🚀 go-pugleaf

"Ińaki Silanes" <isilanes@bluebottle.com> wrote in message 
news:dmmitj$lmh$1@localhost.localdomain...
> Dan C wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:04:30 +0000, sittingduck wrote:
>>
>>>> Many, many (nearly all) will run either natively, or via Wine/Cedega.
>>
>>> Yeah, let's load an operating system that needs a windows emulator to do
>>> anything beyond basic tasks. Brilliant.
>>
>> It's not a windows emulator, doofus.  You should really try to learn
>> something about what you write, so you don't look so stupid.
>
> What's wrong with people nowadays? From what I read, Sittingduck sounds 
> like
> a youngster fearful of the unknown, and hence defending himself through
> blind attack, and Dan C sounds like a not-so-young "techie" faking being a
> rude kid to wind up his hate for the world. I don't mean it's it, but
> sounds like it.
>
> I am nobody's mother (I'm a 28 years old guy), but...
>
> Dan, what the hell are you trying to do? I mean, I agree that some of
> Sittingduck's views are incorrectly biased against Linux... but your
> attitude doesn't help correct Sittingduck's misconceptions. And you are 
> not
> giving a good image of us Linux users, either (probably, not that you
> care). So, in the name of the Holly Tux, I prompt you to give up :^)
>
> Now, Sittingduck... do not fear. No, I mean it. It's not that I like being
> paternalist (you might be the age of my grandpa, for all I know), but 
> trust
> me: Linux is not so difficult to get a hold of. Linux is not such an alien
> product. It's just different, and, to be honest, _much_ better than MS
> Windows. And you know it, otherwise you wouldn't be fearful.
>
> The "windows emulation" is not needed to do anything serious. It's just
> needed to run some proprietary s/w that the makers didn't find "necessary"
> to port to Linux. The TCP/IP protocol we all use to surf the web was
> developed in a BSD environment, as was SSH. BSD is yet _another_ OS,
> related to UNIX, the "father" of Linux. So, every Windows user is using a
> "borrowed" system to connect to internet servers (which, by the way, run
> Apache in the majority), and also to make secure connections to other
> machines. The really "serious" things are made with Unix and Unix-like 
> s/w,
> don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise.
>
>>>> Almost never will you see a
>>>> Linux user decide to go back to Windows.
>>
>>> Almost always, these same linux users STILL run windows for certain
>>> tasks, and linux for others. (wackjobs like yourself excluded, of 
>>> course)
>
> Dan's point is not a moot one. Day by day more and more Windows users get
> fed up of their crappy OS and move to Linux. I'd be amazed of seeing just
> ONE case of the contrary. This tells you something.
>
> And what it tells you is magnified by the fact that, as you say, many
> applications (Photoshop, AutoCAD) and games are only natively available 
> for
> Windows (remember: it's simply a commercial decision of the makers, 
> nothing
> to do with quality of the OS), so the Windows refugees escape from it
> _even_ if they have to say goodbye to some pieces of s/w.
>
> On the other hand, Linux users don't ever go back to Windows _despite_
> having all these sweet games waiting for them in the "promised MS-land".
>
> Do you imagine ALL s/w being equally available in both plataforms? Linux
> would clean the house hands down! (forgive me if my slang is flaky, 
> English
> is my third language).

This is true.  If all sw was equally available on both platforms, I'd be a 
dedicated Linux user.  I would forget M$ everything.
McG.

>
> -- 
> Ińaki Silanes / Chemistry Faculty UPV-EHU Donostia
> http://www.sc.ehu.es/powgep99/dcytp/teoricos/staff/inaki/inaki.htm
> On Intelligent Design: http://www.venganza.org/