*sigh*

What do you expect people to respond to this one?

You're making a statement that you can't be helped
with since you don't provide any information, and
you're comparing apples to pears while others may
have oranges or lemons. Your specific hardware may
be supported by ME, and may not be auto-detected
by your distribution of choice. Other distros might
pick it up?

And does it work in other versions of Windows?

And what about all my problems with getting cards
to work in various versions of Windows (without
any succes - which is one reason why I don't use
Windows :})....

Again, what you have is a personal account.



Cheers,
Tink

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm......pears! Ahhh, the days of pear-eating races.....what sloppy, juicy, tasty fun!

Tinkster
ain't' all your problems with windows just a person a account?

That does not make me a windows elitist as you mentioned earlier in the tread, simply that what works for one person might not for another.

As for strange hue's problem with sound, if it were Mandrake or Redhat I would expect it to work straight away but without knowing which distro your using there no way to tell.

Of course it is, and if you had read my post proper
you wouldn't have had to ask :}


Firstly, I can't recall having called you a windows
elitist in any of my posts. Secondly, your saying exactly
what I said in my response to xanas3712 ... I'm not
sure why you bother posting this in response to my
post ...



Cheers,
Tink

Stop arguing, ya red-faced nerds. Flaming, bullying & arguing about trivial Linux-related crap belongs on Undernet IRC.

Now in summary, Linux generally suffers from open-source blues.

Think about MacOS. Thats a *nix based operating system thats managed from a central entity and it is years ahead of Linux, in more ways than one.

In order to hail the penguin, you must first study the apple. Or something. :P

Moderator note: this thread was placed in Linux-Newbie forum, so if it turns into 'my-OS-is-better' it'l be blosed or moved.

My generic response to all "make Linux easier" threads:
The general population can go jump in a lake. Most people are lazy and feel they deserve a simple solution to everything. If you think this way, then perhaps you should stick with Win/Mac...these operating systems are designed especially for such people.
Linux doesn't need to be simplified. Its purpose is to be a stable, reliable system which can be modified to a user's specifications. When a system takes on a pile of user-friendly tools in an effort to become easy for everyone, it begins to buckle under its own weight...it compromises stability and security for ease of use.
Maybe this sounds elitist. This is not my intention, but if it comes off that way I offer no apology. Windows and Macintosh are decent systems which work well for many people. I see no reason why Linux should be made to compete for the users of these systems.

Mara, that should have happened about a year ago,
all this thread is (and was intended to be by Paul as
far as I can tell from his way of argumentation) is a
"Windows is better than Linux-thread".



Mik, I whole-heartedly agree to your point of view
(if you have read the vast majority of my posts in
this one and similar threads you're well aware of
that). The reasons for "Linux to compete with
these systems" is that lazy people now feel they
shouldn't be paying for their comfort ;} ... A world
full of kids in adults bodies, expecting Mom and
Dad to cover up for their lack of motivation and
make up for their stupidity ;D


Cheers,
Tink

I think I said this before in this thread (which I have read every post in - where is Mr Parr?? Last troll, er post was last May),

AMEN

I disagree on both accounts.

The point of this argument / forum was to highlight the need to make Linux easier.

So people are saying that windows is easier and giving examples as to why.

Windows has been refined to the inth degree and will only improve. Stability problems in windows don't arise from utilities they arise because of flaws in the code and how the PC "maps" within the interaction of a total GUI and how commands are processed and what size of code is being sent through to be processed.

The stability also arises from the PC itself not being capable of processing all of the information it's getting. So here one feeds the other. Windows frozen? It probably tried to process to much at once. Is it the OS, the PC or the operator?

Linux does exactly the same thing. I have seen it so there is nothing to compare. the whole argument cannot be won here. The only difference is Linux operations, or the execution of, takes the user a lot longer to do in most instances and the GUI is very "striped down" so you cant say Linux is more stable and you can't say Windows isn't.

Coding or refining a program language to make code smaller and more flexible will help greatly.

Lazy people? You think I want to spend hours trying to install a Driver for the graphics card?

Once again it is easier to streamline the way applications are handled rather than have 20 different ways of doing the same thing, each with it's own Advantages / Disadvantages.

Lindows goes along way to doing this so why are you not following the rule.

Do you think I want to type in code? No I don't.....Does that make me lazy?

This is what I want.
I want to work quickly, I want to work without software issues. (If Linux is having issues then resolve the reason why, (policy more research)
I want to find an application and run it without need to spend time configuring it. I want to navigate throughout my PC with user friendly (practical / intuitive) graphical features that make it fast.

Why is windows winning? Because they listen to their clients.

Windows GUI and features were designed more by the public than bill gates (He started the conceptuals but we refined the detial)...He asked questions and he got answers. It does not matter how and with what language (lol) he still had the information he needed to make windows the best for most users. So scrub this forum if you want..........If I ran a Linux Distro...I would print it.....

i think linux should keep it that way.... i was a windows user for about half of my life.... but when i started using linux (though i must say i'm still a newbie, but i'm trying my very best to get things smooth and easy)... gee, it bought something different.... if u wanted to learn use linux, if not, then use windows

I remember one of the participants here having a signature saying something along the lines of "complaining that Linux isn't more like Windows is like complaining that coffee isn't more like tea".
The thing is, the rising popularity of Linux - and as I see it (a cheap ui-lover) it has only been desktop-ready for a couple of years - is due to the fact that it deals with some issues of openness and price, which Microsoft and Windows have failed or refused to deal with (or react to).
But as I see it, the thing is: If the only available option was Linux - creating Windows would be a brilliant idea, since everyone can do the basic tasks in Windows; you pay for not having to know! I mean, I am not unable to build a shelf or a desk or whatever, but if I had a little more money and would save my creativity, time and energy for other things, I would go out and buy it.
The price tag for a new copy of Windows XP is brutal; but I think the two systems pretty much cover people's needs.
A disclaimer/devil's advocate-thingie: If Linux was the only option, everything - games, programs - would be tuned for a Linux-based system, and the situation would be different. Also, again, implying that Linux is one thing and not many is quite naïve.
Still, I think my point is valid, regarding the balance between a pay-up-so-you-don't-need-to-know-system and a pay-less-and-make-a-community-effort-to-understand-and-improve-system.

"The point of this argument / forum was to highlight the need to make Linux easier."
And my point is that there is little need to do this. Of course there's room for improvement...there always will be...but I don't think it needs to be made easier for the 'general public' because they already have their easy-to-use operating systems.

"Stability problems in windows don't arise from utilities they arise because of flaws in the code and how the PC "maps" within the interaction of a total GUI and how commands are processed and what size of code is being sent through to be processed.
The stability also arises from the PC itself not being capable of processing all of the information it's getting. So here one feeds the other. Windows frozen? It probably tried to process to much at once. Is it the OS, the PC or the operator?"
I didn't say it exactly as I meant to...my bad. However, the more GUI utilities you add to make it easier, the greater the chance of instability for the reasons you mention above...more processing needed, more code to screw up, and just the fact that it's a GUI on top of commands adds an extra layer of complexity.
Additionally, GUI tools are inherently less usable for the fact that desktop space is limited, and for the fact that no one wants to code a button or menu item for all the hundreds of different options a tool can have.

"Coding or refining a program language to make code smaller and more flexible will help greatly."
I can't argue with that.

"Lazy people? You think I want to spend hours trying to install a Driver for the graphics card?"
No one does, but sometimes it happens, regardless of your operating system. It's not the fault of the OS, but of the driver developer.

"Once again it is easier to streamline the way applications are handled rather than have 20 different ways of doing the same thing, each with it's own Advantages / Disadvantages.
Lindows goes along way to doing this so why are you not following the rule."
I didn't realize there was a rule stating that an operating system should limit the user's choices.

"Do you think I want to type in code? No I don't.....Does that make me lazy?
This is what I want.
I want to work quickly, I want to work without software issues. (If Linux is having issues then resolve the reason why, (policy more research)
I want to find an application and run it without need to spend time configuring it. I want to navigate throughout my PC with user friendly (practical / intuitive) graphical features that make it fast."
Have you tried Windows or Mac? You might like it.

"Why is windows winning? Because they listen to their clients."
Winning what? the desktop "market"? This isn't a competition; it's a choice.

As a newbie, (I just started using Linux a week ago) I love the everything about it, except the wayu have install an application and configuring them. just yesterday i downloaded firefox to see if i could open and run the app, to no avail, theres so much stuff i have to do just to get it to run. Why cant it be easy?

Well ... if you used C or even asembler to code things
they will become smaller/faster. They won't become more
felxible, the opposite is the case, and the development/
testing/debugging times are going to increase.



:}


Cheers,
Tink