Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: A Windows Enthusiast's View of SUSE

__/ [Ixidorr Gavrielides] on Friday 06 January 2006 17:54 \__

> Roy Schestowitz newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wrote in message
> pmal0$fdr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>> __/ [Ixidorr Gavrielides] on Friday 06 January 2006 17:34 \__
>>> B Gruff bbgruff@xxxxxxxxxxx, wrote in message
>>> 27np3F1hg0pkU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>> My word - why can't WE have wintrolls like this one:-
>>>> http://ezinearticles.com/?id=123048
>> I'd agree with you, but it's not truly a "Wintroll".
>>  "The other problem was that I hated her having a computer.
>>  I hated it because I constantly had to work on it. She used the
>>  computer for homework, instant messaging, and browsing. Every couple
>>  of months, I found myself removing spyware and other junk from the
>>  computer. Occasionally it was easier just to re-build the computer
>>  by re-installing ALL the software, including the operating system."
>> A troll is one whose purpose is to stir up anger and lead to a
>> commotion. The father above is a relaxed individual who only sought
>> to live in peace and harmony with his daughter's personal computer.
>> SuSE was his bet.
>>  "I decided to consider something that I had
>>  never before considered. LINUX!"
>> Pay careful attention to the fact that he was a victim of FUD. He
>> never dared to do it before. Guess why? Wintrolls.
>>> Well, without reading from what you posted, my guess is, you
>>> wouldn't get the truth about the lies linux advocates would have the
>>> innocent believe.
>> What truth is that exactly? That Linux is secure? That it is
>> user-friendly? That it is stable?
> No need to be facetious Roy, you know full well linux isn't any of that.

I sure know it *is*. I say it without a shadow of a doubt. Using Ubuntu at
the moment:

 18:01:55 up 87 days,  9:52,  6 users,  load average: 0.15, 0.19, 0.29

Never had to struggle with this machine. 20 minutes to install, all needed
software was in place, never a warning, never a quirk. As an avid SuSE user,
I sometimes envy Ubuntu because it proves to be as reliable as SuSE. Having
several distributions that are /consistently/ stable says sometimes about
their underlyings.

You can either give Linux a prolonged test drive or continue to sit stubborn
with a halmet on as the network bangs on your door. I occasionally help
people in a Windows XP environment. Only then do I get reminded or how flaky
Windows is, even without network intervention. This afternoon, for example,
I saw 10 applications collapsing for no apparent reason. I only spent about
5 minutes in front of that screen and it was the one among just occasions
when I faced a Windows wordstation. Backups on the USB drive saved the day
(not for me). That particular Window user knew damn well (from bitter
experiences) why such a backup was routinely needed.

Linux is as rock solid as any platform that is built to become modular. Palm
O/S is another platform that never failed me. Why is it that people take
crashes for granted? Or contriwise, why is it that participants of this
group take system stability for granted? Why is it that after posting about
8,000 messages from KNode I can only recall 1 or 2 instances when KNode (or
the O/S) ever crashed on me?

> Why are you replying to Gruff through my post? Have you leafnoded him?

No, but I was trying to reply to two people within a single post. I do this

Best wishes,


Roy S. Schestowitz      | Anonymous posters are more frequently disregarded
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux     |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
  6:00pm  up 27 days  1:11,  12 users,  load average: 0.08, 0.10, 0.09
      http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index