User experience - PC Linux 2007 Final

Rick wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
>> Rick wrote:
>>
>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>>>>
>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>>>
>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>>
>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example of
>> emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is excellent,
>> and is an example where the diversity and choice inherant in Linux
>> offers superior solutions that Windows cannot match.
>
>Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a positive
>way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility is complicated.

You are correct, of course. Quack, as usual, failed miserably - his
attempt to put Linux in a bad light backfired, and, in fact, showed
Linux to be superior to Windwoes.

On 2007-08-01, Rick <none.TakeThisOut@nomail.com> claimed:

> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a positive
> way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility is complicated.

It probably is. For an imbecile like Quirk.

--
A friend in need is a pain indeed.

On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 09:11:11 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine
>
>Exactly! Linux is such junk, whereas Vista's installation
>is smooth and seamless. Just ask this enthusiastic
>reviewer!
>
>http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html
>
>Oh wait, did I say "smooth and seamless"? I meant
>"Rocky Horror Motion Picture Show."
>
>Oh well. At least the latter is a cult fav.
Whoa....that's the first time I've ever heard an operating system
refered to as a "dogs breakfast".

Hadron wrote:

> BearItAll <spam RemoveThis @rassler.co.uk> writes:
>
>> LR wrote:
>>
>>> I just tried the LiveCD for PC Linux 2007 Final...
>>>
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/1.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/2.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/3.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/4.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/5.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/6.jpg
>>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/7.jpg
>>>
>>> Threw the CD in my trash can afterwards.
>>>
>>> - Lasse
>>
>> By chance I have the live CD off a recent mag beside me so I booted
>> PCLinuxOS 2007 on a fairly standard lowish spec office PC.
>>
>> Didn't get the problems you mention even from the default video settings,
>> which I thought were a bit clunky. after I'd looked at the things in your
>> photographs, none of which were messed up, I changed the video to a
>> better setting.
>
> "Works for me". Why not advocate and help him find the source of the
> problem?
>

You mean tell him to go into display settings and select a better setting? I
suppose I could have done that, is the orriginal poster only six years old
then?

>>
>> It all looks quite nice. I also noticed as it came up that it was one of
>> the quickest Live Linux's I have used. It comes with a nice range of
>> software in each section, office, development etc.
>
> Define "Quickest" please.
>

Least slow.

>>
>> I noticed it has a k tool called kregexpeditor, it is a nice
>> application for
>
> Thanks for heads up.
>
>> building and testing regular expressions. You type a piece of text, then
>> type your regex below it and as an expresssion makes sense it will show
>> what is selected as you type. Would be a nice tool for a tutorial, but
>> also we all have troubles occasionally getting a regex right sometimes,
>> this makes working them out very easy. So I'll start rolling that little
>> gem out to my clients.
>>
>
> "Rolling out this little gem?" Impressive sounding stuff.
>
> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>

No, I mean the client PCs that I use, I will install this little gem onto
them.

Do people really need help using package managers or apt-get these days? I
would have thought that 99% could find and install the application without
me giving them instructions. The other 1% probably couldn't do it even if I
did give them instructions.

On 2007-08-01, John Locke <johnlocke98513 RemoveThis @comcast.net> claimed:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 09:11:11 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine
>>
>>Exactly! Linux is such junk, whereas Vista's installation
>>is smooth and seamless. Just ask this enthusiastic
>>reviewer!
>>
>>http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html
>>
>>Oh wait, did I say "smooth and seamless"? I meant
>>"Rocky Horror Motion Picture Show."
>>
>>Oh well. At least the latter is a cult fav.
> Whoa....that's the first time I've ever heard an operating system
> refered to as a "dogs breakfast".

Dogs eat turds. That makes Vista a natural for calling it a "dog's
breakfast" or similar.

--
Despite the cost of living, it remains popular.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, John Locke
<johnlocke98513 DeleteThis @comcast.net>
wrote
on Wed, 01 Aug 2007 14:38:05 -0700
<p6r1b3pbotddej18sa1rmfhl2g99k6b7ov DeleteThis @4ax.com>:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 09:11:11 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine
>>
>>Exactly! Linux is such junk, whereas Vista's installation
>>is smooth and seamless. Just ask this enthusiastic
>>reviewer!
>>
>>http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html
>>
>>Oh wait, did I say "smooth and seamless"? I meant
>>"Rocky Horror Motion Picture Show."
>>
>>Oh well. At least the latter is a cult fav.
> Whoa....that's the first time I've ever heard an operating system
> refered to as a "dogs breakfast".
>

I'll admit I like the three-legged Bactrian camel notion.

--
#191, ewill3 DeleteThis @earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #992381111:
while(bit&BITMASK) ;

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Aug 2, 6:47 am, Rick <n... DeleteThis @nomail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:04:09 +0200, Hadron wrote:
> > Rick <n... DeleteThis @nomail.com> writes:
>
> >> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
> >>> Rick wrote:
>
> >>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>
> >>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>
> >>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>
> >>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
> >>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example of
> >>> emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is excellent,
> >>> and is an example where the diversity and choice inherant in Linux
> >>> offers superior solutions that Windows cannot match.
>
> >> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a
> >> positive way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility is
> >> complicated.
>
> > Yes, but what you "doubt" or "think" is invariably wrong. I was pointing
> > out that how easy it was to "roll out" this install. Cut and paste that
> > is MUCH easier than locating synaptic, opening it, finding kregexpeditor
> > and then installing it. But of course you are a Windows using wannabe
> > with a hard on for Linux.
>
> And of course, you are a liar. Yes, I do use windows, but my main OS is
> PCLinuxOS 2007. My main OS has been Linux for years, which I have
> documented for years:
>
> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/computer.html>
> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/1270.html>
>
> You seem to be the one with the hard on for Linux.

Isn't that the exact opposite of what was just posted? Or is COLA now
redefining "hard on" too, along with various other English phrases and
words?

Rick <none.TakeThisOut@nomail.com> writes:

> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
>> Rick wrote:
>>
>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>>>>
>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>>>
>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>>
>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example of
>> emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is excellent,
>> and is an example where the diversity and choice inherant in Linux
>> offers superior solutions that Windows cannot match.
>
> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a positive
> way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility is
> complicated.

Yes, but what you "doubt" or "think" is invariably wrong. I was pointing
out that how easy it was to "roll out" this install. Cut and paste that
is MUCH easier than locating synaptic, opening it, finding kregexpeditor
and then installing it. But of course you are a Windows using wannabe
with a hard on for Linux.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:04:09 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> Rick <none.RemoveThis@nomail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>
>>> Rick wrote:
>>>
>>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>>>>>
>>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>>>>
>>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>>>
>>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
>>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example of
>>> emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is excellent,
>>> and is an example where the diversity and choice inherant in Linux
>>> offers superior solutions that Windows cannot match.
>>
>> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a
>> positive way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility is
>> complicated.
>
> Yes, but what you "doubt" or "think" is invariably wrong. I was pointing
> out that how easy it was to "roll out" this install. Cut and paste that
> is MUCH easier than locating synaptic, opening it, finding kregexpeditor
> and then installing it. But of course you are a Windows using wannabe
> with a hard on for Linux.

And of course, you are a liar. Yes, I do use windows, but my main OS is
PCLinuxOS 2007. My main OS has been Linux for years, which I have
documented for years:

<http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/computer.html>
<http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/1270.html>

You seem to be the one with the hard on for Linux.

--
Rick

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:53:40 -0700, cc wrote:

> On Aug 2, 6:47 am, Rick <n....TakeThisOut@nomail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:04:09 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>> > Rick <n....TakeThisOut@nomail.com> writes:
>>
>> >> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>
>> >>> Rick wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>>
>> >>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>>
>> >>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>>
>> >>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
>> >>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example
>> >>> of emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is
>> >>> excellent, and is an example where the diversity and choice
>> >>> inherant in Linux offers superior solutions that Windows cannot
>> >>> match.
>>
>> >> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a
>> >> positive way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility
>> >> is complicated.
>>
>> > Yes, but what you "doubt" or "think" is invariably wrong. I was
>> > pointing out that how easy it was to "roll out" this install. Cut and
>> > paste that is MUCH easier than locating synaptic, opening it, finding
>> > kregexpeditor and then installing it. But of course you are a Windows
>> > using wannabe with a hard on for Linux.
>>
>> And of course, you are a liar. Yes, I do use windows, but my main OS
>> is PCLinuxOS 2007. My main OS has been Linux for years, which I have
>> documented for years:
>>
>> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/computer.html>
>> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/1270.html>
>>
>> You seem to be the one with the hard on for Linux.
>
> Isn't that the exact opposite of what was just posted? Or is COLA now
> redefining "hard on" too, along with various other English phrases and
> words?

Opposite? Quark routinely knocks Linux. He's saying that using apt-get is
really easy in this instance, but how many times has he said using the
terminal hard, and puts off users?

--
Rick

After takin' a swig o' grog, LR belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> I forgot to mention that it didn't support my wlan car danyway, nor my cideo
> card.

At least it would have supported your spell-checker!

--
Tux rox!

On Aug 2, 6:57 am, Rick <n....DeleteThis@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:53:40 -0700, cc wrote:
> > On Aug 2, 6:47 am, Rick <n....DeleteThis@nomail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:04:09 +0200, Hadron wrote:
> >> > Rick <n....DeleteThis@nomail.com> writes:
>
> >> >> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:47:21 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
> >> >>> Rick wrote:
>
> >> >>>>> oh you mean emailing them and saying that if the need it they can
>
> >> >>>>> "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor"
>
> >> >>>>Or just selecting it in Synaptic?
>
> >> >>> Actually, if you know the exact name of the app, using apt-get is
> >> >>> probably the fastest and easiest way to install. The above example
> >> >>> of emailing advice to "sudo apt-get install kregexpeditor" is
> >> >>> excellent, and is an example where the diversity and choice
> >> >>> inherant in Linux offers superior solutions that Windows cannot
> >> >>> match.
>
> >> >> Yes, but I highly doubt Quark was using the apt-get example in a
> >> >> positive way... more like trying to show installing an app/utility
> >> >> is complicated.
>
> >> > Yes, but what you "doubt" or "think" is invariably wrong. I was
> >> > pointing out that how easy it was to "roll out" this install. Cut and
> >> > paste that is MUCH easier than locating synaptic, opening it, finding
> >> > kregexpeditor and then installing it. But of course you are a Windows
> >> > using wannabe with a hard on for Linux.
>
> >> And of course, you are a liar. Yes, I do use windows, but my main OS
> >> is PCLinuxOS 2007. My main OS has been Linux for years, which I have
> >> documented for years:
>
> >> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/computer.html>
> >> <http://ricks-place.tripod.com/computer/1270.html>
>
> >> You seem to be the one with the hard on for Linux.
>
> > Isn't that the exact opposite of what was just posted? Or is COLA now
> > redefining "hard on" too, along with various other English phrases and
> > words?
>
> Opposite? Quark routinely knocks Linux. He's saying that using apt-get is
> really easy in this instance, but how many times has he said using the
> terminal hard, and puts off users?
>

A hard on means a boner, you know like a real love for something.

Verily I say unto thee, that Rick spake thusly:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 12:05:51 +0200, LR wrote:

>> http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x255/rlasse/7.jpg
>>
>> Threw the CD in my trash can afterwards.
>
> Why?

Better throw out your Windows CD too, while you're at it:

http://bugprintscreen.blogspot.com/

> Were you actually looking for help?

No, but he certainly needs it.

--
K.
http://slated.org

..----
| "Proprietary licenses, the crack cocaine of software finance."
| - Matt Asay, CNET
`----

Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
09:56:15 up 4 days, 8:51, 2 users, load average: 2.11, 2.10, 2.00