On Thu, 30 May 2024 12:02:56 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> On 2024-05-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 May 2024 15:31:56 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>
>>> I used Windows 2000. It's inferior to Cinnamon, or Mate or Xfce in my
>>> opinion. (Of course these desktops have the advantage of running on
>>> top of Linux.) But I can't quite understand why you run down Linux UIs
>>> that look like the Windows' UI — what is it about Windows 2000's UI
>>> that you think is somehow unique compared to other Windows desktops?
>>
>> Well 2000 was better than NT 4.0, the king of BSOD.
>
> My younger brother, who's been a Windows' programmer for a long time
> now,
> hated to see Windows 2000 go away. I don't know anything about NT, never
> used it. I guess I was using XP at that time.

Originally there was going to be a NT 5.0 in 1998 but when the release was
pushed to Dec 1999 they decided Windows 2000 sounded cool, particularly
with the Y2K bug.

XP was built on the NT 5.1 kernel. We're now up to NT 10.0. MS jumped
from 6.3 to 10.0. Sometimes I think they like to confuse people :) SQL
Server is the same but at least they didn't skip numbers. SQL Server 2022
identifies as 16.x.

It's interesting Windows 10, Windows 11, and the related server editions
all are the NT 10.0 kernel.

vallor wrote:

>Why do you assume Linux users all subscribe to idiots' fallacies?

Why do expect anything resonable or honest or fair, from that dumb
fsck?

>I've seen idiocy in the Windows groups -- should I paint you with
>that brush?

No need. He's painted himself with that brush.

--
'If "Linux just works" and "Linux is perfect for anything" we would
not have a single bug report ever - past, present or future. But it
turns out lots of morons make those kind of ridiculous claims about
Linux' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote at 14:11 this Thursday (GMT):
> On 5/30/2024 8:14 AM, RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-29 5:36 p.m., DFS wrote:
>>>> On 5/28/2024 7:35 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Regardless of all that, according to Microsoft’s own research, a
>>>>> supposedly fully-service-packed Windows installation still requires up to
>>>>> 8 hours to get its patches up to date.
>>>>
>>>> Which version of Windows?
>>>>
>>>> What's your source?
>>>
>>> He would be correct if he were referring to Windows 7 or 8.1. However,
>>> if a person downloads an ISO of Windows 10 or 11 directly from Microsoft
>>> today, as they should, the installation and all recent updates will take
>>> no more than an hour.
>>
>> Where a Linux install and complete update (including apps) now takes about
>> 20-25 minutes with relatively fast Internet service.
>
>
> Then you have to go thru and uninstall all the unwanted (cr)apps a Linux
> distro forces on you.

Debian doesn't have a lot of pre-installed apps, and less if you don't
select a DE.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Thu, 30 May 2024 06:29:11 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Wed, 29 May 2024 15:10:45 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> Whether D'Oliveiro wants to admit it or not, Windows 2000 and XP both
>> looked like professional operating systems when they were released ...
>
> Go on, keep insisting that dumbed-down consumer OSes were meant to look
> “professional”. Microsoft didn’t even know what the word meant.

It was easier back in the day when the 'professional' OS was NT and the
consumers got something built on DOS or Win95. Now that everything uses
the NT kernel they have more work to do to differentiate the product and
charge accordingly.

I can relate. We had a couple of apps that were called different things
depending on who they were sold to and for how much. It even caused a lot
of internal confusion since programming called a spade a spade while
marketing came up with new names for a spade that we didn't recognize.

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote at 15:23 this Wednesday (GMT):
> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>>> alt-tab?"
>>>
>>> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>>>
>>> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>>>
>>> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
>>> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
>>> but still can’t get right?)
>>>
>>> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
>>> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.
>>
>> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
>> users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
>> with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
>> another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
>> because of your zealotry.
>
> I'm guessing that most people who don't use multiple desktops are ignorant
> about how useful this feature is. This was one of the first things that
> attracted me to Linux when moving over from Windows. Separate desktops for
> separate jobs. I use this feature constantly.

It is pretty handy sometimes.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Thu, 30 May 2024 05:41:10 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Thu, 30 May 2024 02:25:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> At least the downloading is in the background from what I remember.
>
> And then the updating itself renders your machine unusable, because
> Windows cannot update files that are currently in use, like Linux can.

In my private hell I have one Windows 11 machine on the Insiders channel.
It hasn't been able to install the 'update' since March. I'm not the only
one and quite a few people are pissed. worst case I'll have to do a clean
install in July.

chrisv wrote:

>vallor wrote:
>>
>>Why do you assume Linux users all subscribe to idiots' fallacies?
>
>Why do expect anything resonable or honest or fair, from that dumb
>fsck?

Oops, another typo. Cue for Dumfsck to start pulling on his dick.

>>I've seen idiocy in the Windows groups -- should I paint you with
>>that brush?
>
>No need. He's painted himself with that brush.
>
>--
>'If "Linux just works" and "Linux is perfect for anything" we would
>not have a single bug report ever - past, present or future. But it
>turns out lots of morons make those kind of ridiculous claims about
>Linux' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly

Such a "reasonable", "honest" person, huh?

Watch him make a jackass of himself defending the below idiocy.

--
'Linux "experts" say Linux is perfect. (period)' - DumFSck, lying
shamelessly

On Thu, 30 May 2024 09:45:08 -0400, Joel wrote:

> That *isn't* true, first of all, trans women sometimes are top or
> versatile, my GF is not, though, I've talked to her about that and she's
> not into it. But I will suck her dick, so, big difference there.

TMI.

Uncle_Matuch wrote:
> the news servers I use can't get their act together to produce a working server.

"AstraWeb.COM" is flawless, try it.

On 2024-05-30 4:03 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 06:43:42 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> I implore you to take a screenshot of a current Linux Mint desktop and
>> one of a default Windows 2000 installation. Then, ask _strangers_, not
>> zealots like yourself who probably pray to a photo of Stallman, what
>> they think is prettier.
>
> I wouldn't want a stranger looking at me like I were a total idiot.
> Prettier? They're frigging computer desktop. Do you really think people
> wander through BestBuy looking for the prettiest desktop?

Honestly? Yes.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 4:07 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 08:55:21 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> Generally, I wouldn't be worried that drivers for the hardware used on
>> Linux-minded laptops would be available. However, I wouldn't be
>> surprised if I faced the same kind of issues using Windows on a Linux
>> machine that I had using Linux on a Windows machine. Problems waking
>> from sleep, graphical errors and things of the sort are very likely to
>> happen.
>
> The oddity I see with my Acer laptop with an open WSL session is Hyper-V
> crashes if it sleeps. It will hibernate with no problem and the couple of
> seconds difference in startup isn't a problem.

I think that there are a number of issues with the way Windows 11
sleeps. I'm not sure what they changed from 10, especially since they
both use Modern Standby by default, but it seems to be fairly chaotic
for hardware.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 4:29 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2024-05-30 10:51 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-05-30 7:47 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-05-29 11:23 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>>>>>>>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>>>>>>>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>>>>>>>>> alt-tab?"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
>>>>>>>>> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
>>>>>>>>> but still can’t get right?)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
>>>>>>>>> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
>>>>>>>> users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
>>>>>>>> with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
>>>>>>>> another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
>>>>>>>> because of your zealotry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm guessing that most people who don't use multiple desktops are ignorant
>>>>>>> about how useful this feature is. This was one of the first things that
>>>>>>> attracted me to Linux when moving over from Windows. Separate desktops for
>>>>>>> separate jobs. I use this feature constantly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It might be useful for some, but most people won't see a point to them.
>>>>>> If you want one desktop for media consumption, one for gaming and one
>>>>>> for word processing, knock yourself out. Most people will just put the
>>>>>> applications for all three categories in the same desktop and minimize
>>>>>> whatever they're not using.
>>>>>
>>>>> Less efficient, in my opinion.
>>>>
>>>> Tell yourself that a lot of people see minimizing an application to be
>>>> more efficient because it ends up consuming less power, CPU and RAM than
>>>> one that's constantly open in a virtual desktop.
>>>
>>> Minimizing a window generally doesn't cause the application to use less CPU or
>>> memory. Same with an application not visible because it's in another virtual
>>> desktop. Also depends what the application does in the background vs
>>> updating an open window.
>>>
>>> Besides, I think Ron means it's more efficient for his workflow.
>>
>> No, I am right. <https://shorturl.at/iByNk>
>
> That's for Windows.

And I was referring to Windows.

>> It might be different in Linux, but that would only explain why battery
>> life is so poor on a Linux machine as compared to Windows on the same
>> hardware.
>
> You are resurfacing news from years ago.
>
> As I noted, my Lenovo Flex running Linux can last 13 hours or so (if I just let
> it sit there doing nothing).
>
> Some more anecdotal information:
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/10kenc2/i_searched_the_internet_about_battery_life_on/
>
> You seem to be sour about some things.

With tlp, you can get some decent additional battery life in Linux, but
you're still looking at less than Windows. Anyone who's claimed that
they get more in Linux has so far been unwilling to show any kind of proof.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 4:34 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2024-05-30 11:26 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-05-30 7:27 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <brevsnip>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad you agree with my assessment of Windows :-).
>>>>
>>>> I agree only that while being a lot more functional than Windows for
>>>> much of its existence, Linux still looks like a Pontiac Sunfire.
>>>
>>> "Linux" has all kinds of looks:
>>>
>>> - Plain text-only terminal screen with multiple virtual consoles.
>>> Can also run tmux or GNU screen to get multiple consoles and
>>> panes.
>>
>> That's only for real men like Larry Pietraskiewicz though. I can't
>> imagine how strong the smell of testosterone must be in his mother's
>> basement!
>>
>>> - Generic old-style GUI with something like TWM.
>>>
>>> - Manual and dynamic tiling window managers like i3 or Sway, DWM or
>>> AwesomeWM.
>>> - Simple-looking overlapping window managers like OpenBox or FluxBox.
>>> They can be customized with other components for the taskbar, slot,
>>> etc.
>>> - Desktop built for kids: Sugar (started with the OLPC, has
>>> a GTK+ theme engine as well)
>>> - The whole gamut of desktops: Lxde, Xfce, GNOME, Cinnamon, Mate,
>>> KDE.
>>>
>>> Not to mention all the theming engines available, along with icon sets, mouse
>>> cursors, stand-alone menus and taskbars.
>>>
>>> So no, there's no single look to "Linux".
>>
>> You're right, except that every one of those environments still manages
>> to look worse than Windows 2000 did, hence my point.
>
> Sorry, but that's your take. I will say that GUIs that don't hide scrollbars
> (until you hover near them), that have some depth to them to indicate controls
> versus non-functional areas, and don't have invisible functional areas that you
> have to stumble onto to find them, are better. In that regard, the Win 2000
> desktop qualifies.
>
> Still, the look is archaic, to me.
>
> Nothing more elegant than an empty desktop that will show nothing but your
> running apps. Eh, enough opinionting from me.

It is indeed my take, but that takes nothing away from the fact that
Linux is a better operating system. The point for me was that it was
foolish for Lawrence to mock the Windows look when it is much greater
than that of Linux.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 5:17 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 09:04:13 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> I'm not necessarily a fan of GNOME 3, but I became one because of how
>> much hate it used to get at the beginning for trying to change the way
>> people use their computers. People resistant change and GNOME, so I went
>> out of my way to use it and figure out how it worked when it was
>> released. I think that many of its ideas are smart ones.
>
> Like Metro I think most of its ideas are aimed toward people more
> acclimated to tablets and smartphones.

They were, but many of the ideas translate to the desktop as well.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 6:00 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 05:41:10 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 02:25:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>>> At least the downloading is in the background from what I remember.
>>
>> And then the updating itself renders your machine unusable, because
>> Windows cannot update files that are currently in use, like Linux can.
>
> In my private hell I have one Windows 11 machine on the Insiders channel.
> It hasn't been able to install the 'update' since March. I'm not the only
> one and quite a few people are pissed. worst case I'll have to do a clean
> install in July.

I "love" when updates refuse to install whether you go through Windows
Update or try to install them manually. It happened all the time in 10.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-30 6:06 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 09:45:08 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> That *isn't* true, first of all, trans women sometimes are top or
>> versatile, my GF is not, though, I've talked to her about that and she's
>> not into it. But I will suck her dick, so, big difference there.
>
> TMI.

What an utter, complete idiot.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On Thu, 30 May 2024 10:03:05 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
<66588714$0$1245635$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> On 5/29/2024 9:16 PM, vallor wrote:
>> Did you watch the video that rbowman posted? Linus was surprised
>> at the Linux performance of his little Thelio. It beat MS Windows
>> in many ways.
>
> link please. I'd like to see it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTN1c1j6V1s&list=LLLpz93TZfYzoEgEICOaMA0Q&index=189

[ I'll have to respond to the rest of your article later. ]

--
-v

On Thu, 30 May 2024 10:03:05 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
<66588714$0$1245635$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> On 5/29/2024 9:16 PM, vallor wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 May 2024 18:49:40 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>> <6657b101$0$1245638$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>>> On 5/28/2024 11:49 PM, vallor wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 23:17:32 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>>>> <66569e4b$8$1258331$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/28/2024 11:12 PM, vallor wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 22:26:01 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>>>>>> <v363no$viqs$1@dont-email.me>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/28/2024 10:24 PM, vallor wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 21:17:06 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> <66568211$2$8094$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/28/2024 2:50 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-28 9:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you bought a machine which was designed to run Linux,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I didn't know there was such a thing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does that mean Windows won't run on them?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wouldn't want to try to run Windows on this system, unless it
>>>>>>>> was in a virt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First, I don't want Microsoft to get its greasy fingers on my EFI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Second, it probably doesn't have drivers for the custom
>>>>>> daughterboard that runs the cooling, and I'm not willing to spend
>>>>>> the time to chase down Windows drivers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Third...there's no need. The system is perfectly fine with what it
>>>>>> has,
>>>>>> and needs nothing that Windows has to offer. If that changed,
>>>>>> maybe I'd rethink it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are the exact specs of the hardware?
>>>> This is the 1.0 version, I have the 1.1 version:
>>>>
>>>> https://tech-docs.system76.com/models/thelio-mega-r1.0/README.html
>>>>
>>>> With a AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X. 256G of ECC memory.
>>>>
>>>> NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
>>>>
>>>> If the daughterboard isn't supported on Windows, all the cooling fans
>>>> will run full-speed, which would be annoying.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://github.com/system76/thelio-io-windows
>>>
>>> Now remove that Linux shit by slicking it with a Windows disk.
>>
>> That would be a downgrade.
>>
>>
>>> Enjoy good software and games for a change.
>>
>> The software I use is more Linux-oriented than Windows-oriented.
>
> Not understanding this.

The people who put Linux into Windows do understand it.

It's a POSIX environment, one that I prefer to "command.com"
and "PowerShell".

>>> https://imgur.com/a/ZhwJJLz
>>
>> LOL. "[TRIAL VERSION]". Talk about "ghetto".
>
>
> ha!
>
> I just recently tried AIDA64 for the first time. I'm trying to get them
> to sell me a one-PC license for $20. The current license if 3 PCs for
> $60.
>
> Even $20 is too much for a system info app that I'll barely use, but
> it's a masterful piece of software. Too bad Linux has nothing
> approaching it.

Knock yourself out. I have all I need from /proc and /sys.

Where do you find that kind of introspection in Windows?

>>> Note: why did you buy such a powerful system?
>>
>> Because I didn't want my system to be weak. I wanted a workstation,
>> not just a desktop. (Even so, for a workstation, it's actually a
>> little on the low-end.)
>
> It's scary that you/others consider your system 'low-end'. It's an
> incredible amount of computing power to have in front of you.
>
> Looking at various 'workstations' online, the graphics card often makes
> up 1/2 the price.
>
> Note: I wrote a python program to parse Usenet message files one at a
> time and add them to a SQLite relational db. On my AMD 5600G/16GB
> memory system, the program never runs slower than ~200 posts PER SECOND.
>
> If I run the program for N posts, then rerun it for the same N posts (eg
> after fixing a minor code issue), it will often run at 1200 to 2000
> posts per second. I was shocked when I saw that.
>
> I have to wonder what a system like yours would do.

Are you talking about downloading posts and processing
them? The bottleneck would be the downloading part -- NNTP
is not a very efficient bulk-transfer mechanism.

If you want feeds for specific newsgroups, I suggest finding
someone that will feed you with uucp -- or, bring up innd and
peer with someone.

>> For example, I can use the ramdisk for images for virts.
>>
>> I can also unpack sources on my ramdisk for faster compilation, and
>> build them with "make -j 64".
>>
>> I run games and stream them with obs-studio, which takes serious
>> horsepower. 4K video is like that. Also editing the video benefits
>> from the extra horsepower.
>
> So you paid $5K+ to record video gaming streams (not that there's
> anything wrong with that).

Not just for that...as you well know.

> Aside: did you follow the demise of Artisan Builds computer builder?
> Their downfall began with the CEO making fun online of a Twitch
> streamer.

I just read an exposé of their business practices. Ugly business.

> > I also use Foocus for generative AI, text-to-image.
>
> https://github.com/lllyasviel/Fooocus/releases/download/release/
Fooocus_win64_2-1-831.7z

And? It's nice that it is available for Windows, too.

I prefer the Linux performance.

--
-v

On Thu, 30 May 2024 18:17:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> On 2024-05-30 4:03 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2024 06:43:42 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> I implore you to take a screenshot of a current Linux Mint desktop and
>>> one of a default Windows 2000 installation. Then, ask _strangers_, not
>>> zealots like yourself who probably pray to a photo of Stallman, what
>>> they think is prettier.
>>
>> I wouldn't want a stranger looking at me like I were a total idiot.
>> Prettier? They're frigging computer desktop. Do you really think people
>> wander through BestBuy looking for the prettiest desktop?
>
> Honestly? Yes.

You must know some very strange people.

On Thu, 30 May 2024 16:34:44 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Sorry, but that's your take. I will say that GUIs that don't hide
> scrollbars (until you hover near them), that have some depth to them to
> indicate controls versus non-functional areas, and don't have invisible
> functional areas that you have to stumble onto to find them, are better.
> In that regard, the Win 2000 desktop qualifies.

The magical vanishing scrollbar! I'd like to stake the person who came up
with that on a hill of fire ants.

On Thu, 30 May 2024 18:37:35 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> I "love" when updates refuse to install whether you go through Windows
> Update or try to install them manually. It happened all the time in 10.

"what to do when Windows Update stops at 0%?" The state this one is in is
really annoying since it will download and install the version with
several restarts before saying 'Only fooling! Restoring your old system."
with more restarts and so forth.

On Thu, 30 May 2024 21:55:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> Debian doesn't have a lot of pre-installed apps, and less if you don't
> select a DE.

I did the plain vanilla xfce install and it was a little light. It ran but
by no means were you going to develop much of anything without adding
packages.

On 2024-05-30, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-05-30 7:05 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On 2024-05-29 9:08 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 29 May 2024 08:03:37 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
>>>>> users.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it’s an advanced power-user feature. As I mentioned before, it was
>>>> introduced in OSF Motif/CDE in the early/mid 1990s sometime, and has been
>>>> commonplace in *nix systems ever since.
>>>>
>>>> You know, the kind of systems that are “workstations”, not just
>>>> “desktops”.
>>>
>>> The suggestion here is that Linux allows you to do work whereas Windows
>>> and Mac are just toys.
>>
>> A strawman!
>>
>>> Meanwhile, people who high-paying jobs and workplaces are almost always using
>>> Windows. I wonder why that is. What is the point of producing _workstations_
>>> that no one who _works_ wants to station in their home?
>>
>> :-D
>>
>> "Why is everyone using the Company-mandated setup?"
>>
>> "Only people using the Company-manddated setup want to _work_!"
>>
>> I would have kvelled to be able to use my productive Linux setup at work.
>> And now I can, as I am now "The Company".
>
> And that is fine, and I am glad that your choice was Linux. However,
> Lawrence is arguing that Linux succeeded as a desktop over Windows
> because it is used by nobody as a workstation. How his mind works is
> truly a mystery.

Okay. As I said in another post, I'm backing out of this particular
discussion. You and Lawrence can have the floor.

--
[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 2024-05-30, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-05-30 7:47 a.m., RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-29 11:23 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>>>>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>>>>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>>>>>> alt-tab?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
>>>>>> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
>>>>>> but still can’t get right?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
>>>>>> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.
>>>>>
>>>>> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
>>>>> users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
>>>>> with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
>>>>> another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
>>>>> because of your zealotry.
>>>>
>>>> I'm guessing that most people who don't use multiple desktops are ignorant
>>>> about how useful this feature is. This was one of the first things that
>>>> attracted me to Linux when moving over from Windows. Separate desktops for
>>>> separate jobs. I use this feature constantly.
>>>
>>> It might be useful for some, but most people won't see a point to them.
>>> If you want one desktop for media consumption, one for gaming and one
>>> for word processing, knock yourself out. Most people will just put the
>>> applications for all three categories in the same desktop and minimize
>>> whatever they're not using.
>>
>> Less efficient, in my opinion.
>
> Tell yourself that a lot of people see minimizing an application to be
> more efficient because it ends up consuming less power, CPU and RAM than
> one that's constantly open in a virtual desktop.

I'm guessing that the virtual desktop hardware usage is extremely minimal.
But by "efficient" I meant more efficient for my usage patterns, not for
hardware efficiency. Using older, low power machines, I'm guessing just
turning on a higher power gaming machine uses a whole lot more power than my
computers do.

>> And most people's hands are glued to the
>> mouse, which is also less efficient (again, in my opinion).
>
> I agree here. There are certain things which absolutely need to be done
> with a keyboard.

Like newsgroup reading and writing in slrn. :)

--
[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 2024-05-30, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2024-05-30 7:47 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-29 11:23 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>>>>>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>>>>>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>>>>>>> alt-tab?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
>>>>>>> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
>>>>>>> but still can’t get right?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
>>>>>>> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
>>>>>> users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
>>>>>> with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
>>>>>> another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
>>>>>> because of your zealotry.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm guessing that most people who don't use multiple desktops are ignorant
>>>>> about how useful this feature is. This was one of the first things that
>>>>> attracted me to Linux when moving over from Windows. Separate desktops for
>>>>> separate jobs. I use this feature constantly.
>>>>
>>>> It might be useful for some, but most people won't see a point to them.
>>>> If you want one desktop for media consumption, one for gaming and one
>>>> for word processing, knock yourself out. Most people will just put the
>>>> applications for all three categories in the same desktop and minimize
>>>> whatever they're not using.
>>>
>>> Less efficient, in my opinion.
>>
>> Tell yourself that a lot of people see minimizing an application to be
>> more efficient because it ends up consuming less power, CPU and RAM than
>> one that's constantly open in a virtual desktop.
>
> Minimizing a window generally doesn't cause the application to use less CPU or
> memory. Same with an application not visible because it's in another virtual
> desktop. Also depends what the application does in the background vs
> updating an open window.
>
> Besides, I think Ron means it's more efficient for his workflow.

Yep. That's what I meant.

What I find really inefficient (in my wife's computer hardware usage) is a
couple dozen tabs opened in Firefox. I almost always only have one or two
tabs opened at a time (sometimes up to five or six, but not for long).

>>> And most people's hands are glued to the
>>> mouse, which is also less efficient (again, in my opinion).
>>
>> I agree here. There are certain things which absolutely need to be done
>> with a keyboard.
>

--
[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