymore....
Then try installing some software for Linux. No I didn't say Red Hat or Debian, Linux. Oh yea, there's no standard installer, let's compile from source.... what a pain!! Y'no I think source installation might be the way forward but we need alternatives to GNU make, so that there is a definate procedure for compiling, and copying, and installing and integrating.
quote:
RPM is not the easiest way. As mentioned above, OS X has the lead in software installation. There's NO WORRIES of dependency. OS X apps don't run at the UNIX level, they run much higher up, and include all required support files inside a private folder tree. You see an icon that really contains the entire app, never having to worry about whether it put a bunch of bullshit in /bin or /lib or anything like that. You can move the icon around, you can toss it in the trash to get rid of it. How is RPM better than that?
The thing I've always said is that to succeed, Linux is going to have to not just hide, but supplant all of its UNIXness. Just as OS X is five or six layers all atop Darwin, there needs to be someone develop a layered system atop Linux. Users should be fully shielded from ever having to see a console message or a terminal screen. The option should still exist to use it, but that's all it should be... an option for those of us that are competent enough to use it.
something has to be made that's noticably better than Windows, not just "as good but different"... it has to be better at the same things.
quote:
Compiling from source is a pain, RPM's don't allways work, dependancies suck, and you never know when a package is gonna work on your distro or not.
Linux needs to modularize the installation process of applications so that you can move them around, and deinstall them simply.
And it's not just this thread, I remember from awhile back making a thread about "What are Linux's downsides?", as I had a few suspicions. Of course I can't remember a damn thing from it. (http://smile.gif)
All this stuff is meaningless to pros, as it becomes easy. The point being is that it's alot of totally new things that need to be learned eventually. However, it's not an excuse to stick with Windows.
About that "downside I can name offhand". I'll just sum it up like this: Wine, Games, and Linux newbies. Can a Linux newbie, who is good enough to partition drives and install Linux, setup Wine and play some of his favorite Wind0ze games without alot of hassle? That is one helluva can of worms, but I don't care(and know exactly where I stand on this can's contents), it's a challenge(not to debate the can, but to answer the question)... (http://smile.gif)
-
I agree 100% with lazy gamer. With my past experience with RedHat and SuSE and Windows and OSX. I think he is right on.
-
So if your new you can have difficulty installing an application on Linux, whats your point? I've seen plenty of people try and fail to install on a Windows PC, and also on a Mac OSX PC. Yes, most people are unaware that rpms/debs/source can all be different for each distribution, but that problem also exists with people trying to run Windows .exe installers on a Mac OSX box. (No, I'm not joking.) It's a steep learning curve on most distributions, probably because some (eg Debian / Slackware) do not know how easy things have to be made for new users to get it. Learning a new OS isn't going to be easy - no one said it would. I defy you however to tell me that a competent computer user could have difficulty on red hat 9 - but wait, I'm not allowed to talk about a newbie distro like that am I? ;)
quote:
and no, I'm not talking about Red Hat or Debian, Linux.
(In case you haven't noticed guys Red Hat and Debian are actually Linux distributions.)
Oh and can I have an actual example of one of the "so called desktop distributions" errors? In something other than a minor distro that no-one uses?
[ May 29, 2003: Message edited by: Faust ]
-
All OS's have good and bad points - the main "problem" with Linux is that it isn't as simplified as some people wan't it to be.
-
i can see what you guys are saying, and i agree with it, all except for those "linux isn't all it's cracked up to be" type remarks. that is simply garbage.
however onto the substance:
all that stuff you mentioned is the result of your vendor, the person who packaged the berkeley, gnu, linux, perl, and many other free types of software all together and attempted to give you an idiot proof method of installation.
Now you might say "microsoft does pretty well at that job, how come so many linux distributors are not so good" well, linux is about choice. some people's "good" is another people's "bad". with linux if you choose to get a distro that is shit, it is as much your fault as linux's. That said i know linux will get blamed for distributors' slackness and user stupidity more and more in future. that's why i was so worried about lindows, people will try it, hate it and never touch linux again.
As to the how many linux newbies can repartition their drive etc question, how many windows newbies can do all that stuff? i put it to you that newbies to windows (in fact so called "experienced" windows users) are just as clueless. A bad workperson always blames their tools, and there seem to be a lot of computer illiterate bad workpeople out there these days. If you can't do basic administration tasks, get a macintosh.
This said, i DO NOT wish to seem like i am an elitist who is trying to alienate newbies. i was there once, and in many ways i still am. I simply advocate intelligence and learning about stuff instead of what appears to be the de rigeur solution in the windows world, which is just bitching about it. With linux you DO NOT have that excuse. For one thing everything's infinitely more configurable so you are not pitting your wits against a black box OS when you do something and for another thing, there is a huge community out there willing to help you. Contrary to what you might have heard, people telling you to "try this" and "try that" is a LOT more helpful than the standard windows help advice of "reboot then reinstall".
-
Good response Calum.
Well I suppose the answer, until 2-4 years from now, is to present a "switch, but don't expect to just jump right in flawlessly" attitude. Or is that the wrong answer? (http://smile.gif)
Learning new shit is ok, I won't let it put me off no matter what, but I'm just thinking of those silly ass windoids. ;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
i can see what you guys are saying, and i agree with it, all except for those "linux isn't all it's cracked up to be" type remarks. that is simply garbage.
That remark is actually more applicable to Window$. If ever a product did not live up to it's billing, it would be Window$ XP, which is a f*****g liability.
Anybody that doesn't give Linux a fair crack is either stupid, hasn't looked into it properly or a non-trier.
Linux is the way forward, I'm betting my career on it !
-
the flash movies are def taking shots at linux & mac. i was hoping there would be a windows one, but there wasn't :(
as for linux vs windows vs mac. the mac is unix + ease of use. windows is bloated, outdated, software, linux (the distros, not the kernel) is still a child, albeit a very powerful one. i still think linux has some hurdles to jump (wow, that was almost a pun i think, hurdles. im a dork sometimes ;) ). but i can see them becoming a very easy, very powerful solution in a few years. then again, linux is not that "hard" to use right now, its just different. OSX was hard the first time i used it because i came from a windows background. linux was challenging (still is somtimes ;) ) but what i was trying to learn was apache, samba, proftp, etc.. i wasnt just using the distro. i am now. so far, its painless. like my mac. my little analogy has failed me. i should probably go back and reword this post seeing as my view changed like 12 times in it. (http://tongue.gif)
-
quote:
If you can't do basic administration tasks, get a macintosh.
:D :D :D
ooh there will be flames here soon large enough to make christians scream "armageddon."
and back to the topic, we have all seen the windows partition tool havent we? I mean that thing is less user friendly than fdisk! With red hat / mandrake (and a lot of other distros) you hit enter and *boom!* you have a GUI installer. With windows you have to hit F6 to shove in any third party drivers you need... then you partition, DOS style... then you format (which takes god damn yonks)... then you wait even frigging longer for the installer to copy necessary files to the disk... then *finally* the newbie gets a GUI. And red hat / mandrake are more difficult then this??? now that I have my partitions set up all I have to do to install Mandrake is hit the enter button about 15 times, and type in a few passwords when prompted by a big box which says "please enter your name and password", hardly rocket science!
I guess this is my way of saying that any criticism of Linux for being "difficult to install" is completely ridiculous. Now system administration can be tricky for a new user... If they are using a "power users" distribution or heavily customising things. Honestly the Mandrake default install gives a normal desktop user everything they need. Like Calum said Linux is about choice - sysadmins who remember PDP's don't want user friendliness, they just want a "hackers" system - so that's what they should get. New users on the other hand don't want distributions aimed at a kernel hacker, they want user friendliness so they should get a distribution like Mandrake or Red Hat. Which is not to say that Red Hat / Mandrake et al can't be power users distros either, whats to stop a Mandrake user bringing up xterm, installing gcc (not exactly hard, theres a big list of software in the mandrake control center where you click a few boxes, then you shove in a few CD's.) In fact theres nothing to stop a Mandrake user
from writing their own custom X windows software and using it, or writing up their own Window Manager. (sometimes I think the "old school / I hate user friendliness" guys just enjoy showing off (http://tongue.gif) )
The point is Linux users should never need to do anything more difficult than they do in Windows or when using a Mac, and in the vast majority of cases they won't.
-
quote:
If you can't do basic administration tasks, get a macintosh.
ha.
-
[insert flame large enough to make christians scream "armageddon" here]
-
hahaha, what little you know. slackware 9/kde happens to have all sorts of little gui tools. like the easy gui for messing with X. or countless others. the only downside to linux are things we call IP, or intellectual property.
-
that's not a downside because it is not an issue. linux has less intellectual property issues than any other OS that i know of. It's the only OS i have heard of for instance that has a TCP/IP stack NOT based on BSD's one. Why? because at the time Cox & others were developing the TCP/IP software for linux, BSDI was getting sued. Linux does not play fast and loose with intellectual property contrary to what you might have read.
as for those flames about macs being hassle free, are you guys telling me i was wrong? are you in fact telling me that if you get a macintosh you still have a lot of hassle to get it working right? I was under the impression that my comments were pro-macintosh from the perspective of the Mac-As-Toaster brigade. well, looks like you can't please some of the people any of the time.
finally, yes slack9/kde have tons of GUI stuff that definitely rivals macOS (not tried OSX but i reckon slack9/kde definitely is superior to WinXP as far as GUI tools goes) but so what? who mentioned slack?
-
here is may favorite one on ubergeek
http://www.ubergeek.tv/whatswrong/ (http://www.ubergeek.tv/whatswrong/)
Also, there are no GUI Admin tools better than OSX's. Well actually there might be, I just have never seen any.
[ May 31, 2003: Message edited by: jeffberg: Mac Comrade Captain ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by jeffberg: Mac Comrade Captain:
here is may favorite one on ubergeek
http://www.ubergeek.tv/whatswrong/ (http://www.ubergeek.tv/whatswrong/)
Also, there are no GUI Admin tools better than OSX's. Well actually there might be, I just have never seen any.
[ May 31, 2003: Message edited by: jeffberg: Mac Comrade Captain ]
funny stuff
-
Calum. When I installed Redhat 9 I did absolutely *NO* "administrative tasks". And through a week using it on and off I have not done any "administrative tasks". That's another stereotype that I can't figure out. If Linux people know that nice distros like Redhat (dont know about others) dont need administration, why are they saying it does... hmm...
The flash is cool, I think they are trying to take people's stereotypes of Linux and turn it into humor, which can be good and bad of course. Besides, the site is ubergeek, usually your proud to be a geek to go to any site with 'geek' in it, Make conclusions for yourself (http://smile.gif) .