[News] Microsoft's Tactics Drive Loyal Windows User to Linux

Au79 · External Since: Jun 02, 2006 Posts: 204

Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:58:31 +0000 (UTC), thad01.RemoveThis@tux.glaci.remove-this.com
> wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.RemoveThis@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Without a doubt, the activity of the Funkenbusch has declined an order
>>> of magnitude since I first subscribed to this NG.
>>
>> You know, I've seen a few Windows fans become Linux advocates that way.
>> They start out ripping on Linux, but the more they learn about it during
>> the arguments, the more they become secretly or subconsciously intrigued.
>> They eventually try it (perhaps telling themselves that it will help
>> them better criticize it).
>
> I've been using Unix system for more than 15 years. I've been using Linux
> off and on (and more regularly recently) since at least 96. I don't hate
> Linux at all, especially not on the server.
>
> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
> via the MSDN and Technet.
>

The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell, yes.
Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.

So its no surprise that MS is able to spend vast amount of resources
spawning microserfs everywhere with its programs. However, check this out:
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200609091840.htm

> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the
> net looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux
> users
> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
> drivers for Windows).

It is quite evident that after so called 15 year using Unix you have
developed a self-loathing attitude that only reflects your personal
failures: Spending 1000x more times searching for information about Linux
simply means that you are grossly incompetent- which is keeping in line
with your real Windos aptitude.

Anybody with the slightest technical knack can really appreciate the beauty
of an advanced and sophisticated operating system like Linux. it's sad that
you have not reached this level of appreciation, which again, is not
surprising.

--
.....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html

flatfish+++ · External Since: Dec 12, 2004 Posts: 2793

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 11:02:22 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

>
> I've been using Unix system for more than 15 years. I've been using Linux
> off and on (and more regularly recently) since at least 96. I don't hate
> Linux at all, especially not on the server.

Same here and I don't hate Linux either.
It's the crazy Linux zealots that I dislike.

> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
> via the MSDN and Technet.

True, but I don't think average desktop users are going to be using MSDN
or Technet.
I would say that Windows help system is light years ahead of Linux.

> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the net
> looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux users
> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
> drivers for Windows).

Same here.
Just try and find information on ALSA for example.
Cups? Same thing.
Samba?
Same thing.

You'll find a million and one How-To's for a million and two different
distributions.

It's information overload.

Of course this gets denied all the time but yet if you go to ANY Linux
discussion group you will see the same questions over and over again from
noobs:

1, I don't get any sound.
2. I can't make my printer work.
3. How do I set up Samba so I can see my Workgroup.

It's been like this for YEARS and YEARS..
Same questions.

Here's a clue to the Linux community::

FIX IT!!!

Erik Funkenbusch · External Since: May 27, 2005 Posts: 2403

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 09:55:59 -0700, Au79 wrote:

>> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
>> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
>> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
>> via the MSDN and Technet.
>
> The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
> vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell, yes.
> Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.

Spare me the "Linux is only a kernel" mantra. We're talking about complete
systems here. Distro's. Linux being usable to get the job done.

> So its no surprise that MS is able to spend vast amount of resources
> spawning microserfs everywhere with its programs. However, check this out:
> http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200609091840.htm

Bah. The rumors of Microsoft's demise are a bit exagerated. Microsoft
knows it has to make sweeping and global changes. It remains to be seen if
they can do that, but it's by no means a sure bet that they will not be
able to.

>> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
>> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
>> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the
>> net looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux
>> users
>> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
>> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
>> drivers for Windows).
>
> It is quite evident that after so called 15 year using Unix you have
> developed a self-loathing attitude that only reflects your personal
> failures: Spending 1000x more times searching for information about Linux
> simply means that you are grossly incompetent- which is keeping in line
> with your real Windos aptitude.

First, I said I've spent 1000x more time searching for information than
searching for Windows drivers. I was making a point that Linux advocates
like to wine about that all the time, but conveniently ignore how much time
they spend looking for solutions themselves.

Second, spare me the "you're too stupid to use Linux" argument. It only
reinforces my point. If you have to be a guru to use Linux, it's not ready
for anybody but Guru's.

Third, the fact of the matter is, howto's are poorly written, often times
incomplete, and many times give you just enough information to make it work
(for various values of "work). It may not be the right way to do it at
all.

> Anybody with the slightest technical knack can really appreciate the beauty
> of an advanced and sophisticated operating system like Linux. it's sad that
> you have not reached this level of appreciation, which again, is not
> surprising.

I would appreciate the beauty of and advanced and sophisticed operating
system if the documentation were equally as advanced and sophisticated.

it's not.

flatfish+++ · External Since: Dec 12, 2004 Posts: 2793

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 09:55:59 -0700, Au79 wrote:

> The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
> vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell, yes.
> Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.

There's always an excuse waiting in the wings when it comes to Linux.

>

Hadron Quark · External Since: Sep 10, 2006 Posts: 1621

Erik Funkenbusch <erik RemoveThis @despam-funkenbusch.com> writes:

> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:58:31 +0000 (UTC), thad01 RemoveThis @tux.glaci.remove-this.com
> wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups RemoveThis @schestowitz.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Without a doubt, the activity of the Funkenbusch has declined an order of
>>> magnitude since I first subscribed to this NG.
>>
>> You know, I've seen a few Windows fans become Linux advocates that way.
>> They start out ripping on Linux, but the more they learn about it during
>> the arguments, the more they become secretly or subconsciously intrigued.
>> They eventually try it (perhaps telling themselves that it will help
>> them better criticize it).
>
> I've been using Unix system for more than 15 years. I've been using Linux
> off and on (and more regularly recently) since at least 96. I don't hate
> Linux at all, especially not on the server.
>
> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
> via the MSDN and Technet.
>
> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the net
> looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux users
> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
> drivers for Windows).

Your last paragraph is excellent. It sums up all thats wrong with the
information repositories or lack of them for Linux.

Hordes of distro specific information which is often wrong : my search
for info recently almost made me jump ship and move back to
Windows. People often mean well, but there is a "hacker mentality" in a
lot of Linux users : and this often results in idle guesswork or illegal
hacks to get things working. As well as the poor standard of information
out there on the web, there is also a penchant for hardcore Linux fans
to disbelieve that anyone could be having issues.

--
Be warned that typing \fBkillall \fIname\fP may not have the desired
effect on non-Linux systems, especially when done by a privileged user.
(From the killall manual page)

Hadron Quark · External Since: Sep 10, 2006 Posts: 1621

Au79 <au79.TakeThisOut@789.edu> writes:

> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:58:31 +0000 (UTC), thad01.TakeThisOut@tux.glaci.remove-this.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.TakeThisOut@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Without a doubt, the activity of the Funkenbusch has declined an order
>>>> of magnitude since I first subscribed to this NG.
>>>
>>> You know, I've seen a few Windows fans become Linux advocates that way.
>>> They start out ripping on Linux, but the more they learn about it during
>>> the arguments, the more they become secretly or subconsciously intrigued.
>>> They eventually try it (perhaps telling themselves that it will help
>>> them better criticize it).
>>
>> I've been using Unix system for more than 15 years. I've been using Linux
>> off and on (and more regularly recently) since at least 96. I don't hate
>> Linux at all, especially not on the server.
>>
>> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
>> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
>> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
>> via the MSDN and Technet.
>>
>
> The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
> vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell,
> yes.

Correct : result? Crap "Linux" documentation which should be distro
specific but nearly always falls short.

> Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.

Except for support. And games. And multimedia.

>
> So its no surprise that MS is able to spend vast amount of resources
> spawning microserfs everywhere with its programs. However, check this out:
> http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200609091840.htm
>
>> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
>> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
>> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the
>> net looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux
>> users
>> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
>> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
>> drivers for Windows).
>
> It is quite evident that after so called 15 year using Unix you have
> developed a self-loathing attitude that only reflects your personal
> failures: Spending 1000x more times searching for information about Linux
> simply means that you are grossly incompetent- which is keeping in line
> with your real Windos aptitude.

Aha. The old "you're too stupid to use Linux". I suspect Erik is a lot
smarter than you old bean. And he's right : searching for fixes to
problems for Linux is like trial by fire. There is no central "fix all"
place that I can see.

>
> Anybody with the slightest technical knack can really appreciate the beauty
> of an advanced and sophisticated operating system like Linux. it's sad that
> you have not reached this level of appreciation, which again, is not
> surprising.

--
Touch tone phones only.

Au79 · External Since: Jun 02, 2006 Posts: 204

Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 09:55:59 -0700, Au79 wrote:
>
>>> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
>>> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For
>>> example, not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource
>>> Microsoft does via the MSDN and Technet.
>>
>> The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
>> vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell,
>> yes. Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.
>
> Spare me the "Linux is only a kernel" mantra. We're talking about
> complete
> systems here. Distro's. Linux being usable to get the job done.
>

O.K. then- Any Linux Distro is BETTER than Windos, yes, in every respect.
I'm able to get all my professional work done with more reliability than if
I was using that loser MS system.

>> So its no surprise that MS is able to spend vast amount of resources
>> spawning microserfs everywhere with its programs. However, check this
>> out: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200609091840.htm
>
> Bah. The rumors of Microsoft's demise are a bit exagerated. Microsoft
> knows it has to make sweeping and global changes. It remains to be seen
> if they can do that, but it's by no means a sure bet that they will not be
> able to.
>

You betray your love for microsoft whilst displaying a considerable lack of
cognition on current events as they may affect the future. Why would you
think that microsoft considers Linux such a formidable threat? Mr. Gates
had no trouble quelling OS/2 and BeOS in little time- Yet, Linux has proven
indestructible to numerous marketing assaults.

This is no coincidence. Linux has tremendous momentum within the
technological sector which has put it beyond reach of microsoft's war
machine. Quality triumphs over hype.

>>> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
>>> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
>>> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the
>>> net looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux
>>> users
>>> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily
>>> 1000x more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking
>>> for drivers for Windows).
>>
>> It is quite evident that after so called 15 year using Unix you have
>> developed a self-loathing attitude that only reflects your personal
>> failures: Spending 1000x more times searching for information about Linux
>> simply means that you are grossly incompetent- which is keeping in line
>> with your real Windos aptitude.
>
> First, I said I've spent 1000x more time searching for information than
> searching for Windows drivers. I was making a point that Linux advocates
> like to wine about that all the time, but conveniently ignore how much
> time they spend looking for solutions themselves.
>

Ah, under your logic, there is far more information about how to fix windos
and its multitude of problems than Linux How-to's. This makes sense since
Linux does not require even a portion of troubleshooting and repairs.

> Second, spare me the "you're too stupid to use Linux" argument. It only
> reinforces my point. If you have to be a guru to use Linux, it's not
> ready for anybody but Guru's.
>

Given the success of SuSE, Red Hat, Mandriva, and Ubuntu to provide distros
that are simply install-and-use environments, I very much doubt that the
notion that Linux is for the uber-geek is valid; in fact quite unbelivable.

> Third, the fact of the matter is, howto's are poorly written, often times
> incomplete, and many times give you just enough information to make it
> work
> (for various values of "work). It may not be the right way to do it at
> all.
>

For somebody with 15 years of Unix "experience" you do sound rather
amateurish. Here, we need to realize two points: One, How-to's are written
by volunteer contributors that may have formulated a particular solution,
not by professional writers, therefore you have to appreciate the solution
provided over its delivery. Two, There is a vast wealth of information
about all things Linux out there: Not only from publishing companies such
as O'Reilly, McGraw-Hill Osborne, John Wiley & Sons, and even For Dummies,
but also from websites and newsgroups.

I have not found a particular task or problem for which a solution was
lacking. Your criticism of Linux documentation sounds like an obnoxious
whining of an amateur, and one with claims of 15 years experience. Now,
that's sad.

>> Anybody with the slightest technical knack can really appreciate the
>> beauty of an advanced and sophisticated operating system like Linux. it's
>> sad that you have not reached this level of appreciation, which again, is
>> not surprising.
>
> I would appreciate the beauty of and advanced and sophisticed operating
> system if the documentation were equally as advanced and sophisticated.
>

That jus shows how immature you are from a technical point of view. The
quality of content cannot be judged by its delivery method, and your claims
of "incomplete" is absurd indeed.

> it's not.

It doe not have to be.

Maybe microsoft should start engineering their OS's as good as their
advanced and sophisticated documents, then it may work without endless
patching and the legions of third party software that it needs just to be
marginally functional.

--
.....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html

thad01 · External Since: Apr 20, 2005 Posts: 812

Erik Funkenbusch <erik.TakeThisOut@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>
> I've been using Unix system for more than 15 years. I've been using Linux
> off and on (and more regularly recently) since at least 96. I don't hate
> Linux at all, especially not on the server.
>
> On the desktop, I simply believe it's nowhere near ready for average use
> and that the level of maturity of support is sadly lacking. For example,
> not one single Linux vendor provides the kind of resource Microsoft does
> via the MSDN and Technet.

Having been an MSDN subscriber, I'll agree that MS does a good job
with it... but I would not be so quick to dismiss the Linux vendors.
IBM professional services provides some wonderful (if pricy) support
and Red Hat has done well for me also.

Linux is quite suitable as a desktop OS for most users right now.
Growth is slow only because people tend to stick with what they
know and need a compelling reason to switch. For a few people I
know, the compelling reason has been malware. I've set up several
Linux systems for non-geek friends. They use them for Internet
access, multimedia, office work, and even the occasional game...
and have no trouble. Really, once you've learned how to point
and click and find your way around a menu, it is all pretty much
the same.

> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the net
> looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux users
> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
> drivers for Windows).

Yes, the open and infinetely adaptable nature of Linux has lead to a
lot of customized distros, one-off hacks, and a mountain of information
to sift through on the Internet when researching anything Linux. It
is both a blessing and a curse. I suspect that is actually one my more
useful skills as a consultant; I've learned how to fashion targeted
Google searches, sort the wheat from the chaf, and actually locate
useful info on the net.

Yes, Linux sometimes takes a little more effort up front, but I find
the investment more than worth it. Once installed and configured, I
find my Linux systems are more stable and easier to maintain.

Cheers,

Thad

Erik Funkenbusch · External Since: May 27, 2005 Posts: 2403

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 05:20:10 +0000 (UTC), thad01.TakeThisOut@tux.glaci.remove-this.com
wrote:

> Having been an MSDN subscriber, I'll agree that MS does a good job
> with it... but I would not be so quick to dismiss the Linux vendors.
> IBM professional services provides some wonderful (if pricy) support
> and Red Hat has done well for me also.

I'm not talking about an MSDN subscription. The only thing the MSDN
subscription buys you that isn't available for free is the software. *ALL*
support documentation is free from Microsoft.

> Linux is quite suitable as a desktop OS for most users right now.

There are so many gotcha's with installing stuff for Linux it's crazy. A
lack of "commercial grade" software makes it hard for end users to know
what's solid and stable and featureful and what's not. Also a lack of
targeting information at average people leaves the average user confused.

> Growth is slow only because people tend to stick with what they
> know and need a compelling reason to switch. For a few people I
> know, the compelling reason has been malware. I've set up several
> Linux systems for non-geek friends. They use them for Internet
> access, multimedia, office work, and even the occasional game...
> and have no trouble. Really, once you've learned how to point
> and click and find your way around a menu, it is all pretty much
> the same.

So long as they have you to maintain their systems for them.

>> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
>> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
>> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the net
>> looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux users
>> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
>> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
>> drivers for Windows).
>
> Yes, the open and infinetely adaptable nature of Linux has lead to a
> lot of customized distros, one-off hacks, and a mountain of information
> to sift through on the Internet when researching anything Linux. It
> is both a blessing and a curse. I suspect that is actually one my more
> useful skills as a consultant; I've learned how to fashion targeted
> Google searches, sort the wheat from the chaf, and actually locate
> useful info on the net.

Here's a good example. I've been trying for months to get a working,
simple to use administration interface for my clients to configure their
own mini-hosted mail server. This sort of thing is a no brainer with
Exchange, but almost impossible in Linux without a lot of custom work.

There are commercial solutions, but if they wanted commercial, they'd just
buy Exchange. It's simple, configure postfix to use mysql as a data
source, and give virtual domain hosting for hundreds of domains and users
in a nice simple to adminster interface.

Don't say postfix.admin, it's broken and doesn't work. Major steps of the
installation simply don't work as documented. Their only response,
manually configure everything. Except, of course, the fact that the major
distro's all ship incompatible versions of the components that work with
it, so you have to uninstall them, download the tarballs, reconfigure them
to work with postfix.admin, and then that breaks all kinds of apps in the
distro's repository that expect those apps to be configured in the default
way.

vmail.admin is still VERY beta. The developer dropped development right in
the middle, and decided to instead start working on the 'next generation'.

This stuff is just WAY too broken if you aren't using the default
configuration.

> Yes, Linux sometimes takes a little more effort up front, but I find
> the investment more than worth it. Once installed and configured, I
> find my Linux systems are more stable and easier to maintain.

You mean a LOT more effort up front, which is something the average person
simply will not do. Path of least resistance.

"Shmuel · External Since: Mar 31, 2004 Posts: 292

begin In <ee07aa$fmu$1@tux.glaci.com>, on 09/10/2006
at 05:20 AM, thad01.RemoveThis@tux.glaci.remove-this.com said:

>Having been an MSDN subscriber, I'll agree that MS does a good job
>with it

Whether or not MSDN offers good support, it's not for the end user.
The support for Linux is distributed, but it's certainly better than
what I went through the last time I tried the general m$ help line.
Has m$ end-user support improved since then?

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap.RemoveThis@library.lspace.org

JEDIDIAH · External Since: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 1070

On 2006-09-09, flatfish+++ <flatfish RemoveThis @linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 09:55:59 -0700, Au79 wrote:
>
>
>> The support that you refer here has nothing to do with Linux but with the
>> vendors. You are talking apples vs oranges: Is MS richer than Novell, yes.
>> Is Linux OS BETTER than windows, yes, in every respect.
>
> There's always an excuse waiting in the wings when it comes to Linux.

....or Solaris, or AIX, or BeOS, or OS/2, or GEM (in the day), or MacOS.

DOS has always had the "it's gotta be DOS compatable" thing going for it.
While this is certainly handy, it has also allowed "DOS Corp" to get fat
and lazy and depend on the fact that everyone thinks that "it's gotta
be DOS compatable".

This aspect of AltOS systems has been brought up here on Usnet since
before Linux ever existed.

--
Sophocles wants his cut. |||
/ | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Joe User · External Since: Oct 10, 2006 Posts: 8

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 19:12:15 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:

> Au79 <au79.RemoveThis@789.edu> writes:
>
>> It is quite evident that after so called 15 year using Unix you have
>> developed a self-loathing attitude that only reflects your personal
>> failures: Spending 1000x more times searching for information about Linux
>> simply means that you are grossly incompetent- which is keeping in line
>> with your real Windos aptitude.
>
> Aha. The old "you're too stupid to use Linux". I suspect Erik is a lot
> smarter than you old bean. And he's right : searching for fixes to
> problems for Linux is like trial by fire. There is no central "fix all"
> place that I can see.

You're right. But there's no central "fix all" place for Windows, either.
Anybody who has used Windows for more than a few weeks knows that there
are things you'll need to find out that you CANNOT find in Windows help or
on any of Microsoft's web sites.

You can find pretty much anything you need to know about Windows somewhere
on the Internet, of course. But that's exactly the same as Linux, isn't
it? Actually, Linux wins, here, because you can find EVERYthing about
Linux on the Internet. Everything. You can't do THAT with Windows.

Joe User · External Since: Oct 10, 2006 Posts: 8

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 13:06:15 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote:

> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 11:02:22 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> Sure, there's a billion how-to's spread across the net, but this
>> informaiton is typically out of date, incomplete, distro specific, and
>> often times plain wrong. Not to mention you end up having to scour the net
>> looking for them (which is ironic considering all the bullshit Linux users
>> spew about having to search for drivers for Windows. I spend easily 1000x
>> more time searching for information about Linux than I do looking for
>> drivers for Windows).
>
>
> Same here.
> Just try and find information on ALSA for example.
> Cups? Same thing.
> Samba?
> Same thing.
>
> You'll find a million and one How-To's for a million and two different
> distributions.
>
> It's information overload.
>
> Of course this gets denied all the time but yet if you go to ANY Linux
> discussion group you will see the same questions over and over again from
> noobs:
>
> 1, I don't get any sound.
> 2. I can't make my printer work.
> 3. How do I set up Samba so I can see my Workgroup.
>
> It's been like this for YEARS and YEARS..
> Same questions.

And it's been like that even longer for Microsoft's operating systems. Go
to any Windows help site and you'll see the same questions over and over.

Don't tell me you've never noticed this.

> Here's a clue to the Linux community::
>
> FIX IT!!!

Good idea. They're working on it. Smile