On 2024-06-01 9:43 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 09:05:30 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> Nobody is claiming that Linux isn't better in that respect. However, the
>> reason it takes so little time is because people aren't using an ISO
>> from four years ago to install Linux and then update, which is what
>> they're usually doing with Windows. Even with Linux, doing such a thing
>> would be a nightmare to update.
>
> Even then, Linux is not a “nightmare to update”. Remember, you can
> continue using the system even while updates are in progress, because
> Linux doesn’t lock files like Windows does.
>
> And the Linux updates tend to be a lot smaller, for some reason: it’s like
> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
> Tuesday.

You forgot to mention the greatest part about updating Linux: if you do
trivial things like update, you'll often be left with an unbootable
system. This gives you time to learn how the system works in a desperate
attempt to get your computer to be functional again. If unsuccessful, it
gives you lots of time to ponder why the heck you ruined a perfectly
good system to use the equivalent of two dried branches someone tied
together and called an operating system.

I apologize to everyone but you about what I just wrote. I am frustrated
that even in 2024 and having done research into the right distribution
for my needs, I am yet again disgusted by the result. I love everything
about Linux but the result, yet again, is pure demoralization. To read
this idiotic zealot's words and his delusion that any of those 1990s
UNIX distributions were actually pretty simply add salt to the wound.

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:22:43 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Actually, at one point, the only difference between the two was (IIRC) a
>> Registry entry :-D
>
> I have a book, obsolete now, that was a dictionary of the Windows
> Registry. I can't find a current equivalent. There are many keys that
> control behaviors that aren't in the registry. You can create them and set
> the values but first you have to know the key exists.
>
> One example I remember is the cmd console in Windows 2000 didn't have tab
> completion but it could be enabled if you knew the option existed. It
> sticks in my mind because I thought it was a particularly stupid default.

At work I changed some Registry settings (using something called Power Broker
or somesuch that the Company provided) so that I could use CAPS LOCK as
Ctrl.

After a couple times of changes like that being undone, I just gave up.

--
Tuesday After Lunch is the cosmic time of the week.

On 6/1/2024 9:22 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 06:34:55 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> On 2024-06-01 12:11 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> You have no idea, do you? There are lots of clips on YouTube showing
>>> off those 1990s-era Unix systems. You want to go educate yourself, or
>>> shall I give you some links?
>>
>> Feel free to do so.
>
> SGI:
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEoEXHM53oQ>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctZ1m3rXBfo>

"At an affordable $25,000 back in 1990, the Personal Iris can still be
found in many companies in use as servers."

On 6/2/24 7:28 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>I immediately got the same kind of orgasm Joel Crump gets whenever he
>sees a man's "girl anus."

That's stupid even for you, killfile coward bitch.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/2/2024 8:33 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:22:43 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, at one point, the only difference between the two was (IIRC) a
>>> Registry entry :-D
>>
>> I have a book, obsolete now, that was a dictionary of the Windows
>> Registry. I can't find a current equivalent. There are many keys that
>> control behaviors that aren't in the registry. You can create them and set
>> the values but first you have to know the key exists.
>>
>> One example I remember is the cmd console in Windows 2000 didn't have tab
>> completion but it could be enabled if you knew the option existed. It
>> sticks in my mind because I thought it was a particularly stupid default.
>
> At work I changed some Registry settings (using something called Power Broker
> or somesuch that the Company provided) so that I could use CAPS LOCK as
> Ctrl.
>
> After a couple times of changes like that being undone, I just gave up.

Did you get personalized feedback that using Caps Lock as Ctrl is
extremely idiotic?

On 6/2/2024 8:46 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
> On 6/2/24 7:28 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>> I immediately got the same kind of orgasm Joel Crump gets whenever he
>> sees a man's "girl anus."
>
>
> That's stupid even for you, killfile coward bitch.

Not stupid. Consistent with your claim that your boyfriend is a girl.

Then by default he has 'girl cock, anus, testicles and beard'.

On 6/2/24 8:56 AM, DFS wrote:
>On 6/2/2024 8:46 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
>> On 6/2/24 7:28 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>> I immediately got the same kind of orgasm Joel Crump gets whenever he
>>> sees a man's "girl anus."
>>
>> That's stupid even for you, killfile coward bitch.
>
>Not stupid. Consistent with your claim that your boyfriend is a girl.
>
>Then by default he has 'girl cock, anus, testicles and beard'.

My GF has a biologically male body, we say "gock" merely to celebrate the
wonder of a girl having a cock, not because it's physically different from
a man's dick, but it *is* psychologically different because I want to suck
her dick, which I never much liked with cis guys.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/1/2024 9:23 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 06:34:55 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> On 2024-06-01 12:11 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> You have no idea, do you? There are lots of clips on YouTube showing
>>> off those 1990s-era Unix systems. You want to go educate yourself, or
>>> shall I give you some links?
>>
>> Feel free to do so.
>
> NeXTStep: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn7qIl59MAQ>.

"around $18,500 for the retail entry price point."

https://allaboutstevejobs.com/blog/2012-09-04-how-expensive-the-next-computers-actually-were/

On 2024-06-02, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-06-01 9:43 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 09:05:30 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> Nobody is claiming that Linux isn't better in that respect. However, the
>>> reason it takes so little time is because people aren't using an ISO
>>> from four years ago to install Linux and then update, which is what
>>> they're usually doing with Windows. Even with Linux, doing such a thing
>>> would be a nightmare to update.
>>
>> Even then, Linux is not a “nightmare to update”. Remember, you can
>> continue using the system even while updates are in progress, because
>> Linux doesn’t lock files like Windows does.
>>
>> And the Linux updates tend to be a lot smaller, for some reason: it’s like
>> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
>> Tuesday.
>
> You forgot to mention the greatest part about updating Linux: if you do
> trivial things like update, you'll often be left with an unbootable
> system. This gives you time to learn how the system works in a desperate
> attempt to get your computer to be functional again. If unsuccessful, it
> gives you lots of time to ponder why the heck you ruined a perfectly
> good system to use the equivalent of two dried branches someone tied
> together and called an operating system.

Or so you say. I have NEVER had an unbootable Linux system and have never
had any issues with updating. That's a Windows thing, not a Linux thing.
I've seen several Windows machines go to unrecoverable BSODs after a
mandatory update. At least with a Linux Live USB I was able to save the data
before rebuilding the machines.

> I apologize to everyone but you about what I just wrote. I am frustrated
> that even in 2024 and having done research into the right distribution
> for my needs, I am yet again disgusted by the result. I love everything
> about Linux but the result, yet again, is pure demoralization. To read
> this idiotic zealot's words and his delusion that any of those 1990s
> UNIX distributions were actually pretty simply add salt to the wound.

Alright. Sorry that I got involved (again) in an ongoing personal argument.
I usually just read the new section of the post and ignore the rest.

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine

On 6/1/2024 9:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> it’s like
> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
> Tuesday.

What an idiot liar.

On 6/2/2024 7:50 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> the equivalent of two dried branches someone tied together and called an
> operating system.

ha!

Note: this is logged in, stamped 'approved' and archived in my system,
to be resuscitated when you switch back to Linux 7 hours from now.

On 6/2/24 9:32 AM, RonB wrote:
>
>I have NEVER had an unbootable Linux system and have never
>had any issues with updating. That's a Windows thing, not a Linux thing.
>I've seen several Windows machines go to unrecoverable BSODs after a
>mandatory update. At least with a Linux Live USB I was able to save the data
>before rebuilding the machines.

When I got rid of Win11, I thought I'd keep my second NTFS partition, but
the Mint installer kept saying it ran out of space inexplicably, but all I
had to do was connect my external hard drive, and use the live session to
back up my data, then let the installer take control of the SSD, and voila,
boot/update, copy the files back, and I was in business. Should've prepared
for that all along, but it didn't matter.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/2/24 9:44 AM, DFS wrote:
>On 6/2/2024 7:50 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> the equivalent of two dried branches someone tied together and called an
>> operating system.
>
>ha!
>
>Note: this is logged in, stamped 'approved' and archived in my system,
>to be resuscitated when you switch back to Linux 7 hours from now.

You have *time* to keep up with him switching? ;)

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/2/24 9:35 AM, DFS wrote:
>On 6/1/2024 9:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> it’s like
>> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
>> Tuesday.
>
>What an idiot liar.

Cumulative updating only downloads stuff not already installed, yeah. It's
not an elegant system like Linux, but not any worse than older versions
were.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/2/2024 9:52 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
> On 6/2/24 9:35 AM, DFS wrote:
>> On 6/1/2024 9:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> it’s like
>>> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
>>> Tuesday.
>>
>> What an idiot liar.
>
>
> Cumulative updating only downloads stuff not already installed, yeah. It's
> not an elegant system like Linux, but not any worse than older versions
> were.

Windows Update has always been extremely and inexcusably slow, but I
just did a 'Check for Updates' and it took 10 seconds. In the past I
remember waiting 10+ minutes for that to complete (Win7).

Windows updating has never been obtrusive to me. Now it's even more
hidden: it installs the updates and if necessary restarts 'outside of
active hours' so I never even see it, and am never interrupted. Ever.

I just turned on the settings to make Windows Update as obnoxious as
possible:
'Get the latest updates as soon as they're available' On
'Get me up to date' On
'Notify me when a restart is required to finish updating' On
Set active hours manually 5am to 6am.

I want to see if it becomes a pain in the ass.

On 6/2/2024 9:04 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
> On 6/2/24 8:56 AM, DFS wrote:
>> On 6/2/2024 8:46 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
>>> On 6/2/24 7:28 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I immediately got the same kind of orgasm Joel Crump gets whenever
>>>> he sees a man's "girl anus."
>>>
>>> That's stupid even for you, killfile coward bitch.
>>
>> Not stupid.  Consistent with your claim that your boyfriend is a girl.
>>
>> Then by default he has 'girl cock, anus, testicles and beard'.
>
>
> My GF has a biologically male body, we say "gock" merely to celebrate the
> wonder of a girl having a cock,

It's not a 'wonder'. It's a delusion and an impossibility.

> not because it's physically different from
> a man's dick, but it *is* psychologically different because I want to suck
> her dick, which I never much liked with cis guys.

You're a mentally-disturbed individual.

At least you don't support that filthy, deranged demon Donald Trump.

"I will accept the results of this rigged election... if I win!"

On 6/2/24 10:05 AM, DFS wrote:
>On 6/2/2024 9:52 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
>> On 6/2/24 9:35 AM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 6/1/2024 9:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> it’s like
>>>> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
>>>> Tuesday.
>>>
>>> What an idiot liar.
>>
>> Cumulative updating only downloads stuff not already installed, yeah. It's
>> not an elegant system like Linux, but not any worse than older versions
>> were.
>
>Windows Update has always been extremely and inexcusably slow, but I
>just did a 'Check for Updates' and it took 10 seconds. In the past I
>remember waiting 10+ minutes for that to complete (Win7).
>
>Windows updating has never been obtrusive to me. Now it's even more
>hidden: it installs the updates and if necessary restarts 'outside of
>active hours' so I never even see it, and am never interrupted. Ever.
>
>I just turned on the settings to make Windows Update as obnoxious as
>possible:
>'Get the latest updates as soon as they're available' On
>'Get me up to date' On
>'Notify me when a restart is required to finish updating' On
>Set active hours manually 5am to 6am.
>
>I want to see if it becomes a pain in the ass.

I always tried to manually check when M$ emailed about new updates, avoiding
a surprise reboot.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 2024-06-02 8:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 6/1/2024 9:22 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 06:34:55 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-06-01 12:11 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> You have no idea, do you? There are lots of clips on YouTube showing
>>>> off those 1990s-era Unix systems. You want to go educate yourself, or
>>>> shall I give you some links?
>>>
>>> Feel free to do so.
>>
>> SGI:
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEoEXHM53oQ>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctZ1m3rXBfo>
>
>
> "At an affordable $25,000 back in 1990, the Personal Iris can still be
> found in many companies in use as servers."

Meanwhile, it looks as pretty as a worn shoe. At least when Apple
charged you your first-born, what they gave you looked the part.

On 2024-06-02 9:09 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 6/1/2024 9:23 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 06:34:55 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-06-01 12:11 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> You have no idea, do you? There are lots of clips on YouTube showing
>>>> off those 1990s-era Unix systems. You want to go educate yourself, or
>>>> shall I give you some links?
>>>
>>> Feel free to do so.
>>
>> NeXTStep: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn7qIl59MAQ>.
>
>
> "around $18,500 for the retail entry price point."
>
> https://allaboutstevejobs.com/blog/2012-09-04-how-expensive-the-next-computers-actually-were/

And those NeXT computers were mostly useless, no matter how innovative
they might have been in some respects. The storage they offered with
their initial computers resulted in machines slower than what you could
get at a fraction of the price, and the computers sold so well that the
company was forced to make their operating system available for other
platforms in a desperate attempt to survive. The story is the same with
Be who stupidly rejected Apple's fair offer for the operating system
because even though nobody was buying their hardware, they thought that
they had enough of a reputation to eventually replace Apple as #2. I
don't know if using UNIX makes people stupid or whether you have to
reject all common sense to advocate for it, but the track record here
isn't too pretty.

Once again, Linux is a wonderful kernel and UNIX is a wonderful
operating system. However, it

1) never was prettier than consumer offerings of the time
2) the innovations exclusive to it did not eventually change the face of
computing

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, what people could get on
affordable machines not only looked better but managed to do the
majority of what one would want a computer to do. They might not have
had the computing power to calculate how long it takes for ketchup to
naturally exit the bottle (this was actual research in those days), but
it will help you to do everything else. Yes, it will get malware too, if
that's your thing. However, we have a walking bag of diseases named Joel
Crump in this newsgroup, so malware will turn up no matter where you
are. It took us forever to get rid of the technological AIDS known as Snit.

I love Linux and I'm sure I would have loved UNIX. However, I like it
despite its many very visible faults. I'm sick of these zealots turning
a blind eye to everything because they think that if one day they don't
defend every stupid thing their favourite operating system does, it will
cease to exist or something.

On 2024-06-02 9:35 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 6/1/2024 9:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> it’s like
>> Windows forces you to download an entire new system install every Patch
>> Tuesday.
>
>
> What an idiot liar.

It's not every Tuesday, but the cumulative updates do essentially
reinstall the entire operating on many occasions.

On 2024-06-02 9:44 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 6/2/2024 7:50 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> the equivalent of two dried branches someone tied together and called
>> an operating system.
>
>
> ha!
>
> Note: this is logged in, stamped 'approved' and archived in my system,
> to be resuscitated when you switch back to Linux 7 hours from now.

It might be difficult for you to understand, but the philosophy behind
Linux and open-source is closer to what I believe. As a result, I will
continue to give it a shot regardless of whether there is any good
reason to do so. I love the repairability of the hardware it runs on,
the fact that just about anything you can do with a computer can be done
with Windows and so on. It generally works better for me than Linux
does. However, much like I enjoy repairability, I enjoy knowing that no
component of the operating system I choose to use is forced on me. Linux
offers me a choice, Windows doesn't for certain things. Still, Linux
still feels like I'm driving a Dodge and need to make compromises
everywhere because the brain-dead Americans didn't expect that you'd
need to do things such as turn the vehicle while moving or change gears.
Pick a distribution, and problems are numerous.

Wayland or X11? Trackpad gestures supported or unsupported? Snap or
Flatpak? Flatpak or system packages? Speed or stability? GPU enabled
with proprietary drivers but things don't work right or things work
right but no GPU acceleration? Battery life or performance (you need to
log out of the system to use only the integrated GPU on a laptop)?
Compositing enabled and pretty but graphical glitches or compositing
disabled and ugly but graphically sound? It never ends. You give it
twenty-five years worth of chances and in the end, you're stuck with
your dick in your hand.

DFS: At least you don't support that filthy, deranged demon Donald Trump.
"I will accept the results of this rigged election... if I win!"

Show me on the doll where he touched you.

On 6/2/24 10:09 AM, DFS wrote:
>On 6/2/2024 9:04 AM, Joel Crump wrote:
>>
>> My GF has a biologically male body, we say "gock" merely to celebrate the
>> wonder of a girl having a cock,
>
>It's not a 'wonder'. It's a delusion and an impossibility.
>
>> not because it's physically different from
>> a man's dick, but it *is* psychologically different because I want to suck
>> her dick, which I never much liked with cis guys.
>
>You're a mentally-disturbed individual.

Sex doesn't make one mentally disturbed, but phobes sure are.

>At least you don't support that filthy, deranged demon Donald Trump.
>
>"I will accept the results of this rigged election... if I win!"

I'm a Democrat anyway, but Trump is far worse than other Republican
candidates we've had.

--
Joel W. Crump

On 6/2/2024 11:17 AM, Relf wrote:

> DFS: At least you don't support that filthy, deranged demon Donald Trump.
> "I will accept the results of this rigged election... if I win!"
>
> Show me on the doll where he touched you.

He wants to touch my wallet, but I refuse.

He wants to touch my wife's crotch, but she and I refuse.

On 2024-06-02 11:17 a.m., Relf wrote:
> DFS: At least you don't support that filthy, deranged demon Donald Trump.
> "I will accept the results of this rigged election... if I win!"
>
> Show me on the doll where he touched you.

ROFL!