On 2024-05-02 7:07 p.m., chrisv wrote:
> rbowman wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> Is WinDOS the right choice for most people? I suppose, but GNU/Linux is
>>> also a great choice, for many. Also, the availability of a viable FOSS
>>> alternative, in case M$ or Apple (or the government) go off the rails,
>>> is *huge*.
>>
>> It's a gross generalization particularly today but roll back 30 years
>> Unix/Linux was a developer's platform and Windows was a consumer product.
>> It didn't last long but Microsoft Bob was an indication of the audience
>> they thought they were dealing with.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob
>>
>> Microsoft Works wasn't ready for the enterprise either.
>>
>> I don't know if Linux would exist if Unix licensing hadn't been such a CF.
>
> Some FOSS OS would have risen. If not GNU/Linux, something else.
>
> It's a necessary thing, in our modern society.

I have to agree that if open-source weren't available, there is no
telling what the corporations would already have forced onto us in terms
of surveillance. The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes
about where the tech world is going.

However, we can only wonder how long the alternative will be around. As
Lunduke showed during the week, GNOME is bleeding money and has less
than a year to go financially. Since it is the base of many
distributions and a few desktop environments, I can only hope that their
impending bankruptcy won't matter.

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

On 5/3/2024 8:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes
> about where the tech world is going.

After installing Win11 (and being forced to use an MS account), you can
reverse that at any time and go back to booting with a local account.

When I installed, I used a 24-year-old anonymous MS hotmail account, and
the main user profile was created with the first 5 letters of that
account. So instead of C:\Users\DFS it was C:\Users\everm.

Reversing it was a bit of a hassle, but now it's C:\Users\DFS and I
don't login with the MS account. That's not gonna stop MS from
collecting the telemetry data you agreed to let them collect, of course.

It's just ridiculous. Not that it's any consolation, but I hear Apple
is much worse.

On 2024-05-03 11:31 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 5/3/2024 8:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install Windows without
>> being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes about where
>> the tech world is going.
>
> After installing Win11 (and being forced to use an MS account), you can
> reverse that at any time and go back to booting with a local account.
>
> When I installed, I used a 24-year-old anonymous MS hotmail account, and
> the main user profile was created with the first 5 letters of that
> account.  So instead of C:\Users\DFS  it was C:\Users\everm.
>
> Reversing it was a bit of a hassle, but now it's C:\Users\DFS and I
> don't login with the MS account.  That's not gonna stop MS from
> collecting the telemetry data you agreed to let them collect, of course.
>
> It's just ridiculous.  Not that it's any consolation, but I hear Apple
> is much worse.

They're both bad and using open-source projects like Linux or Haiku are
the only solution. They want to give us something for "free," but they
want all of our private data in exchange. Some don't care because they
feel that their lives are so boring that there is nothing for them to
hide, but they don't realize that those boring details can and will be
used against them if ever they are on the radar of any authority who
doesn't like what they stand for.

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

Andrzej Matuch wrote:

>The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account

For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
motivated.

--
"Telling lies about how Linux can replace Windows for most people is
no way to go through life son." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

On 2024-05-03 3:26 p.m., chrisv wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>
> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
> motivated.

The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
should be a direct option is disgusting. Some of us have a Pro license
but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
indeed have to log in.

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

On 2024-05-03, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
> On 2024-05-03 3:26 p.m., chrisv wrote:
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>
>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>> motivated.
>
> The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
> should be a direct option is disgusting. Some of us have a Pro license
> but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
> web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
> only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
> happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
> indeed have to log in.
>
I have installed Win11 in qemu to see what it is like and how easy it is to
bypass the online account requirement. I have to say the average person would
not know how to do it, even if they knew it was possible.

--
Simon

RLU: 222126

Le 03-05-2024, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> a écrit :
>
> It's just ridiculous. Not that it's any consolation, but I hear Apple
> is much worse.

I know someone who switched from Apple to Linux the day she had an issue
with her computer. She called the help center. They asked her if they
could take control of her computer. She answered "yes" and saw the mouse
moving on her screen. Everything was on phone she didn't do any
technical thing with her computer to allow them access with complete
control. She gave her consent for this one time. But she realised that
even if she didn't agreed they could have taken control.

So yes, I agree with you to call Apple worse than Microsoft.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 2024-05-04, Simon <SimonJ@eu.invalid> wrote:
> On 2024-05-03, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2024-05-03 3:26 p.m., chrisv wrote:
>>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>>
>>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>>> motivated.
>>
>> The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
>> should be a direct option is disgusting. Some of us have a Pro license
>> but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
>> web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
>> only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
>> happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
>> indeed have to log in.
>>
> I have installed Win11 in qemu to see what it is like and how easy it is to
> bypass the online account requirement. I have to say the average person would
> not know how to do it, even if they knew it was possible.

It's just a checkbox if you use Rufus to create your live USB.

https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-windows-11-without-microsoft-account

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d4Tio8eiu5Ns2sCCKYhMHi-970-80.png.webp

--
[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

Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>
>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>> motivated.
>
>The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
>should be a direct option is disgusting.

Well, they're not called Evilsoft for nothin'.

>Some of us have a Pro license
>but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
>web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
>only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
>happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
>indeed have to log in.

If you have a Pro license, you should have a Pro ISO, no? In that
case, I would use that and endure the hours of updates.

My most recent experience is, admittedly, dated. A year ago on my
daughter's new PC. We started with a Win10 Pro install (I had a legal
license from work that was collecting dust) and then used Micro$oft's
Win11 update tool. It did take a while, but we got what we wanted -
no M$ account and legal.

--
"Do you think you should be able to buy a car with no seats from the
Ford showroom?" - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, arguing that
it's unreasonable to expect OEM's to offer PC's with no OS installed

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>On 2024-05-03 3:26 p.m., chrisv wrote:
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>
>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>> motivated.
>
>The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
>should be a direct option is disgusting. Some of us have a Pro license
>but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
>web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
>only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
>happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
>indeed have to log in.

If you have a Pro product key, there's no reason the Home edition
should install. Perhaps you mean specifically the key that transforms
Home into Pro, useful in converting OEM systems into retail Pro OS
licenses, but for naked systems it's best to get a discounted license
from Bleeping Computer or such.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-05-04 12:27 p.m., chrisv wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>>
>>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>>> motivated.
>>
>> The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
>> should be a direct option is disgusting.
>
> Well, they're not called Evilsoft for nothin'.

Yep. I watched a few YouTube videos talking about what happened when
companies wanted Windows 3.1 to become a de facto ISO standard.
Microsoft really went out of their way to prevent the competition's
software from working. It's rather disgusting.

>> Some of us have a Pro license
>> but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
>> web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
>> only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
>> happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
>> indeed have to log in.
>
> If you have a Pro license, you should have a Pro ISO, no? In that
> case, I would use that and endure the hours of updates.

The USB thumb drive I got with the Pro license is 10 Pro. Effectively, I
would have to install 10 Pro first and then upgrade to 11. More hoop
jumping. Perhaps it is possible to get a Pro ISO and prevent myself the
headaches, but even when you use the MediaCreationTool to download the
appropriate ISO for the license you have on your system, it uses the
Home one.

> My most recent experience is, admittedly, dated. A year ago on my
> daughter's new PC. We started with a Win10 Pro install (I had a legal
> license from work that was collecting dust) and then used Micro$oft's
> Win11 update tool. It did take a while, but we got what we wanted -
> no M$ account and legal.

I can do it that way too and it does work rather well to prevent me from
logging into my Microsoft account. However, you end up spending hours
dong updates.

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

On 2024-05-04, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install
>>>> Windows without being forced to enter a Microsoft account
>>>
>>> For the home version, and there's work-arounds for that, for the
>>> motivated.
>>
>>The mere fact that you need to jump through hoops to do something which
>>should be a direct option is disgusting.
>
> Well, they're not called Evilsoft for nothin'.
>
>>Some of us have a Pro license
>>but, when we install, we do so by downloading the latest ISO from their
>>web site so that we won't have to spend a few hours doing updates. That
>>only affords us the option of installing the Home version; upgrades
>>happen after the system has already been installed. As a result, you
>>indeed have to log in.
>
> If you have a Pro license, you should have a Pro ISO, no? In that
> case, I would use that and endure the hours of updates.
>
> My most recent experience is, admittedly, dated. A year ago on my
> daughter's new PC. We started with a Win10 Pro install (I had a legal
> license from work that was collecting dust) and then used Micro$oft's
> Win11 update tool. It did take a while, but we got what we wanted -
> no M$ account and legal.

My little Dell Optiplex Micros and Dell Latitudes all have the Windows Pro
license built into the BIOS. As far as I remember, I just downloaded one
Windows 11 ISOs, which includes either Home or Pro (and I think there's other
options). Using Rufus to make the USB install is easy. Just check the
"bypass" setting up a Microsoft account and tell Windows you don't have
Internet access and it installs without forcing you to get an account. You
can also turn off the TPC requirement. Once it's installed, just set up the
Internet without a Microsoft account.

--
[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 5/3/2024 5:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install Windows without
> being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes about where the
> tech world is going.

I also thought that was true (as of Win11), but I found out it's not.

Last night I screwed up my Win11 Pro install, bad, by stopping the wrong
services. Had no system restore points, so ended up reinstalling.

During the reinstall, instead of choosing 'This PC will be used at home'
or whatever it says, choose the other option 'To be used at work'.

Then you don't have to enter a MS email - you can use whatever
email/domain you want to continue the install.

Problem solved!

But it caused a new problem: under Windows Security | Virus & threat
protection it said 'Action needed'. When I clicked, it said to contact
the IT Adminstrator for your company.

Googled and found this solution:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1367032/in-my-windows-11-virus-and-threat-protection-missi

Add a simple Registry key and it's fixed.

https://imgur.com/a/G7HZ7Lm

This is less trouble than using an MS email to install, then going back
and changing your user profile (because the user profile is named with
the first 5 letters of the MS email acct).

On 2024-05-08 10:14 a.m., DFS wrote:
> On 5/3/2024 5:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install Windows without
>> being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes about where
>> the tech world is going.
>
>
> I also thought that was true (as of Win11), but I found out it's not.
>
> Last night I screwed up my Win11 Pro install, bad, by stopping the wrong
> services.  Had no system restore points, so ended up reinstalling.
>
> During the reinstall, instead of choosing 'This PC will be used at home'
> or whatever it says, choose the other option 'To be used at work'.
>
> Then you don't have to enter a MS email - you can use whatever
> email/domain you want to continue the install.
>
> Problem solved!
>
> But it caused a new problem:  under Windows Security | Virus & threat
> protection it said 'Action needed'.  When I clicked, it said to contact
> the IT Adminstrator for your company.
>
> Googled and found this solution:
>
> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1367032/in-my-windows-11-virus-and-threat-protection-missi
>
> Add a simple Registry key and it's fixed.
>
> https://imgur.com/a/G7HZ7Lm
>
>
> This is less trouble than using an MS email to install, then going back
> and changing your user profile (because the user profile is named with
> the first 5 letters of the MS email acct).

So, we're still jumping through hoops to get the system to work the way
we want it to. It's quite annoying.

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

On 5/8/2024 11:42 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
> On 2024-05-08 10:14 a.m., DFS wrote:
>> On 5/3/2024 5:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install Windows
>>> without being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes
>>> about where the tech world is going.
>>
>>
>> I also thought that was true (as of Win11), but I found out it's not.
>>
>> Last night I screwed up my Win11 Pro install, bad, by stopping the
>> wrong services.  Had no system restore points, so ended up reinstalling.
>>
>> During the reinstall, instead of choosing 'This PC will be used at
>> home' or whatever it says, choose the other option 'To be used at work'.
>>
>> Then you don't have to enter a MS email - you can use whatever
>> email/domain you want to continue the install.
>>
>> Problem solved!
>>
>> But it caused a new problem:  under Windows Security | Virus & threat
>> protection it said 'Action needed'.  When I clicked, it said to
>> contact the IT Adminstrator for your company.
>>
>> Googled and found this solution:
>>
>> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1367032/in-my-windows-11-virus-and-threat-protection-missi
>>
>> Add a simple Registry key and it's fixed.
>>
>> https://imgur.com/a/G7HZ7Lm
>>
>>
>> This is less trouble than using an MS email to install, then going
>> back and changing your user profile (because the user profile is named
>> with the first 5 letters of the MS email acct).
>
> So, we're still jumping through hoops to get the system to work the way
> we want it to. It's quite annoying.

It is. It happened because I chose to install the system as part of a
corporate network, and "the corp" controls security settings. Install
it for home use and that doesn't happen (but then you have to phone home
with an MS email).

At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
used to do a LOT. Click them and nothing happens. Resolving them was
FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.

On 2024-05-08 12:04 p.m., DFS wrote:
> On 5/8/2024 11:42 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2024-05-08 10:14 a.m., DFS wrote:
>>> On 5/3/2024 5:05 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> The mere fact that it is no longer possible to install Windows
>>>> without being forced to enter a Microsoft account speaks volumes
>>>> about where the tech world is going.
>>>
>>>
>>> I also thought that was true (as of Win11), but I found out it's not.
>>>
>>> Last night I screwed up my Win11 Pro install, bad, by stopping the
>>> wrong services.  Had no system restore points, so ended up reinstalling.
>>>
>>> During the reinstall, instead of choosing 'This PC will be used at
>>> home' or whatever it says, choose the other option 'To be used at work'.
>>>
>>> Then you don't have to enter a MS email - you can use whatever
>>> email/domain you want to continue the install.
>>>
>>> Problem solved!
>>>
>>> But it caused a new problem:  under Windows Security | Virus & threat
>>> protection it said 'Action needed'.  When I clicked, it said to
>>> contact the IT Adminstrator for your company.
>>>
>>> Googled and found this solution:
>>>
>>> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1367032/in-my-windows-11-virus-and-threat-protection-missi
>>>
>>> Add a simple Registry key and it's fixed.
>>>
>>> https://imgur.com/a/G7HZ7Lm
>>>
>>>
>>> This is less trouble than using an MS email to install, then going
>>> back and changing your user profile (because the user profile is
>>> named with the first 5 letters of the MS email acct).
>>
>> So, we're still jumping through hoops to get the system to work the
>> way we want it to. It's quite annoying.
>
> It is.  It happened because I chose to install the system as part of a
> corporate network, and "the corp" controls security settings.  Install
> it for home use and that doesn't happen (but then you have to phone home
> with an MS email).
>
>
> At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
> used to do a LOT.  Click them and nothing happens.  Resolving them was
> FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.

I'll be the first to admit that as much as I like using Linux and the
ideas behind it, I had to stop using it as a result of the lack of
polish. Ubuntu is better because they at least make an attempt to
provide is as a serious alternative for corporate environments. It,
Fedora and openSUSE are the only ones with polish, but the latter two
are slaves to the homosexual agenda.

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

On Wed, 8 May 2024 13:13:57 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

>
> I'll be the first to admit ...
>

Did you ever stop to consider that no rational, intelligent person
gives a flying fuck about your ridiculous assessments?

Give it up.

Or better, hang yourself.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:

>homosexual agenda

Retard.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Wed, 8 May 2024 12:04:28 -0400, DFS wrote:

> At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
> used to do a LOT. Click them and nothing happens. Resolving them was
> FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.

When was 'used to do'? 1998?

On 2024-05-08 6:06 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 8 May 2024 12:04:28 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
>> used to do a LOT. Click them and nothing happens. Resolving them was
>> FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.
>
> When was 'used to do'? 1998?

Actually, DFS showed this to be the case recently, and many times over
the last few years. This is not an old problem; it's a problem Linux
distributions have yet to iron out. The lack of polish is very noticeable.

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

On 5/8/2024 6:06 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 8 May 2024 12:04:28 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
>> used to do a LOT. Click them and nothing happens. Resolving them was
>> FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.
>
> When was 'used to do'? 1998?

Here's what I posted to cola Apr 2019, when running Solus Linux with the
Budgie desktop.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The "All" entry in the start menu lists everything available, about
50-60 items. About doesn't work. Background doesn't work. Calendar
doesn't work. Color doesn't work. Date + Time doesn't work. Displays
doesn't work. Mouse + Touchpad doesn't work, etc. Removable Media
doesn't work, on and on and on. I didn't test them all, but probably
50% do nothing. No app launches, no screen flashing. Nothing.

YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd say non-working menu items has been the most common bug I've seen in
Linux distros over the last 20 years. I haven't installed one to bare
metal in a few years, though.

I probably had the best experience with XFCE on Manjaro, but I'll be
trying something different next time.

On Wed, 8 May 2024 19:39:09 -0400, DFS wrote:

> Here's what I posted to cola Apr 2019, when running Solus Linux with the
> Budgie desktop.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budgie_(desktop_environment)

Could you possibly find a more obscure/fucked up distro?

On Thu, 09 May 2024 04:34:14 +0000, rbowman wrote:

> On Wed, 8 May 2024 19:39:09 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> Here's what I posted to cola Apr 2019, when running Solus Linux with
>> the Budgie desktop.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budgie_(desktop_environment)
>
> Could you possibly find a more obscure/fucked up distro?

For what it's worth, I appreciate that DFS is looking for minuscule
problems in Linux and pointing them out. You can't make anything better if
you're not going to be honest about its flaws. Unfortunately, even after
he points out the flaws and submits bug reports, the developers don't seem
to do anything to fix it.

Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2024-05-08 6:06 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 May 2024 12:04:28 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> At least Windows doesn't display non-working app menu items, as Linux
>>> used to do a LOT. Click them and nothing happens. Resolving them was
>>> FAR more troublesome than the Registry fix I showed.
>>
>> When was 'used to do'? 1998?
>
> Actually, DFS showed this to be the case recently, and many times over
> the last few years. This is not an old problem; it's a problem Linux
> distributions have yet to iron out. The lack of polish is very noticeable.

Name the offending apps, please.

--
O, it is excellent
To have a giant's strength; but it is tyrannous
To use it like a giant.
-- Shakespeare, "Measure for Measure", II, 2

Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Thu, 09 May 2024 04:34:14 +0000, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 8 May 2024 19:39:09 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> Here's what I posted to cola Apr 2019, when running Solus Linux with
>>> the Budgie desktop.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budgie_(desktop_environment)
>>
>> Could you possibly find a more obscure/fucked up distro?
>
> For what it's worth, I appreciate that DFS is looking for minuscule
> problems in Linux and pointing them out. You can't make anything better if
> you're not going to be honest about its flaws. Unfortunately, even after
> he points out the flaws and submits bug reports, the developers don't seem
> to do anything to fix it.

That's a project problem, not a platform problem.

Microsoft itself seems to treat issue reports in a similar manner to bad
projects. So often in a Microsoft help forum, you'll get non-answers or no
answers, with user's getting plaintive about the lack of help.

Other companies act the same, all too often.

I wouldn't ding small open-source team for being slow in responding to bugs, as
they may have other more important things on their plate.

I will note one responsive project: Meson, on GitHub. Meson was using a file
called "meson_options.txt" to hold default values for project options. I wrote
up an issue about it (as had others earlier, apparently), and I noted that
the "txt" extension is too generic, and that I edited my /etc/DIR_COLORS file
so that I could grok a directory listing faster. And in version 1.1 IIRC,
voila, there was meson.options to supplement meson.build.

--
Steady movement is more important than speed, much of the time. So long
as there is a regular progression of stimuli to get your mental hooks
into, there is room for lateral movement. Once this begins, its rate is
a matter of discretion.
-- Corwin, Prince of Amber