On 12/23/24 7:51 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> -hh wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> On 12/22/24 7:14 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-21 à 19:50, chrisv a écrit :
>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (idiocy snipped)
>>>>
>>>> Really?  What does the NYSE run?
>>>
>>> I never looked into it. If it runs Linux, that's great. How that helps
>>> to improve the user experience is up to you to explain.
>>
>> Sounds like some lame deflection attempt into what *nix flavor is on the
>> mainframe servers...
>>
>> But for the traders, the Industry Standard is the Bloomberg Terminal.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_Terminal>
>>
>> The Bloomberg Terminal runs on Windows OS.
>
> What about the London Stock Exchange?
>

Hadn't really thought about it...

....but Google does provide this:

"London Stock Exchange goes after Bloomberg’s data crown with Microsoft deal

Deal strengthens challenge to Bloomberg’s financial data business,
analysts say

By Josh Mitchell
Friday 23 December 2022 at 06:56"

<https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/london-stock-exchange-goes-after-bloombergs-data-crown-with-microsoft-deal-20221223>

-hh

On 2024-12-23, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 06:30:19 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop?
>> Windows might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most
>> corporations run SQL under Linux servers for their important records.
>> You've heard of Oracle,
>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>
> PosgresSQL is making inroads. Oracle licenses are not cheap and support is
> an extra cost option; Postgres is free. Most of our clients use SQL
> Server. Not as robust as Oracle or expensive although it's not cheap. The
> only RFP that required Oracle was from the DOI. Nothing is too good when
> you're spending the taxpayers' money.

I'm not a fan of Oracle's boss, so any substitute for it sounds great to me.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:04, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 05:09, Stéphane CARPENTIER a écrit :
>>>> Le 21-12-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> And: All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. Now, a computer is not mandatory to play. There are other
>>>> possibilities.
>>>
>>> I have to agree here. I just got a new monitor yesterday and both my
>>> computer and Xbox Series S are plugged into it. I'm sure that the same
>>> game running from the computer would look better than it does coming
>>> from the console, but the games still look fantastic and I doubt that
>>> some additional polygons would multiply the amount of fun one can have.
>>> Besides, there are console exclusives like NHL that make it preferable.
>>
>> My kids have tried to get me interested in some of the games they play. The
>> graphics are pretty impressive sometimes, but the games, themselves, often
>> seem kind of repetitious and boring. It seems like they're doing the same
>> thing, over and over again.
>>
>
> I would tell you that the one game which might have a chance of
> interesting you is Geometry Wars. It is simple, addictive, easy to
> understand the first time you play and it should even work without issue
> in Linux.

I never was very good at these kind of games. I haven't gotten any better as
I've aged. It looks kind of like a more elaborate version of Astroids from
the old arcade days.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:21, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 00:30, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-21 à 17:36, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-21 à 14:02, rbowman a écrit :
>>>>>>>> https://www.wired.com/story/2024-was-the-year-the-bottom-fell-out-of-the-
>>>>>>>> games-industry/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd seen a few articles but never paid much attention. RPI put a lot of
>>>>>>>> effort into their video game degree program and thought the spinoffs might
>>>>>>>> revitalize the upstate NY economy. I wonder if they missed the boat or if
>>>>>>>> the industry will spring back?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux: who really cares if games run on Linux? It's a serious OS for
>>>>>>>> serious people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it were a serious operating system for serious people, businesses and
>>>>>>> academic institutions would be willing to run it, and invest in the
>>>>>>> people necessary to troubleshoot it. Instead, both have realized that
>>>>>>> its free cost does not result in savings of any kind because the
>>>>>>> problems it causes often can't be resolved by even the most gifted of
>>>>>>> technical staff. That's why they use Windows, even with the security issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap)
>>>>>
>>>>> They do use Microsoft Office but there is no denying that it is superior
>>>>> to what's available to Linux. Perhaps WPS Office can compete at some
>>>>> level, but most people I know who use spreadsheet software say that
>>>>> LibreOffice is sorely lacking in the functionality they use daily.
>>>>> Additionally, they say that the functionality it does provide is nowhere
>>>>> near the level of Microsoft's.
>>>>
>>>> I'm denying it. I despise MicroCrap Office. Worthless bloatware.
>>>>
>>>> I used Calc in OpenOffice at work before LibreOffice ever existed. For my
>>>> purposes it worked fine. Spreadsheets are overused for data purposes anyhow.
>>>> If you want a database use a database software.
>>>
>>> Your opinion on spreadsheets and the software used to make them won't
>>> sway people like my wife who calculates financial risk and needs to
>>> report it to the investors. For people like her, Calc is not even up for
>>> consideration because Microsoft's software is robust and has been
>>> offering reliable service for decades. There were stronger competitors
>>> to Excel than Calc in the past, competitors that had already made lots
>>> of headway, and they too were left in the dust. It's not all because of
>>> "shady business practises" either.
>>
>> I don't think "robustness" has anything to do with it. I think it comes down
>> to what the others expect. It's basically a monopoly product and, as I
>> mentioned with Windows, monopolies have an inertia loop that's hard for
>> businesses to exit from. It has nothing to do with the supposed "quality" of
>> the product — it has everything to do with "this is what we're used to
>> using."
>
> Well, I can tell you that there are certain advanced features people
> need in Microsoft Office which seem to be unavailable to LibreOffice
> users. Of course, they might just be somewhere else in the open suite,
> like when I received a document with forms in .DOCX and had someone here
> convert it to the equivalent in .ODT. At the same time, I don't use any
> of the advanced features so LibreOffice has always been more than enough
> for me. The only reason I use Microsoft's suite is because I got a
> license for cheap. I can also use the 365 license I get from work for
> free. Since I routinely receive documents from them to fill out, I have
> no proper use for Libre.

I guess I've never had any use for these advanced features. All I know is
that, when we would get Word Documents at the print shop, we had a heck of a
time cleaning them up for Desk Top Application. Lot of hidden code.

>> In my opinion M$ Office is bloated crapware that tries to "think" for you.
>> But I was only occasionally forced to use it so I never got in stuck in the
>> "inertia loop."
>
> I would extend that to Windows itself too. The way it has implemented AI
> makes it clear that they don't want you thinking. Of course, there are
> certain places where I appreciate the AI like in Brave Search or Bing
> Search. There, if there is a certain technological question like what is
> the benefit of one monitor over another, the engine quickly scours the
> web for information and summarizes the data for me. That is much easier
> than navigating to a bunch of websites which cannon a series of ads at me.

I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.

>> My wife uses Power Point. She originally used it because a template she
>> purchased only worked with Power Point. Now she's used to using it, so
>> she'll probably keep using it as long as she needs to prepare classes. Just
>> the way it works. People use what they're used to using. Inertia.
>>
>> That's why so many still use the inferior Microsoft Windows crap OS.
>
> I can't argue that habit plays a big part in what people choose to use.
> At the same time, that's why I usually load Linux Mint for whatever user
> I help: it's not that unfamiliar.

Linux Mint is often suggested for those moving from Windows because it does
work similarly (at least at the Desktop level). I'm sure that design is not
by accident.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:30, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit :
>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 05:25:09 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-12-21, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap) and Microsoft's has leverage
>>>>>>> with the computer manufacturers. Monopolies have a lot of inertia
>>>>>>> that's hard to overcome. But you'll note that, for development
>>>>>>> purposes, Microsoft is now including Linux in Windows. There's a
>>>>>>> reason for that. And, as software moves to the "rental" phase and more
>>>>>>> and more of the applications move to the "Cloud", there will be less
>>>>>>> and less necessity to use Windows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> No purchasing manager was ever fired for specifying Microsoft.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>
>>>> Leaving out the cloud I have to agree. Microsoft and the availability of
>>>> Microsoft Certified Whatevers makes pointy headed bosses sleep better at
>>>> night.
>>>
>>> It's the same argument as the one that was made as to why IBM won over
>>> superior platforms in the 1980s. At the very least, anyone who suggests
>>> Microsoft can't be reprimanded because the boss knows that they will be
>>> able to find a ton of people who can use the well-known software as well
>>> as a ton of techs who can troubleshoot it. Even if they can't afford
>>> that staff, there is lots of help online for most problems if they
>>> search for it. That doesn't mean that the operating system is
>>> necessarily better; it simply means that businesses take a lot less risk
>>> in choosing one over the other.
>>>
>>> I've always mentioned that I believe that in fields like education and
>>> finance, everyone would be better off using open-source though. For
>>> finance, you need a robust kernel and a filesystem which resists bit-rot
>>> to keep those records. There shouldn't be a need to back up data daily
>>> for fear that your records will corrupt (even though it is still clearly
>>> smart to do so). Similarly, in education, if the public system desires
>>> removing all financial barriers to learning, doesn't it make sense to
>>> run an operating system which can be deployed to even the most
>>> affordable hardware at no performance penalty and prioritize the use of
>>> software which can be downloaded at no charge? I've actually asked this
>>> many times in the past and the answer has always been that maintaining
>>> the Linux servers is more costly and time-consuming to the technicians.
>>> I imagine that it is because the slightest change in configuration
>>> causes chaos across the board.
>>
>> First off, what happened to all those people who kept suggesting IBM was a
>> "no brainer" when it sank?
>
> By the time IBM sank, all of the standards they have introduced except
> for PS/2 (for mice and keyboards) had already been abandoned.
> Third-parties were already making better PCs than IBM was so suggesting
> that company was no longer necessary. However, even if people chose to
> suggest IBM anyway, they would have gotten ThinkPads which were
> spectacular computers. Only the IBM hard disks became notoriously awful
> by the end.

I just brought up IBM because they used to say the same thing about them.
"You can't go wrong suggesting IBM."

>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop? Windows
>> might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most corporations run
>> SQL under Linux servers for their important records. You've heard of Oracle,
>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>
> I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ubiquitous Linux is. Clearly, it
> has made inroads in areas where failure is not an option. I'm not
> against using it again, especially if sticking to Windows introduces new
> issues like the fTPM stuttering I mentioned before (I don't think Linux
> necessarily resolves this issue as much as offers ways to circumvent it
> which are not available to Windows users).

I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders and
say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is hard to
use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case for me. Never
has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my main OS). There
were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is partly why I didn't
stick with it until about 2007.)

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:39:15 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
> Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.

The Brave search bar has an icon on the right edge 'Answer with AI' if you
want the chatter.

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:31:55 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I never was very good at these kind of games. I haven't gotten any
> better as I've aged. It looks kind of like a more elaborate version of
> Astroids from the old arcade days.

Like a good hacker I kept strange hours. I'd take a break at 2 or 3 AM,
walk over to the Stop'n'Rob that was the only thing open, get a cup of
coffee, and play a few rounds of Asteroids. I've found versions for the PC
and tablet but they're just not the same, particularly the audio.

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:44:59 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders
> and say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is
> hard to use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case
> for me. Never has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my
> main OS). There were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is
> partly why I didn't stick with it until about 2007.)

As I've mentioned I use both Windows and various Linux distros with very
much the same workload on both OSs. Unless you persistently screw yourself
like FuddNut, I don't see any difference in usability. Sure, you can get
into Linux esoterica but it isn't a necessity like it was 25 years ago.

I built an application from a tarball last week but that was the
exception. It was rtl_433 a program that uses a RTL_SDR dongle to pick up
the 433 MHz packets sent by TPMS sensors, among other odd tihngs that use
the unlicensed frequencies.

rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:44:59 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
>> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders
>> and say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is
>> hard to use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case
>> for me. Never has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my
>> main OS). There were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is
>> partly why I didn't stick with it until about 2007.)
>
> As I've mentioned I use both Windows and various Linux distros with very
> much the same workload on both OSs. Unless you persistently screw yourself
> like FuddNut, I don't see any difference in usability. Sure, you can get
> into Linux esoterica but it isn't a necessity like it was 25 years ago.

I see a big difference in usability, because I can completely customize Linux
to my workflow. Windows? No so much.

Merry Christmas!

--
Being owned by someone used to be called slavery -- now it's called commitment.

On 2024-12-25 06:53, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:44:59 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>
>>> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
>>> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders
>>> and say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is
>>> hard to use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case
>>> for me. Never has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my
>>> main OS). There were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is
>>> partly why I didn't stick with it until about 2007.)
>>
>> As I've mentioned I use both Windows and various Linux distros with very
>> much the same workload on both OSs. Unless you persistently screw yourself
>> like FuddNut, I don't see any difference in usability. Sure, you can get
>> into Linux esoterica but it isn't a necessity like it was 25 years ago.
>
> I see a big difference in usability, because I can completely customize Linux
> to my workflow. Windows? No so much.
>
> Merry Christmas!

Unfortunately, Windows is indeed difficult to personalize, just like MacOS.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-24 04:31, RonB wrote:
> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:04, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 05:09, Stéphane CARPENTIER a écrit :
>>>>> Le 21-12-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And: All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed. Now, a computer is not mandatory to play. There are other
>>>>> possibilities.
>>>>
>>>> I have to agree here. I just got a new monitor yesterday and both my
>>>> computer and Xbox Series S are plugged into it. I'm sure that the same
>>>> game running from the computer would look better than it does coming
>>>> from the console, but the games still look fantastic and I doubt that
>>>> some additional polygons would multiply the amount of fun one can have.
>>>> Besides, there are console exclusives like NHL that make it preferable.
>>>
>>> My kids have tried to get me interested in some of the games they play. The
>>> graphics are pretty impressive sometimes, but the games, themselves, often
>>> seem kind of repetitious and boring. It seems like they're doing the same
>>> thing, over and over again.
>>>
>>
>> I would tell you that the one game which might have a chance of
>> interesting you is Geometry Wars. It is simple, addictive, easy to
>> understand the first time you play and it should even work without issue
>> in Linux.
>
> I never was very good at these kind of games. I haven't gotten any better as
> I've aged. It looks kind of like a more elaborate version of Astroids from
> the old arcade days.

It is, but the fact that you have multiplier to amass points and a
constant barrage of enemies makes it a lot of fun as a casual game.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-24 04:39, RonB wrote:

< snip >

>> Well, I can tell you that there are certain advanced features people
>> need in Microsoft Office which seem to be unavailable to LibreOffice
>> users. Of course, they might just be somewhere else in the open suite,
>> like when I received a document with forms in .DOCX and had someone here
>> convert it to the equivalent in .ODT. At the same time, I don't use any
>> of the advanced features so LibreOffice has always been more than enough
>> for me. The only reason I use Microsoft's suite is because I got a
>> license for cheap. I can also use the 365 license I get from work for
>> free. Since I routinely receive documents from them to fill out, I have
>> no proper use for Libre.
>
> I guess I've never had any use for these advanced features. All I know is
> that, when we would get Word Documents at the print shop, we had a heck of a
> time cleaning them up for Desk Top Application. Lot of hidden code.

I believe that is part of the reason why legal offices still prefer
WordPerfect Office over Microsoft's software.

>>> In my opinion M$ Office is bloated crapware that tries to "think" for you.
>>> But I was only occasionally forced to use it so I never got in stuck in the
>>> "inertia loop."
>>
>> I would extend that to Windows itself too. The way it has implemented AI
>> makes it clear that they don't want you thinking. Of course, there are
>> certain places where I appreciate the AI like in Brave Search or Bing
>> Search. There, if there is a certain technological question like what is
>> the benefit of one monitor over another, the engine quickly scours the
>> web for information and summarizes the data for me. That is much easier
>> than navigating to a bunch of websites which cannon a series of ads at me.
>
> I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
> Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.

I'm a big fan of Brave's AI, to be honest. When I was looking up the
fTPM problem I mentioned in a previous post, it saved me a lot of time
by telling me what people were saying, how to fix it, whether or not
Linux is affected and so on. Had I been forced to read all that content
on my own, I'd probably get discouraged. In fact, I might never have
learned that the Linux kernel actually addresses the problem and allows
you to circumvent the issue entirely.

>>> My wife uses Power Point. She originally used it because a template she
>>> purchased only worked with Power Point. Now she's used to using it, so
>>> she'll probably keep using it as long as she needs to prepare classes. Just
>>> the way it works. People use what they're used to using. Inertia.
>>>
>>> That's why so many still use the inferior Microsoft Windows crap OS.
>>
>> I can't argue that habit plays a big part in what people choose to use.
>> At the same time, that's why I usually load Linux Mint for whatever user
>> I help: it's not that unfamiliar.
>
> Linux Mint is often suggested for those moving from Windows because it does
> work similarly (at least at the Desktop level). I'm sure that design is not
> by accident.

I chose Fedora this time around because www.asus-linux.org offers a
comprehensive guide for the distribution to make sure that everything
you want works as it should on your hardware. I chose the KDE flavour
and it more or less behaves like a snappier Windows.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-24 04:44, RonB wrote:
> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:30, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit :
>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 05:25:09 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024-12-21, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap) and Microsoft's has leverage
>>>>>>>> with the computer manufacturers. Monopolies have a lot of inertia
>>>>>>>> that's hard to overcome. But you'll note that, for development
>>>>>>>> purposes, Microsoft is now including Linux in Windows. There's a
>>>>>>>> reason for that. And, as software moves to the "rental" phase and more
>>>>>>>> and more of the applications move to the "Cloud", there will be less
>>>>>>>> and less necessity to use Windows.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No purchasing manager was ever fired for specifying Microsoft.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Leaving out the cloud I have to agree. Microsoft and the availability of
>>>>> Microsoft Certified Whatevers makes pointy headed bosses sleep better at
>>>>> night.
>>>>
>>>> It's the same argument as the one that was made as to why IBM won over
>>>> superior platforms in the 1980s. At the very least, anyone who suggests
>>>> Microsoft can't be reprimanded because the boss knows that they will be
>>>> able to find a ton of people who can use the well-known software as well
>>>> as a ton of techs who can troubleshoot it. Even if they can't afford
>>>> that staff, there is lots of help online for most problems if they
>>>> search for it. That doesn't mean that the operating system is
>>>> necessarily better; it simply means that businesses take a lot less risk
>>>> in choosing one over the other.
>>>>
>>>> I've always mentioned that I believe that in fields like education and
>>>> finance, everyone would be better off using open-source though. For
>>>> finance, you need a robust kernel and a filesystem which resists bit-rot
>>>> to keep those records. There shouldn't be a need to back up data daily
>>>> for fear that your records will corrupt (even though it is still clearly
>>>> smart to do so). Similarly, in education, if the public system desires
>>>> removing all financial barriers to learning, doesn't it make sense to
>>>> run an operating system which can be deployed to even the most
>>>> affordable hardware at no performance penalty and prioritize the use of
>>>> software which can be downloaded at no charge? I've actually asked this
>>>> many times in the past and the answer has always been that maintaining
>>>> the Linux servers is more costly and time-consuming to the technicians.
>>>> I imagine that it is because the slightest change in configuration
>>>> causes chaos across the board.
>>>
>>> First off, what happened to all those people who kept suggesting IBM was a
>>> "no brainer" when it sank?
>>
>> By the time IBM sank, all of the standards they have introduced except
>> for PS/2 (for mice and keyboards) had already been abandoned.
>> Third-parties were already making better PCs than IBM was so suggesting
>> that company was no longer necessary. However, even if people chose to
>> suggest IBM anyway, they would have gotten ThinkPads which were
>> spectacular computers. Only the IBM hard disks became notoriously awful
>> by the end.
>
> I just brought up IBM because they used to say the same thing about them.
> "You can't go wrong suggesting IBM."
>
>>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop? Windows
>>> might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most corporations run
>>> SQL under Linux servers for their important records. You've heard of Oracle,
>>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>>
>> I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ubiquitous Linux is. Clearly, it
>> has made inroads in areas where failure is not an option. I'm not
>> against using it again, especially if sticking to Windows introduces new
>> issues like the fTPM stuttering I mentioned before (I don't think Linux
>> necessarily resolves this issue as much as offers ways to circumvent it
>> which are not available to Windows users).
>
> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders and
> say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is hard to
> use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case for me. Never
> has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my main OS). There
> were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is partly why I didn't
> stick with it until about 2007.)

I'll be honest: Linux is easier to set up on hardware than Windows. In
fact, even hardware encryption is easier to set up on Linux than it is
on Windows. I just wish I hadn't already gone through the process with
Microsoft's OS because I'm at a loss as to how to "take ownership" of my
nvme to complete the encryption process in Linux. Despite the fact that
the nvme's PSID was reverted and the drive was erased securely, it still
seems to have a tie to Windows. No matter.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-24 04:31, RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:04, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 05:09, Stéphane CARPENTIER a écrit :
>>>>>> Le 21-12-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And: All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed. Now, a computer is not mandatory to play. There are other
>>>>>> possibilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to agree here. I just got a new monitor yesterday and both my
>>>>> computer and Xbox Series S are plugged into it. I'm sure that the same
>>>>> game running from the computer would look better than it does coming
>>>>> from the console, but the games still look fantastic and I doubt that
>>>>> some additional polygons would multiply the amount of fun one can have.
>>>>> Besides, there are console exclusives like NHL that make it preferable.
>>>>
>>>> My kids have tried to get me interested in some of the games they play. The
>>>> graphics are pretty impressive sometimes, but the games, themselves, often
>>>> seem kind of repetitious and boring. It seems like they're doing the same
>>>> thing, over and over again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would tell you that the one game which might have a chance of
>>> interesting you is Geometry Wars. It is simple, addictive, easy to
>>> understand the first time you play and it should even work without issue
>>> in Linux.
>>
>> I never was very good at these kind of games. I haven't gotten any better as
>> I've aged. It looks kind of like a more elaborate version of Astroids from
>> the old arcade days.
>
> It is, but the fact that you have multiplier to amass points and a
> constant barrage of enemies makes it a lot of fun as a casual game.

I'm fairly sure it would just be frustrating for me. But I'll look into it a
little more.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-24 04:39, RonB wrote:
>
>< snip >
>
>>> Well, I can tell you that there are certain advanced features people
>>> need in Microsoft Office which seem to be unavailable to LibreOffice
>>> users. Of course, they might just be somewhere else in the open suite,
>>> like when I received a document with forms in .DOCX and had someone here
>>> convert it to the equivalent in .ODT. At the same time, I don't use any
>>> of the advanced features so LibreOffice has always been more than enough
>>> for me. The only reason I use Microsoft's suite is because I got a
>>> license for cheap. I can also use the 365 license I get from work for
>>> free. Since I routinely receive documents from them to fill out, I have
>>> no proper use for Libre.
>>
>> I guess I've never had any use for these advanced features. All I know is
>> that, when we would get Word Documents at the print shop, we had a heck of a
>> time cleaning them up for Desk Top Application. Lot of hidden code.
>
> I believe that is part of the reason why legal offices still prefer
> WordPerfect Office over Microsoft's software.

I think WordPerfect also has special templates for lawyers. And, I'm
guessing, it's inertia thing again. WordPerfect got popular for lawyers, so
they keep using it.

>>>> In my opinion M$ Office is bloated crapware that tries to "think" for you.
>>>> But I was only occasionally forced to use it so I never got in stuck in the
>>>> "inertia loop."
>>>
>>> I would extend that to Windows itself too. The way it has implemented AI
>>> makes it clear that they don't want you thinking. Of course, there are
>>> certain places where I appreciate the AI like in Brave Search or Bing
>>> Search. There, if there is a certain technological question like what is
>>> the benefit of one monitor over another, the engine quickly scours the
>>> web for information and summarizes the data for me. That is much easier
>>> than navigating to a bunch of websites which cannon a series of ads at me.
>>
>> I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
>> Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.
>
> I'm a big fan of Brave's AI, to be honest. When I was looking up the
> fTPM problem I mentioned in a previous post, it saved me a lot of time
> by telling me what people were saying, how to fix it, whether or not
> Linux is affected and so on. Had I been forced to read all that content
> on my own, I'd probably get discouraged. In fact, I might never have
> learned that the Linux kernel actually addresses the problem and allows
> you to circumvent the issue entirely.

I've been using Firefox for so long that I don't think I would want to move
away from it. I can customize so it's very minimal and that's something I
_do_ do on new installs, get Firefox working the way I like it.

My impression of AI is just not very good. It always sounds like an
informercial to me. And it pisses me off that these AI server farms use as
much power as whole cities and not a damn peep (or very muted whining) about
it from the climate screechers — who keep trying to get us (personally) to
use less and less power. I guess the AI server farms are more important than
people.

>>>> My wife uses Power Point. She originally used it because a template she
>>>> purchased only worked with Power Point. Now she's used to using it, so
>>>> she'll probably keep using it as long as she needs to prepare classes. Just
>>>> the way it works. People use what they're used to using. Inertia.
>>>>
>>>> That's why so many still use the inferior Microsoft Windows crap OS.
>>>
>>> I can't argue that habit plays a big part in what people choose to use.
>>> At the same time, that's why I usually load Linux Mint for whatever user
>>> I help: it's not that unfamiliar.
>>
>> Linux Mint is often suggested for those moving from Windows because it does
>> work similarly (at least at the Desktop level). I'm sure that design is not
>> by accident.
>
> I chose Fedora this time around because www.asus-linux.org offers a
> comprehensive guide for the distribution to make sure that everything
> you want works as it should on your hardware. I chose the KDE flavour
> and it more or less behaves like a snappier Windows.

I could use Fedora (especially with the Cinnamon spin) without much trouble.
Synaptic is better than Fedora's install application and Linux Mint has nice
little utilities built-in, but (for when it matters) you're trading "cutting
edge" for a little more convenience. (A trade I don't mind making.) In
Linux Mint, if I install EasyEffects (for example), I'll have to use FlatPak
instead of the repository (at least in version 21). So there's pros and
cons.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-24 04:44, RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:30, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit :
>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 05:25:09 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2024-12-21, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap) and Microsoft's has leverage
>>>>>>>>> with the computer manufacturers. Monopolies have a lot of inertia
>>>>>>>>> that's hard to overcome. But you'll note that, for development
>>>>>>>>> purposes, Microsoft is now including Linux in Windows. There's a
>>>>>>>>> reason for that. And, as software moves to the "rental" phase and more
>>>>>>>>> and more of the applications move to the "Cloud", there will be less
>>>>>>>>> and less necessity to use Windows.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No purchasing manager was ever fired for specifying Microsoft.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leaving out the cloud I have to agree. Microsoft and the availability of
>>>>>> Microsoft Certified Whatevers makes pointy headed bosses sleep better at
>>>>>> night.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the same argument as the one that was made as to why IBM won over
>>>>> superior platforms in the 1980s. At the very least, anyone who suggests
>>>>> Microsoft can't be reprimanded because the boss knows that they will be
>>>>> able to find a ton of people who can use the well-known software as well
>>>>> as a ton of techs who can troubleshoot it. Even if they can't afford
>>>>> that staff, there is lots of help online for most problems if they
>>>>> search for it. That doesn't mean that the operating system is
>>>>> necessarily better; it simply means that businesses take a lot less risk
>>>>> in choosing one over the other.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've always mentioned that I believe that in fields like education and
>>>>> finance, everyone would be better off using open-source though. For
>>>>> finance, you need a robust kernel and a filesystem which resists bit-rot
>>>>> to keep those records. There shouldn't be a need to back up data daily
>>>>> for fear that your records will corrupt (even though it is still clearly
>>>>> smart to do so). Similarly, in education, if the public system desires
>>>>> removing all financial barriers to learning, doesn't it make sense to
>>>>> run an operating system which can be deployed to even the most
>>>>> affordable hardware at no performance penalty and prioritize the use of
>>>>> software which can be downloaded at no charge? I've actually asked this
>>>>> many times in the past and the answer has always been that maintaining
>>>>> the Linux servers is more costly and time-consuming to the technicians.
>>>>> I imagine that it is because the slightest change in configuration
>>>>> causes chaos across the board.
>>>>
>>>> First off, what happened to all those people who kept suggesting IBM was a
>>>> "no brainer" when it sank?
>>>
>>> By the time IBM sank, all of the standards they have introduced except
>>> for PS/2 (for mice and keyboards) had already been abandoned.
>>> Third-parties were already making better PCs than IBM was so suggesting
>>> that company was no longer necessary. However, even if people chose to
>>> suggest IBM anyway, they would have gotten ThinkPads which were
>>> spectacular computers. Only the IBM hard disks became notoriously awful
>>> by the end.
>>
>> I just brought up IBM because they used to say the same thing about them.
>> "You can't go wrong suggesting IBM."
>>
>>>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop? Windows
>>>> might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most corporations run
>>>> SQL under Linux servers for their important records. You've heard of Oracle,
>>>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>>>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>>>
>>> I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ubiquitous Linux is. Clearly, it
>>> has made inroads in areas where failure is not an option. I'm not
>>> against using it again, especially if sticking to Windows introduces new
>>> issues like the fTPM stuttering I mentioned before (I don't think Linux
>>> necessarily resolves this issue as much as offers ways to circumvent it
>>> which are not available to Windows users).
>>
>> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
>> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders and
>> say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is hard to
>> use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case for me. Never
>> has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my main OS). There
>> were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is partly why I didn't
>> stick with it until about 2007.)
>
> I'll be honest: Linux is easier to set up on hardware than Windows. In
> fact, even hardware encryption is easier to set up on Linux than it is
> on Windows. I just wish I hadn't already gone through the process with
> Microsoft's OS because I'm at a loss as to how to "take ownership" of my
> nvme to complete the encryption process in Linux. Despite the fact that
> the nvme's PSID was reverted and the drive was erased securely, it still
> seems to have a tie to Windows. No matter.

I stay away from encryption, so can't be any help here.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-27 21:41, RonB wrote:
> On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-24 04:39, RonB wrote:
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>>>> Well, I can tell you that there are certain advanced features people
>>>> need in Microsoft Office which seem to be unavailable to LibreOffice
>>>> users. Of course, they might just be somewhere else in the open suite,
>>>> like when I received a document with forms in .DOCX and had someone here
>>>> convert it to the equivalent in .ODT. At the same time, I don't use any
>>>> of the advanced features so LibreOffice has always been more than enough
>>>> for me. The only reason I use Microsoft's suite is because I got a
>>>> license for cheap. I can also use the 365 license I get from work for
>>>> free. Since I routinely receive documents from them to fill out, I have
>>>> no proper use for Libre.
>>>
>>> I guess I've never had any use for these advanced features. All I know is
>>> that, when we would get Word Documents at the print shop, we had a heck of a
>>> time cleaning them up for Desk Top Application. Lot of hidden code.
>>
>> I believe that is part of the reason why legal offices still prefer
>> WordPerfect Office over Microsoft's software.
>
> I think WordPerfect also has special templates for lawyers. And, I'm
> guessing, it's inertia thing again. WordPerfect got popular for lawyers, so
> they keep using it.

That's probably true. I never got too far into using it because the
"legal" license I bought on eBay turned out not to be legal. One update
later and poof, no more functionality.

>>>>> In my opinion M$ Office is bloated crapware that tries to "think" for you.
>>>>> But I was only occasionally forced to use it so I never got in stuck in the
>>>>> "inertia loop."
>>>>
>>>> I would extend that to Windows itself too. The way it has implemented AI
>>>> makes it clear that they don't want you thinking. Of course, there are
>>>> certain places where I appreciate the AI like in Brave Search or Bing
>>>> Search. There, if there is a certain technological question like what is
>>>> the benefit of one monitor over another, the engine quickly scours the
>>>> web for information and summarizes the data for me. That is much easier
>>>> than navigating to a bunch of websites which cannon a series of ads at me.
>>>
>>> I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
>>> Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.
>>
>> I'm a big fan of Brave's AI, to be honest. When I was looking up the
>> fTPM problem I mentioned in a previous post, it saved me a lot of time
>> by telling me what people were saying, how to fix it, whether or not
>> Linux is affected and so on. Had I been forced to read all that content
>> on my own, I'd probably get discouraged. In fact, I might never have
>> learned that the Linux kernel actually addresses the problem and allows
>> you to circumvent the issue entirely.
>
> I've been using Firefox for so long that I don't think I would want to move
> away from it. I can customize so it's very minimal and that's something I
> _do_ do on new installs, get Firefox working the way I like it.
>
> My impression of AI is just not very good. It always sounds like an
> informercial to me. And it pisses me off that these AI server farms use as
> much power as whole cities and not a damn peep (or very muted whining) about
> it from the climate screechers — who keep trying to get us (personally) to
> use less and less power. I guess the AI server farms are more important than
> people.

I swore not to use Firefox but it looks like it's the best browser on
Linux if you don't want your dGPU to be used needlessly, and if you want
gestures to work as they should. Using Firefox, I can flick two fingers
back and forth to go to the previous web page or the next one, but it
doesn't work anywhere else. If I use Brave, it ignores the fact that I
don't want hardware acceleration too whereas Firefox respects my wishes.

>>>>> My wife uses Power Point. She originally used it because a template she
>>>>> purchased only worked with Power Point. Now she's used to using it, so
>>>>> she'll probably keep using it as long as she needs to prepare classes. Just
>>>>> the way it works. People use what they're used to using. Inertia.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's why so many still use the inferior Microsoft Windows crap OS.
>>>>
>>>> I can't argue that habit plays a big part in what people choose to use.
>>>> At the same time, that's why I usually load Linux Mint for whatever user
>>>> I help: it's not that unfamiliar.
>>>
>>> Linux Mint is often suggested for those moving from Windows because it does
>>> work similarly (at least at the Desktop level). I'm sure that design is not
>>> by accident.
>>
>> I chose Fedora this time around because www.asus-linux.org offers a
>> comprehensive guide for the distribution to make sure that everything
>> you want works as it should on your hardware. I chose the KDE flavour
>> and it more or less behaves like a snappier Windows.
>
> I could use Fedora (especially with the Cinnamon spin) without much trouble.
> Synaptic is better than Fedora's install application and Linux Mint has nice
> little utilities built-in, but (for when it matters) you're trading "cutting
> edge" for a little more convenience. (A trade I don't mind making.) In
> Linux Mint, if I install EasyEffects (for example), I'll have to use FlatPak
> instead of the repository (at least in version 21). So there's pros and
> cons.

You have the same kind of choice in Fedora as it relates to Flatpaks and
the rest. It's actually kind of annoying when you're looking for
applications because you're never sure which version will integrate best
with the rest of your system.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-27 21:42, RonB wrote:
> On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-24 04:44, RonB wrote:
>>> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:30, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit :
>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 05:25:09 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-21, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap) and Microsoft's has leverage
>>>>>>>>>> with the computer manufacturers. Monopolies have a lot of inertia
>>>>>>>>>> that's hard to overcome. But you'll note that, for development
>>>>>>>>>> purposes, Microsoft is now including Linux in Windows. There's a
>>>>>>>>>> reason for that. And, as software moves to the "rental" phase and more
>>>>>>>>>> and more of the applications move to the "Cloud", there will be less
>>>>>>>>>> and less necessity to use Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No purchasing manager was ever fired for specifying Microsoft.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Leaving out the cloud I have to agree. Microsoft and the availability of
>>>>>>> Microsoft Certified Whatevers makes pointy headed bosses sleep better at
>>>>>>> night.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the same argument as the one that was made as to why IBM won over
>>>>>> superior platforms in the 1980s. At the very least, anyone who suggests
>>>>>> Microsoft can't be reprimanded because the boss knows that they will be
>>>>>> able to find a ton of people who can use the well-known software as well
>>>>>> as a ton of techs who can troubleshoot it. Even if they can't afford
>>>>>> that staff, there is lots of help online for most problems if they
>>>>>> search for it. That doesn't mean that the operating system is
>>>>>> necessarily better; it simply means that businesses take a lot less risk
>>>>>> in choosing one over the other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've always mentioned that I believe that in fields like education and
>>>>>> finance, everyone would be better off using open-source though. For
>>>>>> finance, you need a robust kernel and a filesystem which resists bit-rot
>>>>>> to keep those records. There shouldn't be a need to back up data daily
>>>>>> for fear that your records will corrupt (even though it is still clearly
>>>>>> smart to do so). Similarly, in education, if the public system desires
>>>>>> removing all financial barriers to learning, doesn't it make sense to
>>>>>> run an operating system which can be deployed to even the most
>>>>>> affordable hardware at no performance penalty and prioritize the use of
>>>>>> software which can be downloaded at no charge? I've actually asked this
>>>>>> many times in the past and the answer has always been that maintaining
>>>>>> the Linux servers is more costly and time-consuming to the technicians.
>>>>>> I imagine that it is because the slightest change in configuration
>>>>>> causes chaos across the board.
>>>>>
>>>>> First off, what happened to all those people who kept suggesting IBM was a
>>>>> "no brainer" when it sank?
>>>>
>>>> By the time IBM sank, all of the standards they have introduced except
>>>> for PS/2 (for mice and keyboards) had already been abandoned.
>>>> Third-parties were already making better PCs than IBM was so suggesting
>>>> that company was no longer necessary. However, even if people chose to
>>>> suggest IBM anyway, they would have gotten ThinkPads which were
>>>> spectacular computers. Only the IBM hard disks became notoriously awful
>>>> by the end.
>>>
>>> I just brought up IBM because they used to say the same thing about them.
>>> "You can't go wrong suggesting IBM."
>>>
>>>>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop? Windows
>>>>> might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most corporations run
>>>>> SQL under Linux servers for their important records. You've heard of Oracle,
>>>>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>>>>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>>>>
>>>> I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ubiquitous Linux is. Clearly, it
>>>> has made inroads in areas where failure is not an option. I'm not
>>>> against using it again, especially if sticking to Windows introduces new
>>>> issues like the fTPM stuttering I mentioned before (I don't think Linux
>>>> necessarily resolves this issue as much as offers ways to circumvent it
>>>> which are not available to Windows users).
>>>
>>> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
>>> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders and
>>> say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is hard to
>>> use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case for me. Never
>>> has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my main OS). There
>>> were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is partly why I didn't
>>> stick with it until about 2007.)
>>
>> I'll be honest: Linux is easier to set up on hardware than Windows. In
>> fact, even hardware encryption is easier to set up on Linux than it is
>> on Windows. I just wish I hadn't already gone through the process with
>> Microsoft's OS because I'm at a loss as to how to "take ownership" of my
>> nvme to complete the encryption process in Linux. Despite the fact that
>> the nvme's PSID was reverted and the drive was erased securely, it still
>> seems to have a tie to Windows. No matter.
>
> I stay away from encryption, so can't be any help here.

Well, I'll be honest: the encryption almost caused me to lose access to
my computer entirely. You see, if your drive is hardware encrypted and
you suddenly decide to install Linux, you'll be able to delete the drive
but not install on it. I was lucky that I still had my Windows 2 Go
portable HD and could use Samsung Magician through it to revert the PSID
and do a secure erase. However, had I not had it, this storage and
computer would have suddenly become useless. It's a lot more trouble
than it is worth.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-28, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-27 21:41, RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>> On 2024-12-24 04:39, RonB wrote:
>>>
>>> < snip >
>>>
>>>>> Well, I can tell you that there are certain advanced features people
>>>>> need in Microsoft Office which seem to be unavailable to LibreOffice
>>>>> users. Of course, they might just be somewhere else in the open suite,
>>>>> like when I received a document with forms in .DOCX and had someone here
>>>>> convert it to the equivalent in .ODT. At the same time, I don't use any
>>>>> of the advanced features so LibreOffice has always been more than enough
>>>>> for me. The only reason I use Microsoft's suite is because I got a
>>>>> license for cheap. I can also use the 365 license I get from work for
>>>>> free. Since I routinely receive documents from them to fill out, I have
>>>>> no proper use for Libre.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I've never had any use for these advanced features. All I know is
>>>> that, when we would get Word Documents at the print shop, we had a heck of a
>>>> time cleaning them up for Desk Top Application. Lot of hidden code.
>>>
>>> I believe that is part of the reason why legal offices still prefer
>>> WordPerfect Office over Microsoft's software.
>>
>> I think WordPerfect also has special templates for lawyers. And, I'm
>> guessing, it's inertia thing again. WordPerfect got popular for lawyers, so
>> they keep using it.
>
> That's probably true. I never got too far into using it because the
> "legal" license I bought on eBay turned out not to be legal. One update
> later and poof, no more functionality.

Sorry to hear that. I, personally, never was a big WordPerfect fan. My
"favorite" Windows word processor was WordPro, but usually used WordStar 7
for DOS. (Still do in DOBox-X.)

>>>>>> In my opinion M$ Office is bloated crapware that tries to "think" for you.
>>>>>> But I was only occasionally forced to use it so I never got in stuck in the
>>>>>> "inertia loop."
>>>>>
>>>>> I would extend that to Windows itself too. The way it has implemented AI
>>>>> makes it clear that they don't want you thinking. Of course, there are
>>>>> certain places where I appreciate the AI like in Brave Search or Bing
>>>>> Search. There, if there is a certain technological question like what is
>>>>> the benefit of one monitor over another, the engine quickly scours the
>>>>> web for information and summarizes the data for me. That is much easier
>>>>> than navigating to a bunch of websites which cannon a series of ads at me.
>>>>
>>>> I turn off AI in my searches. I don't know about Brave or Bing, but in
>>>> Firefox you just add the udm14 add-on and AI results are gone in Google.
>>>
>>> I'm a big fan of Brave's AI, to be honest. When I was looking up the
>>> fTPM problem I mentioned in a previous post, it saved me a lot of time
>>> by telling me what people were saying, how to fix it, whether or not
>>> Linux is affected and so on. Had I been forced to read all that content
>>> on my own, I'd probably get discouraged. In fact, I might never have
>>> learned that the Linux kernel actually addresses the problem and allows
>>> you to circumvent the issue entirely.
>>
>> I've been using Firefox for so long that I don't think I would want to move
>> away from it. I can customize so it's very minimal and that's something I
>> _do_ do on new installs, get Firefox working the way I like it.
>>
>> My impression of AI is just not very good. It always sounds like an
>> informercial to me. And it pisses me off that these AI server farms use as
>> much power as whole cities and not a damn peep (or very muted whining) about
>> it from the climate screechers — who keep trying to get us (personally) to
>> use less and less power. I guess the AI server farms are more important than
>> people.
>
> I swore not to use Firefox but it looks like it's the best browser on
> Linux if you don't want your dGPU to be used needlessly, and if you want
> gestures to work as they should. Using Firefox, I can flick two fingers
> back and forth to go to the previous web page or the next one, but it
> doesn't work anywhere else. If I use Brave, it ignores the fact that I
> don't want hardware acceleration too whereas Firefox respects my wishes.

My brother is the same way about firefox. I've tried Brave and several
others, but I guess I'm a creature of habit. I don't do any of the fancy
gestures, however. And uBlock Origin (the full version) works well in
Firefox.

>>>>>> My wife uses Power Point. She originally used it because a template she
>>>>>> purchased only worked with Power Point. Now she's used to using it, so
>>>>>> she'll probably keep using it as long as she needs to prepare classes. Just
>>>>>> the way it works. People use what they're used to using. Inertia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's why so many still use the inferior Microsoft Windows crap OS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't argue that habit plays a big part in what people choose to use.
>>>>> At the same time, that's why I usually load Linux Mint for whatever user
>>>>> I help: it's not that unfamiliar.
>>>>
>>>> Linux Mint is often suggested for those moving from Windows because it does
>>>> work similarly (at least at the Desktop level). I'm sure that design is not
>>>> by accident.
>>>
>>> I chose Fedora this time around because www.asus-linux.org offers a
>>> comprehensive guide for the distribution to make sure that everything
>>> you want works as it should on your hardware. I chose the KDE flavour
>>> and it more or less behaves like a snappier Windows.
>>
>> I could use Fedora (especially with the Cinnamon spin) without much trouble.
>> Synaptic is better than Fedora's install application and Linux Mint has nice
>> little utilities built-in, but (for when it matters) you're trading "cutting
>> edge" for a little more convenience. (A trade I don't mind making.) In
>> Linux Mint, if I install EasyEffects (for example), I'll have to use FlatPak
>> instead of the repository (at least in version 21). So there's pros and
>> cons.
>
> You have the same kind of choice in Fedora as it relates to Flatpaks and
> the rest. It's actually kind of annoying when you're looking for
> applications because you're never sure which version will integrate best
> with the rest of your system.

I'm figuring out FlatPaks. Basically all the configuration files are in
/.var (in your home directory) and /var in the root directory. I still try
to find the application in the repository first.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-28, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-27 21:42, RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-12-27, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>> On 2024-12-24 04:44, RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2024-12-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-23 à 01:30, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-22 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 05:25:09 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-21, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The reason they use Windows is because it runs Microsoft Office (and
>>>>>>>>>>> businesses are "married" to this crap) and Microsoft's has leverage
>>>>>>>>>>> with the computer manufacturers. Monopolies have a lot of inertia
>>>>>>>>>>> that's hard to overcome. But you'll note that, for development
>>>>>>>>>>> purposes, Microsoft is now including Linux in Windows. There's a
>>>>>>>>>>> reason for that. And, as software moves to the "rental" phase and more
>>>>>>>>>>> and more of the applications move to the "Cloud", there will be less
>>>>>>>>>>> and less necessity to use Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No purchasing manager was ever fired for specifying Microsoft.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Leaving out the cloud I have to agree. Microsoft and the availability of
>>>>>>>> Microsoft Certified Whatevers makes pointy headed bosses sleep better at
>>>>>>>> night.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's the same argument as the one that was made as to why IBM won over
>>>>>>> superior platforms in the 1980s. At the very least, anyone who suggests
>>>>>>> Microsoft can't be reprimanded because the boss knows that they will be
>>>>>>> able to find a ton of people who can use the well-known software as well
>>>>>>> as a ton of techs who can troubleshoot it. Even if they can't afford
>>>>>>> that staff, there is lots of help online for most problems if they
>>>>>>> search for it. That doesn't mean that the operating system is
>>>>>>> necessarily better; it simply means that businesses take a lot less risk
>>>>>>> in choosing one over the other.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've always mentioned that I believe that in fields like education and
>>>>>>> finance, everyone would be better off using open-source though. For
>>>>>>> finance, you need a robust kernel and a filesystem which resists bit-rot
>>>>>>> to keep those records. There shouldn't be a need to back up data daily
>>>>>>> for fear that your records will corrupt (even though it is still clearly
>>>>>>> smart to do so). Similarly, in education, if the public system desires
>>>>>>> removing all financial barriers to learning, doesn't it make sense to
>>>>>>> run an operating system which can be deployed to even the most
>>>>>>> affordable hardware at no performance penalty and prioritize the use of
>>>>>>> software which can be downloaded at no charge? I've actually asked this
>>>>>>> many times in the past and the answer has always been that maintaining
>>>>>>> the Linux servers is more costly and time-consuming to the technicians.
>>>>>>> I imagine that it is because the slightest change in configuration
>>>>>>> causes chaos across the board.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First off, what happened to all those people who kept suggesting IBM was a
>>>>>> "no brainer" when it sank?
>>>>>
>>>>> By the time IBM sank, all of the standards they have introduced except
>>>>> for PS/2 (for mice and keyboards) had already been abandoned.
>>>>> Third-parties were already making better PCs than IBM was so suggesting
>>>>> that company was no longer necessary. However, even if people chose to
>>>>> suggest IBM anyway, they would have gotten ThinkPads which were
>>>>> spectacular computers. Only the IBM hard disks became notoriously awful
>>>>> by the end.
>>>>
>>>> I just brought up IBM because they used to say the same thing about them.
>>>> "You can't go wrong suggesting IBM."
>>>>
>>>>>> Second, do you really think important databases run on MicroSlop? Windows
>>>>>> might be the front-end, but I'm willing to bet that most corporations run
>>>>>> SQL under Linux servers for their important records. You've heard of Oracle,
>>>>>> right? (Not endorsing them, but they're the world's largest database
>>>>>> company, I believe. They have their own "flavor" of Red Hat.)
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ubiquitous Linux is. Clearly, it
>>>>> has made inroads in areas where failure is not an option. I'm not
>>>>> against using it again, especially if sticking to Windows introduces new
>>>>> issues like the fTPM stuttering I mentioned before (I don't think Linux
>>>>> necessarily resolves this issue as much as offers ways to circumvent it
>>>>> which are not available to Windows users).
>>>>
>>>> I'm getting to the point where I'm not so much a Linux advocate. When
>>>> someone says they like Windows better, I just kind of shrug my shoulders and
>>>> say, "Okay." The only that bothers me is when I'm told that Linux is hard to
>>>> use, or requires constant tweaking. That's simply not the case for me. Never
>>>> has been (at least from 2007 when I started using it as my main OS). There
>>>> were challenges in the 90s and early 2000s. (Which is partly why I didn't
>>>> stick with it until about 2007.)
>>>
>>> I'll be honest: Linux is easier to set up on hardware than Windows. In
>>> fact, even hardware encryption is easier to set up on Linux than it is
>>> on Windows. I just wish I hadn't already gone through the process with
>>> Microsoft's OS because I'm at a loss as to how to "take ownership" of my
>>> nvme to complete the encryption process in Linux. Despite the fact that
>>> the nvme's PSID was reverted and the drive was erased securely, it still
>>> seems to have a tie to Windows. No matter.
>>
>> I stay away from encryption, so can't be any help here.
>
> Well, I'll be honest: the encryption almost caused me to lose access to
> my computer entirely. You see, if your drive is hardware encrypted and
> you suddenly decide to install Linux, you'll be able to delete the drive
> but not install on it. I was lucky that I still had my Windows 2 Go
> portable HD and could use Samsung Magician through it to revert the PSID
> and do a secure erase. However, had I not had it, this storage and
> computer would have suddenly become useless. It's a lot more trouble
> than it is worth.

That's been my (limited) experience.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-28 02:14, RonB wrote:

>> That's probably true. I never got too far into using it because the
>> "legal" license I bought on eBay turned out not to be legal. One update
>> later and poof, no more functionality.
>
> Sorry to hear that. I, personally, never was a big WordPerfect fan. My
> "favorite" Windows word processor was WordPro, but usually used WordStar 7
> for DOS. (Still do in DOBox-X.)

In the short time I used it, I thought it had the most outdated
interface. However, its dictionary features were superior to Microsoft's
and this is very important if you're writing.

>> I swore not to use Firefox but it looks like it's the best browser on
>> Linux if you don't want your dGPU to be used needlessly, and if you want
>> gestures to work as they should. Using Firefox, I can flick two fingers
>> back and forth to go to the previous web page or the next one, but it
>> doesn't work anywhere else. If I use Brave, it ignores the fact that I
>> don't want hardware acceleration too whereas Firefox respects my wishes.
>
> My brother is the same way about firefox. I've tried Brave and several
> others, but I guess I'm a creature of habit. I don't do any of the fancy
> gestures, however. And uBlock Origin (the full version) works well in
> Firefox.

And it will continue to work in Firefox because it won't be affected by
Google's decisions to stop supporting Manifest v2. People often forget
that the base for most browsers out there is developed by Google and
that they don't benefit in any way from people using an ad-blocker.

>> You have the same kind of choice in Fedora as it relates to Flatpaks and
>> the rest. It's actually kind of annoying when you're looking for
>> applications because you're never sure which version will integrate best
>> with the rest of your system.
>
> I'm figuring out FlatPaks. Basically all the configuration files are in
> /.var (in your home directory) and /var in the root directory. I still try
> to find the application in the repository first.

The repository version is always going to be the fastest, but it is
likely to be outdated in some cases. That's part of why people prefer a
Flatpak which doesn't depend on the distribution developers to update
their package. It also has some additional security though I don't
believe that it is really all that effective.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On 2024-12-28, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-12-28 02:14, RonB wrote:
>
>>> That's probably true. I never got too far into using it because the
>>> "legal" license I bought on eBay turned out not to be legal. One update
>>> later and poof, no more functionality.
>>
>> Sorry to hear that. I, personally, never was a big WordPerfect fan. My
>> "favorite" Windows word processor was WordPro, but usually used WordStar 7
>> for DOS. (Still do in DOBox-X.)
>
> In the short time I used it, I thought it had the most outdated
> interface. However, its dictionary features were superior to Microsoft's
> and this is very important if you're writing.
>
>>> I swore not to use Firefox but it looks like it's the best browser on
>>> Linux if you don't want your dGPU to be used needlessly, and if you want
>>> gestures to work as they should. Using Firefox, I can flick two fingers
>>> back and forth to go to the previous web page or the next one, but it
>>> doesn't work anywhere else. If I use Brave, it ignores the fact that I
>>> don't want hardware acceleration too whereas Firefox respects my wishes.
>>
>> My brother is the same way about firefox. I've tried Brave and several
>> others, but I guess I'm a creature of habit. I don't do any of the fancy
>> gestures, however. And uBlock Origin (the full version) works well in
>> Firefox.
>
> And it will continue to work in Firefox because it won't be affected by
> Google's decisions to stop supporting Manifest v2. People often forget
> that the base for most browsers out there is developed by Google and
> that they don't benefit in any way from people using an ad-blocker.
>
>>> You have the same kind of choice in Fedora as it relates to Flatpaks and
>>> the rest. It's actually kind of annoying when you're looking for
>>> applications because you're never sure which version will integrate best
>>> with the rest of your system.
>>
>> I'm figuring out FlatPaks. Basically all the configuration files are in
>> /.var (in your home directory) and /var in the root directory. I still try
>> to find the application in the repository first.
>
> The repository version is always going to be the fastest, but it is
> likely to be outdated in some cases. That's part of why people prefer a
> Flatpak which doesn't depend on the distribution developers to update
> their package. It also has some additional security though I don't
> believe that it is really all that effective.

I understand. I use some FlatPaks specifically because they are newer.
Usually, though, I'll only use a FlatPak when the application is not
available in the repository.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-29 02:45, RonB wrote:
> On 2024-12-28, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-28 02:14, RonB wrote:
>>
>>>> That's probably true. I never got too far into using it because the
>>>> "legal" license I bought on eBay turned out not to be legal. One update
>>>> later and poof, no more functionality.
>>>
>>> Sorry to hear that. I, personally, never was a big WordPerfect fan. My
>>> "favorite" Windows word processor was WordPro, but usually used WordStar 7
>>> for DOS. (Still do in DOBox-X.)
>>
>> In the short time I used it, I thought it had the most outdated
>> interface. However, its dictionary features were superior to Microsoft's
>> and this is very important if you're writing.
>>
>>>> I swore not to use Firefox but it looks like it's the best browser on
>>>> Linux if you don't want your dGPU to be used needlessly, and if you want
>>>> gestures to work as they should. Using Firefox, I can flick two fingers
>>>> back and forth to go to the previous web page or the next one, but it
>>>> doesn't work anywhere else. If I use Brave, it ignores the fact that I
>>>> don't want hardware acceleration too whereas Firefox respects my wishes.
>>>
>>> My brother is the same way about firefox. I've tried Brave and several
>>> others, but I guess I'm a creature of habit. I don't do any of the fancy
>>> gestures, however. And uBlock Origin (the full version) works well in
>>> Firefox.
>>
>> And it will continue to work in Firefox because it won't be affected by
>> Google's decisions to stop supporting Manifest v2. People often forget
>> that the base for most browsers out there is developed by Google and
>> that they don't benefit in any way from people using an ad-blocker.
>>
>>>> You have the same kind of choice in Fedora as it relates to Flatpaks and
>>>> the rest. It's actually kind of annoying when you're looking for
>>>> applications because you're never sure which version will integrate best
>>>> with the rest of your system.
>>>
>>> I'm figuring out FlatPaks. Basically all the configuration files are in
>>> /.var (in your home directory) and /var in the root directory. I still try
>>> to find the application in the repository first.
>>
>> The repository version is always going to be the fastest, but it is
>> likely to be outdated in some cases. That's part of why people prefer a
>> Flatpak which doesn't depend on the distribution developers to update
>> their package. It also has some additional security though I don't
>> believe that it is really all that effective.
>
> I understand. I use some FlatPaks specifically because they are newer.
> Usually, though, I'll only use a FlatPak when the application is not
> available in the repository.

I just did the same thing, to be honest. There's nothing truly wrong
with Flatpak, but I like the increased performance of the repository
software so I removed whatever I could and put in the equivalent RPMs. I
was prompted to do so when I found out that getting Windows games to
work in Steam on Linux is easier using the native version. Red Dead
Redemption 2 already runs perfectly so I will have to get around to
completing it once I get bored of playing NHL 25 on the console.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 07:45:53 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I understand. I use some FlatPaks specifically because they are newer.
> Usually, though, I'll only use a FlatPak when the application is not
> available in the repository.

All I have for flatpaks are Arduino IDE v2, Brave, Vim and a bunch of
FreeDesktop stuff that I'm not even sure what it does. I have more apps
that are snaps, including Brave. Ubuntu seems more snap happy.

On 12/21/2024 3:43 PM, Lying Larry Piet wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 14:42:38 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>>
>> If it were a serious operating system for serious people, businesses and
>> academic institutions would be willing to run it,
>>
>
> Hey. Hey, mutherfucker.
>
> _I_ am an academic.

How many instances and what subjects have you taught the last 2 years?

> I hold a Masters degree with three papers published
> in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

There's no online record of an academic paper authored or co-authored by
Larry Andrew Piet or Pietraskiewicz, or any combo of those names.

Which means you're very likely a LIAR.

> I am also on the adjunct faculty
> of several community colleges.

Macomb Community College:
Acceptance rate: 100%.
Graduation rate: 16% (within 3 years)

Aim for the stars, princess!

> _I_ also operate a highly successful business.

Your Mom might, but you have jack shit business, liar.

Your lie about being a "consultant to the US Army" was bullshit, too.

> What OS do I use exclusively? "GNU/Linux" is the answer.

You forgot about the 8 hours per day at your Windows job.

> So "Fuck you!" and your imbecilic suppositions.
>
> What do you do? What have you accomplished?

In real life you installed Gentoo 3x in 12 years

Online you bragged about yourself on cola for 8 years straight.

> I asked: "What do you do? What have you accomplished?"
>
> Huh? What?
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> You are a fucking loser

From what I know about the two of you, Slimer is by far the more
well-rounded, accomplished person.

He's not a programmer, but neither are you.

> that has no business commenting
> on GNU/Linux, which is the greatest OS in the history of
> technical man.

That would be Unix. GuhNoo/Linux is just a copycat pretender.