On 2025-01-13 07:40, RonB wrote:
> On 2025-01-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-12 03:38, RonB wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-01-11 04:27, RonB wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-01-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> <https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-to-force-install-new-outlook-on-windows-10-pcs-in-february/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Microsoft will force install the new Outlook email client on Windows 10
>>>>>> systems starting with next month's security update.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The announcement was made in a new message added to the company's
>>>>>> Microsoft 365 Admin Center, tagged MC976059, and it applies to Microsoft
>>>>>> 365 apps users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As Redmond explains, the new Outlook app will be installed on Windows 10
>>>>>> devices for users who deploy the optional January 28 update and force
>>>>>> installed for all who install the February 11 security update.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The new Outlook client will run alongside the classic Outlook app and
>>>>>> will not modify configurations or user defaults. Microsoft added that
>>>>>> there's no way to block it from being installed on Windows 10 devices;
>>>>>> however, those who don't want it can remove it afterward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "New Outlook exists as an installed app on the device. For instance, it
>>>>>> can be found in the Apps section of the Start Menu. It does not replace
>>>>>> existing (classic) Outlook or change any configurations / user defaults.
>>>>>> Both (classic) Outlook and New Outlook for Windows can run side by
>>>>>> side," Microsoft says.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Currently, there isn't a way to block the new Outlook from being
>>>>>> installed - if you prefer not to have new Outlook show up on your
>>>>>> organization's devices, you can remove it after it's installed as part
>>>>>> of the update," the company added in a support document updated on Thursday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> New Outlook user interface
>>>>>> New Outlook user interface (Microsoft)
>>>>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>>>>>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>>>>>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>>>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PowerShell: Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage -AllUsers -Online -PackageName
>>>>>> (Get-AppxPackage Microsoft.OutlookForWindows).PackageFullName
>>>>>>
>>>>>> REG VALUE:
>>>>>> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsUpdate\Orchestrator\UScheduler_Oobe\OutlookUpdate
>>>>>> Next, add a REG_SZ registry setting named BlockedOobeUpdaters with a
>>>>>> value of ["MS_Outlook"]. After removing the Outlook package, Windows
>>>>>> Updates will not reinstall the new Outlook client.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first preview version of the new Outlook for Windows was introduced
>>>>>> in May 2022. The app was generally available for personal accounts in
>>>>>> September 2023 (via the September 26 Windows fall update and the
>>>>>> Microsoft Store on Windows 11) and for commercial customers in August 2024.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if I used Windows I wouldn't use Outlook.
>>>>
>>>> If you use a Microsoft account, the new Outlook is light enough to be
>>>> fun to use. It's a lot less clunky than the older Outlook application
>>>> albeit not as functional. Still, I would rather these people actually
>>>> give me a choice as to whether I have the program on my computer or not.
>>>> I quite like how I can remove anything and everything from a Linux
>>>> installation.
>>>
>>> Light or not light, I have zero interest in Outlook. I never even used it
>>> when I used Windows.
>>>
>>> Speaking of Windows... my son's Windows 10 computer was hosed (probably
>>> because he wouldn't let it update). So we got him an SSD where I was
>>> planning on doing a new install. I thought I was using a Windows 10 USB for
>>> the install, but apparently it was Windows 11 from 2022. At any rate it
>>> installed and updated, but threw an error (can't update).
>>>
>>> TPC 2.0 wasn't turned on in the BIOS, which was required to get it past a
>>> certain point. So I turned that on, still wouldn't update. So I finally
>>> found out I had to use one of the options on Microsoft's download page to
>>> update it. It got to about 76% (or so) and the update stopped because the
>>> NVMe's firmware wasn't updated(?). Really? The damned firmware not being
>>> updated on the (obviously) working SSD and Windows 11 wouldn't update? Is
>>> this the kind of crap everyone is going to run into when trying to update to
>>> Windows 11 from Windows 10?
>>
>> If the firmware were a problem, the computer should not have even
>> allowed the SSD to be detected. Either way, you can use a Linux live
>> environment to either use fwupd or the GUI alternative and update the
>> firmware before trying again. I notice fwupd is much better than
>> Microsoft or ASUS's own tools when it comes to updating secure boot.
>
> I totally agree. And why doesn't Windows check all the requirements BEFORE it
> spends an hour or an hour and a half "installing." How stupid are these
> people? I had no idea TPM was shut in the BIOS. I forgot to mention that,
> since we couldn't fix the issues with Windows 10 on the hard drive, I had to
> buy another license for Windows 11, so now the the same computer has two
> licenses. I just found out that a different son has been using an
> "unactivated" Windows install since he replaced his motherboard. Fortunately
> you can pick up these license keys on eBay for about $5 to $10 (and I don't
> feel bad at all about it). I think it's stupid to have to re-license a
> computer that's already licensed.
>
> Just more reasons to hate hobbyware Windows.

I actually lose the Windows 10 license that was attached to this
computer when they replaced the motherboard, but I don't really care. I
have a 10 Pro license I can use whenever I want if I really insist on
having Windows on the machine. However, I like Fedora, a lot. Everything
but the fingerprint reader works as it should and I can even play my
games (I'm not even using compatibility at this point, I'm focusing on
the ones which have a native Linux edition). I don't have access to a
lot of my movies anymore, but that's fine: I have them on the Xbox
Series S and they're still attached to my account anyway. If Microsoft
one day wakes up and smells the coffee and starts offering them on the
web like everyone else, I'll have access to them on Linux too. It is
just refreshing after three years to know that I _can_ escape the
dreaded stuttering I was having in Windows. Nobody knew what it was and
nobody would admit to it happening, until someone pin-pointed the
problem and forced AMD to admit to it. Meanwhile, it still isn't fixed
on laptops and you are forced to use the machine knowing that
occasionally, the sound, mouse cursor and video will chop for 2-3
seconds at a time. The mere fact that they won't fix a _known_ problem
is evidence that they don't deserve the support.

>>> Anyhow I downloaded and installed the firmware for the WD Blue SSD (when did
>>> San-disk buy Western Digital?) and hit the "Refresh" button on the install
>>> page. Hit it again... and again... and again... Zero response. So I had to
>>> start the install again. Of course it stopped — again — with the SSD
>>> firmware issue. I realized ah, crap, I'll have to restart the computer.
>>> (Crappy Windows) before it will see the firmware update. It took forever
>>> again, but the update finished with only one more restart... and about
>>> another fifteen minutes of waiting. But, *finally* the update was
>>> complete... wait a minute, Windows immediately started downloading the next
>>> update... so I guess the loop goes on and on.
>>>
>>> Windows 11 updates may be better than than Windows 10 ones, but it's still
>>> total crap compared to Linux.
>>
>> Well, possibly. However, whenever I update this Fedora installation, it
>> refuses to restart, I have to force it to shut down and then have to
>> rebuild the NVIDIA driver. It's annoying, but I can live with what is
>> essentially a daily frustration.
>
> I haven't had these kinds of problems with Fedora (or Linux Mint) but I have
> simple machines — as mentioned many times. If Fedora gives you that trouble
> every time you update it, I would only update it every other week or so.
> Maybe every third week.

On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>
>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>
>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>
> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
> nothing.
>
So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?

MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>
>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>
>>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>>
>> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>> nothing.
>>
>So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?

Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.

--
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 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>>>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>>>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>>
>>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>>
>>>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>>>
>>> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>> nothing.
>>>
>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>
>
> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.

There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
for it too, mind you.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative

Joel wrote:
> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>>>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>>>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>>
>>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>>
>>>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>>>
>>> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>> nothing.
>>>
>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>
>
> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>

I agree. Plus it also counts as a religion, so you don't have to waste
time going to church anymore.

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>> nothing.
>>>>
>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>
>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>
>There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>for it too, mind you.

I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
right for me.

--
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 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>
>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>
>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>
>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>> for it too, mind you.
>
>
> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
> right for me.

MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>> for it too, mind you.
>>
>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>> right for me.
>
>MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
>we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
>time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
>how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.

My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view
it already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
dilemma.

--
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.

Joel wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>
>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>>> for it too, mind you.
>>>
>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>> right for me.
>>
>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
>> we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
>> time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
>> how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>
>
> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view
> it already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
> dilemma.
>

Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:48:03 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:

> Joel wrote:
>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on
>>>>> your Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage
>>>>> cmdlet with the PackageName parameter value
>>>>> Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>>>
>>>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>>>
>>>>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>>>>
>>>> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>> nothing.
>>>>
>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>
>>
>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and expensive,
>> Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>
>>
> I agree. Plus it also counts as a religion, so you don't have to waste
> time going to church anymore.

https://www.whycatholic.com/even-in-the-beginning-their-were-heretics/
saint-linus/

On 2025-01-13 18:25, Joel wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>
>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>>> for it too, mind you.
>>>
>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>> right for me.
>>
>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
>> we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
>> time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
>> how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>
>
> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view
> it already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
> dilemma.

I just saw what I wrote. Windows machines get about ten years of
updates, not seven. Macs consistently get the least.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative

On 13/01/2025 23:25, Joel wrote:
> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view
> it already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
> dilemma.

It is an interesting example indeed. Linux gets bloats every two weeks
and some people like it! I don't and so I solved the dilemma by moving
to Windows.

Have a nice day or evening where ever you are.

On 1/12/2025 6:20 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:43:14 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>> Apparently you never noticed the deluge of apps a typical Linux distro
>> forces on you.
>
> Have you noticed this happening on your Linux installs? Please tell us.

Yes. For years I've installed distros by booting a LiveCD/DVD, trying
it for a little while, and if I liked it enough, installing from the
live desktop (setting it up as a dual-boot). It's been a long time
since I recall being offered individual packages or roles to install -
it usually just forced a lot of junk on you.

> Or is this something else you read in The Guardian?

You need to work on your trolling, fella. 'DFS reads the Guardian' is
silly and ineffective.

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:44:54 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
> fairly pleasant experience.

It works the way the platform owner wants it to work. And they have a
particularly slick brainw^H^H^H^H^H^Hmarketing organization to “persuade”
customers to accept that they want it to work that way as well.

On 1/13/25 6:10 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing.  macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>> for it too, mind you.
>>
>>
>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>> right for me.
>
> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
> we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
> time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
> how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.

Fair points ... although it can also be worth mentioning that it
typically takes Linux awhile to get around to supporting the newest
gear, so its more along the lines of instead of support for Year 0
through Year 7, its more akin to support for Year ~3 to Year 15.

-hh

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:

> Joel wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is
>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
>>>>> expensive.
>>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
>>>>> MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is
>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
>>>>
>>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>>> right for me.
>>>
>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>
>>
>> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
>> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
>> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
>> already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
>> dilemma.
>>
>>
> Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.

I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!

https://cultnix.org/

(_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
epistles? ;) )

ObWindows:

Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 -- looks like
one can set up periodic traditional backups in the control panel,
but there's no options in the separate "cloud backup" tool
except Microsoft's thing (Onedrive?).

ObLinux:

I also have to figure out why the virt didn't see any
network shares, which would be the Samba instances on
the local workstation and on my Synology Diskstation...

And BTW, regarding Windows: I'm glad they've kept the
control panel from Windows 7.

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.13.0-rc7 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"The young know the rules, the old know the exceptions."

vallor wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
> wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
>
>> Joel wrote:
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is
>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
>>>>>> expensive.
>>>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
>>>>>> MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is
>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
>>>>>
>>>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>>>> right for me.
>>>>
>>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>>>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>>
>>>
>>> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
>>> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
>>> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
>>> already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
>>> dilemma.
>>>
>>>
>> Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
>
> I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
>
> https://cultnix.org/
>
> (_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
> a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
> epistles? ;) )
>
> ObWindows:
>
> Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --

I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works
perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month,
updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with
everything, even if it's working perfectly. It's just what they do.

I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software,
written by people that are experts and specialize in that. I use
macrium reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and
most have a free version. Backup software is too important to trust
microsoft.

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:09:43 +0000, Manu Raju wrote:

> Linux gets bloats every two weeks
> and some people like it! I don't and so I solved the dilemma by moving
> to Windows.

Windows is the one that needs regular defragging and running of dodgy
hacks like CCleaner etc. Linux does not.

On Wed, 1/15/2025 1:56 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:09:43 +0000, Manu Raju wrote:
>
>> Linux gets bloats every two weeks
>> and some people like it! I don't and so I solved the dilemma by moving
>> to Windows.
>
> Windows is the one that needs regular defragging and running of dodgy
> hacks like CCleaner etc. Linux does not.
>

On an SSD, TRIM is preferred to defrag.

The Windows defragmenter is a pretty clever design now. The
one in WinXP era was written by a third party company, and it
was of the "solid green bar" kind, with all the files pushed
shoulder to shoulder. The one written in-house by Microsoft staff,
doesn't do that. Space is left between files. I haven't seen a
description of how that helps, but normally fragmentation is
not an issue. And I haven't seen reports of fragmentation-related
issues. The defragmenter does "consolidate", there is *some*
pushing together, but it's not the solid green line kind of
effort. This is why the defrag takes ten minutes instead of
eight hours.

Defragmentation of hard drives in Windows is still a thing,
and the Optimizer has this scheduled for once a week or so.
At which time, the fragmentation might be 2%-3% or so. Unless
you have used pathological tools to fragment the file systems
on purpose, they're not usually chopped all that much in a
time frame like that. You could, for example, use the Passmark
Fragmenter, to implement a pathological case.

The way Windows buffers data on writes has changed. And this
could be seen in the Passmark Fragmenter. In an OS like
windows 7, you could see fragments 4096 bytes in size (one cluster).
While the OS writes in cluster quanta, the write buffer was
changed to 64KB, and it won't write one cluster when one cluster
is ready. It waits until there is a larger amount. This caused
the writer on the Fragmenter to make no fragment smaller than
64KB. And you could no longer achieve the same level of "Swiss Cheese"
in the file system, as before. This could partially be due to the
prevalence of SSDs and the need to write in block-sized chunks,
or it could be related to the COW problem. But quietly, a change
was made to writing, and I haven't seen a popular article with
the details.

I don't use CCleaner here. What was the problem again ?
There are people who use Registry Cleaners. Is that clever ?
Not really. The registry files stay relatively small. They're
journaled for integrity, the file system has a journal as well,
making the Registry files quite good at avoiding trouble.
Corruption of the Registry might be more common in the
Win98 era when the power goes off.

Paul

On Tue, 1/14/2025 9:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
> vallor wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> Joel wrote:
>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing.  macOS is weird and
>>>>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is
>>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
>>>>>>> expensive.
>>>>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
>>>>>>> MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is
>>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>>>>> right for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>>>>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
>>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
>>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
>>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
>>>> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
>>>> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
>>>> already began to with 23H2.  Linux is the only way to solve this
>>>> dilemma.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
>>
>> I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
>>
>> https://cultnix.org/
>>
>> (_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
>> a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
>> epistles? ;)   )
>>
>> ObWindows:
>>
>> Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
>
> I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month, updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with everything, even if it's working perfectly. It's just what they do.
>
> I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software, written by people that are experts and specialize in that.  I use macrium reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and most have a free version. Backup software is too important to trust microsoft.
>

On the Windows Backup, the backup seems to work better than the restore.

The Macrium Reflect Free is quite a bit better.

Paul

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:24:00 +0000, 🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈Jen🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈 Dershmender
💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🐶笛🌈💐🌻🌺🌹🌻💐🌷🌺🌈 <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in
<=3D?U=3D?UTF-8?Q?T?=3DF-8?Q?=3DF0=3D9F=3D8C=3DBA?=3DPmqKdu54gmAMf3$@92.78.154.93=3D?U=3D?UTF-8?Q?T?=3DF-8?Q?=3DF0=3D9F=3D8C=3DBA?=3D>:

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:24:00 +0000, JenDershmender
<root@127.0.0.1> wrote

> You might have to enable SMB V1 protocol
>
> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/storage/file-server/
troubleshoot/detect-enable-and-disable-smbv1-v2-v3?tabs=server

Um...no. "Wouldn't be prudent."

The solution was to do the following:

1) Enter the share server name as an IP address, and
2) prefix the backup login user with "WORKGROUP\".

https://community.covecube.com/index.php?/topic/5253-file-share-error-validation-information-class-requested-was-invalid/

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.12.9 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"Always remember no matter where you go, there you are."

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vm755l$2lqjk$1@dont-email.me>:

> vallor wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> Joel wrote:
>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is
>>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
>>>>>>> expensive.
>>>>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
>>>>>>> MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is
>>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>>>>> right for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>>>>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
>>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
>>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
>>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
>>>> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
>>>> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
>>>> already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
>>>> dilemma.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
>>
>> I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
>>
>> https://cultnix.org/
>>
>> (_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
>> a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
>> epistles? ;) )
>>
>> ObWindows:
>>
>> Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
>
> I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works
> perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month,
> updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with
> everything, even if it's working perfectly. It's just what they do.
>
> I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software,
> written by people that are experts and specialize in that. I use
> macrium reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and
> most have a free version. Backup software is too important to trust
> microsoft.

Ordinarily I'd agree with you, but it's just a virtual host for
testing things, and maybe building some Windows software -- anything
of import goes on a network share, so if the virt goes Tango Uniform,
I'll still have the data. Can't really test Windows very well
without using their backup.

I got backups working with an "E:" drive backed by an
iSCSI initiator, then figured out how to set the backups
to use the Samba share provided by a Synology Diskstation.

As I wrote under separate cover: On Windows 11, the
network login for the control-panel-style backups has
to be prefixed with the workgroup name, e.g. "WORKGROUP\username".

Also, h/t to Paul for his post last week(?) about how to remove
BitLocker from a partition...there doesn't seem to be a way to
do it from the GUI, nor would Windows 11 let me set up a
partition without BL.

(In PowerShell, I ran: manage-bde -off E: -- after that, I could
get at the NTFS filesystem in the iSCSI partition in Linux.)

--
-v

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:37:00 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> To remove the new Outlook app package after it's force installed on your
>>>> Windows device, you can use the Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage cmdlet
>>>> with the PackageName parameter value Microsoft.OutlookForWindows.
>>>>
>>>> This can be done by running the following command from a Windows
>>>> PowerShell prompt and adding a new reg value:
>>>>
>>>> [Blah blah hoyvin-glayvin blah blah]
>>>
>>> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>> nothing.
>>>
>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>
>
> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.

macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.

On 2025-01-14 00:10, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing.  macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>> for it too, mind you.
>>
>>
>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>> right for me.
>
> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
> we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
> time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
> how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.

Hum. That is not completely true, either. Some distributions stopped
supporting 32 bit machines.

Each year you need more ram to run the same apps.

Proprietary drivers like NVidia stop publishing drivers for what they
think is old hardware, and the open source version doesn't have the full
feature set.

Modern videos use codecs that can not keep running fast enough on
pathetic machines.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Wed, 1/15/2025 7:51 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-01-14 00:10, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>
> Hum. That is not completely true, either. Some distributions stopped supporting 32 bit machines.
>
> Each year you need more ram to run the same apps.
>
> Proprietary drivers like NVidia stop publishing drivers for what they think is old hardware, and the open source version doesn't have the full feature set.
>
> Modern videos use codecs that can not keep running fast enough on pathetic machines.

As long as the videos are coded in something that VAAPI or NVENC/NVDEC has,
the movie can be decoded for "almost free". For example, Intel Quicksync
has sufficient horsepower, to decode five video streams at the same time,
on the early instances of that hardware block.

Old machines and their older video cards without NVidia driver support, might no
longer have access to the built-in encoder/decoder hardware on the video card,
in which case the fallback software method would be used instead.

Another contributor to "pathetic", is the video decoding process can use a
"scaler" which changes a 720x576 decoded video, to whatever box size the
browser presents at the time (the wrapper frame). Doing a pixmap scaler
in software, used at least 30% of a P4 core. Whereas the hardware scaler
(driver support), could do a scaling operation "for free".

And finally, insisting on compositing as a system-wide way of doing things,
if the video card compositing is not working and the OS has to use fallback
code for that, that could take buckets of horsepower to do.

An old machine really needs the support. It isn't so much "pathetic" as it is
everything working against it. "All the items are leaning the wrong way."

The code path has had IDCT removed, so when an old machine has been
stripped of all its goodness, the code doesn't even use the IDCT
(Inverse Discrete Cosine transform for macroblocks). That is a method of
providing a slight acceleration, when forced to do video decode in software.
The older software used to use that, as it helped a bit with the decoding
process.

Paul