Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Edward Rost » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 01:17:21



Yep, it's true what I said in the subject, and I'm talking about
RedHat 5.2 (with the odd upgrade).

You see, since I no longer have an ethernet connection, I have to go
in to college to download Linux. So at the moment, I'm sitting in
college on a Windows 2000 computer downloading Linux.

I have to say that Linux has spoilt me rotten. Imagine this: you look
at the disk space and there is about 2.2GB free, easily enough for the
two RH7.1 iso images. Or so you would think. So I started the
downloads for the two images. 10 minutes it said it would take total.
Not a bad estimate as it happened.

Well, it downloaded them to disk in about 10 minutes as predicted, but
then it decided to move them from the temporary download space to the
file I had designated. OK, that's not so stupid, until you consider
the way that was done. Well, by moving, what it actually does is to
copy the file and delete the original. Hell not even DOS did that (the
source and destination are on the same partition). The copying process
claimed to take 20 minutes to complete (twice as long as the
download), but since I had only 2.2GB free (easily enough for 2 CDs)
it ran out half way through copying since it didn't have space for 4
CDs on the disk. Well, after the first image burns sucessfully on to
disk, I'll think I'll try with the second one.

As it happens, i've never had quite such shitty treatment from my
RedHat box, and further to that it doesn't take it 10 minutes to copy
a 600 MB file. Oh, yeah and in case i forgot to mention, this computer
I'm on at the moment is a PII 400 128M, and my computer is a lowly
P133, 72M.

To add insult to injury, the new Adaptec EZ-CD seems to have sprouted
some kind of office style assistant. Not only that, it seems to have
turned incredibly patronising. Why in hells name does it feel it
necessary to tell me that creating music CDs is fun. It's not fun,
especially

The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

-Ed

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Jettero Helle » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 01:31:01


LOL. There are definitely many things that go unexplained in the
windows world. For example, say you install Win98 on your C drive and
WinXP/2000 on your D drive. Since the boot files for WinXP/2000 go on
the C drive and the system files go on the D drive in the WINNT
folder, you would think that Microsoft would label those partitions as
such, but they do not. The boot partition is the D drive and the
system  partition is the C drive. Why why why? It's a mystery.



Quote:>Yep, it's true what I said in the subject, and I'm talking about
>RedHat 5.2 (with the odd upgrade).

>You see, since I no longer have an ethernet connection, I have to go
>in to college to download Linux. So at the moment, I'm sitting in
>college on a Windows 2000 computer downloading Linux.

>I have to say that Linux has spoilt me rotten. Imagine this: you look
>at the disk space and there is about 2.2GB free, easily enough for the
>two RH7.1 iso images. Or so you would think. So I started the
>downloads for the two images. 10 minutes it said it would take total.
>Not a bad estimate as it happened.

>Well, it downloaded them to disk in about 10 minutes as predicted, but
>then it decided to move them from the temporary download space to the
>file I had designated. OK, that's not so stupid, until you consider
>the way that was done. Well, by moving, what it actually does is to
>copy the file and delete the original. Hell not even DOS did that (the
>source and destination are on the same partition). The copying process
>claimed to take 20 minutes to complete (twice as long as the
>download), but since I had only 2.2GB free (easily enough for 2 CDs)
>it ran out half way through copying since it didn't have space for 4
>CDs on the disk. Well, after the first image burns sucessfully on to
>disk, I'll think I'll try with the second one.

>As it happens, i've never had quite such shitty treatment from my
>RedHat box, and further to that it doesn't take it 10 minutes to copy
>a 600 MB file. Oh, yeah and in case i forgot to mention, this computer
>I'm on at the moment is a PII 400 128M, and my computer is a lowly
>P133, 72M.

>To add insult to injury, the new Adaptec EZ-CD seems to have sprouted
>some kind of office style assistant. Not only that, it seems to have
>turned incredibly patronising. Why in hells name does it feel it
>necessary to tell me that creating music CDs is fun. It's not fun,
>especially

>The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
>BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

>I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

>-Ed


 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 02:41:18



> Well, it downloaded them to disk in about 10 minutes as predicted, but
> then it decided to move them from the temporary download space to the
> file I had designated. OK, that's not so stupid, until you consider
> the way that was done. Well, by moving, what it actually does is to
> copy the file and delete the original. Hell not even DOS did that (the
> source and destination are on the same partition). The copying process
> claimed to take 20 minutes to complete (twice as long as the
> download), but since I had only 2.2GB free (easily enough for 2 CDs)
> it ran out half way through copying since it didn't have space for 4
> CDs on the disk. Well, after the first image burns sucessfully on to
> disk, I'll think I'll try with the second one.

You could have used FTP and not had that problem.  It's an Internet Explorer
weirdness (something I've never liked either).  If you would have downloaded
them seperately, this also wouldn't have been a problem.

Quote:> As it happens, i've never had quite such shitty treatment from my
> RedHat box, and further to that it doesn't take it 10 minutes to copy
> a 600 MB file. Oh, yeah and in case i forgot to mention, this computer
> I'm on at the moment is a PII 400 128M, and my computer is a lowly
> P133, 72M.

It shouldn't take 10 minutes under Windows either.  Not unless the drives
are set to run in PIO mode rather than DMA.

Quote:> The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
> BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

That settles it.  The drives must not be running on DMA, otherwise you
wouldn't have burned a coaster either.

Quote:> I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

That's awfully vague.  One quirk in one program (with others that are
exactly like linux available to you) and you * about the entire system.
Predictable I suppose.
 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Terry Port » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 08:43:23


On 1 Oct 2001 09:17:21 -0700, Edward Rosten dashed off:

Quote:>Yep, it's true what I said in the subject, and I'm talking about
>RedHat 5.2 (with the odd upgrade).

My Redhat4.2 was totally stable and ran for 3 years without
hickups.

Quote:

>You see, since I no longer have an ethernet connection,

Is that why we haven't heard much from you lately Ed ?

Quote:>The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
>BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

Welcome to Windoze :(

Quote:

>I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

Monopoly ?

Quote:

>-Ed

--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.  
Free Micro Burner http://www.veryComputer.com/~tp/burn.html          
** Registration Number: 103931,  http://www.veryComputer.com/ **
 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Terry Port » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 08:50:42


On Mon, 1 Oct 2001 12:41:18 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch dashed off:


>> Well, it downloaded them to disk in about 10 minutes as predicted, but
>> then it decided to move them from the temporary download space to the
>> file I had designated. OK, that's not so stupid, until you consider
>> the way that was done. Well, by moving, what it actually does is to
>> copy the file and delete the original. Hell not even DOS did that (the
>> source and destination are on the same partition). The copying process
>> claimed to take 20 minutes to complete (twice as long as the
>> download), but since I had only 2.2GB free (easily enough for 2 CDs)
>> it ran out half way through copying since it didn't have space for 4
>> CDs on the disk. Well, after the first image burns sucessfully on to
>> disk, I'll think I'll try with the second one.

>You could have used FTP and not had that problem.

I use Linux everyday and don't have that problem either.

Quote:>  It's an Internet Explorer
>weirdness (something I've never liked either).  If you would have downloaded
>them seperately, this also wouldn't have been a problem.

If he had been able to use Linux he wouldn't have had that problem
either.

Quote:

>> As it happens, i've never had quite such shitty treatment from my
>> RedHat box, and further to that it doesn't take it 10 minutes to copy
>> a 600 MB file. Oh, yeah and in case i forgot to mention, this computer
>> I'm on at the moment is a PII 400 128M, and my computer is a lowly
>> P133, 72M.

>It shouldn't take 10 minutes under Windows either.  Not unless the drives
>are set to run in PIO mode rather than DMA.

>> The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
>> BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

>That settles it.  The drives must not be running on DMA, otherwise you
>wouldn't have burned a coaster either.

>> I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

>That's awfully vague.

It sounded crystal clear to me, Ed wants Linux and not Windows, so
he can get some work done.

Quote:>  One quirk in one program

Hahahah, quirk!

Quote:> (with others that are
>exactly like linux available to you) and you * about the entire system.

He made a coaster, wasted heaps of time trying to use Win2k to do what
his slower less ram Linux box does easily, I'd say he has every right to
*.

Quote:>Predictable I suppose.

And you have every right to apologise about Windows too :)

--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.  
Free Micro Burner http://www.veryComputer.com/~tp/burn.html          
** Registration Number: 103931,  http://www.veryComputer.com/ **

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Chris Ahlstr » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 20:39:41


While stuck in the full lotus position, Edward Rosten chanted this mantra:

Quote:> Well, it downloaded them to disk in about 10 minutes as predicted, but
> then it decided to move them from the temporary download space to the
> file I had designated. OK, that's not so stupid, until you consider
> the way that was done. Well, by moving, what it actually does is to
> copy the file and delete the original. Hell not even DOS did that (the
> source and destination are on the same partition). The copying process
> claimed to take 20 minutes to complete (twice as long as the
> download), but since I had only 2.2GB free (easily enough for 2 CDs)
> it ran out half way through copying since it didn't have space for 4
> CDs on the disk. Well, after the first image burns sucessfully on to
> disk, I'll think I'll try with the second one.

You might want to try the Debian pseudo-image kit http://www.veryComputer.com/

Quote:> As it happens, i've never had quite such shitty treatment from my
> RedHat box, and further to that it doesn't take it 10 minutes to copy
> a 600 MB file. Oh, yeah and in case i forgot to mention, this computer
> I'm on at the moment is a PII 400 128M, and my computer is a lowly
> P133, 72M.

I, too, am spoiled at Linux, and I am becoming a jerk at work, where
I complain loudly from my cubicle:  "I hate Windows (2000).  How
can it be so *ing slow?  Come on, Outlook, respond!  Get that
fricking hourglass off the screen!"

Quote:> To add insult to injury, the new Adaptec EZ-CD seems to have sprouted
> some kind of office style assistant. Not only that, it seems to have
> turned incredibly patronising. Why in hells name does it feel it
> necessary to tell me that creating music CDs is fun. It's not fun,
> especially

> The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
> BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

> I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

I've never used Windows to burn a CD.

Oh, yeah, my laptop's hard-drive went belly up, and I had to stay
home to do some work.  So I said, "Crap, guess I gotta shutdown
Linux and reboot to Win 2000 to do some work."  I had loaded Win
2000 a few months ago, made a couple of accounts, but hadn't
booted it to it since.  (Why bother?)

Thinking of NIMDA, and the fact that I wasn't sure what services
were running, I unplugged the network cable before rebooting.
The boot took forrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrever!  The admin login
prompt came up, but I watched for about two minutes while the
floppy drive was repeatedly accessed.  Finally, I found the
password in my logbook.  Logged in, no problems.  Okay, so I logged
out and logged back in under my normal name.  Up comes a write error
with the caption "ieuinit.exe" or somesuch.  I tried some other work,
and got the same error in "vim.exe" -- how??????

Could a virus have gotten into my system?  How could an installation
which I barely used be so *ed up?

Chris

--
Kick Microsoft off of the Internet!

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Chris Ahlstr » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 20:42:23


While stuck in the full lotus position, Erik Funkenbusch chanted this mantra:

Quote:> That settles it.  The drives must not be running on DMA, otherwise you
> wouldn't have burned a coaster either.

Yeah, Ed, you shoulda known that Windows won't set up that
particular item for you.  

Chris

--
Kick Microsoft off of the Internet!

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Mark Hal » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 22:17:44




>On 1 Oct 2001 09:17:21 -0700, Edward Rosten dashed off:
>>Yep, it's true what I said in the subject, and I'm talking about
>>RedHat 5.2 (with the odd upgrade).

>My Redhat4.2 was totally stable and ran for 3 years without
>hickups.

I find that interesting, Terry.
In an earlier post I just read; where you were playing the obsequious
sycophant by doing the  fan boy thing to someone extolling Linux's
virtues ...
...IIRC, it was a high school student who took the time to write an
essay length Linux love story which detailed all the wonderful things
he had done with Linux at his school. During which, in your reply you
said: ( I can't remember *exactly* but the following is pretty close)

"...I've only been running linux a few years .. so I really can't help
you ...."

What is a few years Terry? 2? 3? 4? 5?

When did Red hat 4.2 come out?

If we go with 'few_years' == 4 does that mean that
you ran 4.2 for 3 years? Sorry, but this math of yours seems just a
tad 'fuzzy'. Why am I not surprised?

Which meant that when you chastised me for running RH 6.2 up until 3
months ago that you were a hypocrite, plain and simple, no?
Yes! But then anyone with even a modicum of sense already realizes
that, don't they?

So, when DID you start using Linux Terry?

I started with RH 5.0 in late 95'.

You're still living in B.S. land, aren't you?

Get some air, and some sense why don't you?

LinTrolls just aren't what they used to be.
Ahem.

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Mark Ber » Wed, 03 Oct 2001 22:47:14


Quote:>I, too, am spoiled at Linux, and I am becoming a jerk at work, where
>I complain loudly from my cubicle:  "I hate Windows (2000).  How
>can it be so *ing slow?  Come on, Outlook, respond!  Get that
>fricking hourglass off the screen!"

Trying to blame windows for bad outlook/outlook express performance is
as absurd as blaming Linux for the POS called Netscape.

I can give you 45 examples of software that runs on Linux that is so
god-awful bad it would make you want to crawl back to Windows.

Most of the problems with slowness (IMHO) are due to bad program
optimizations and bad threading (or no threading .. ie Outlook) in
software.  Unix threads are fairly easy to work with, and usually the
whole reason you use or write software for unix because of
multi-threading or process requirements... Hence, I believe that the
programming pool has a better knowledge of these things and can avoid
some of those problems.

Thats no excuse though for Netscape 4x, LOTS of Gnome software I use,
and even KDE based software can get stuck.

Mac software (again, in my opinion) has been plagued with similar
problems due to the terrible threading implimentation. (though, not
really the case in OSX).

Not trying to start a flame here, but your opinions will be taken much
more serious if you base your 'I hate windows 2000' on terms of
outlooks hourglass.

I use Windows and Linux all day long (Linux server dev from a win2k
workstation) and I have absolutely no problems at all.  Actually, it's
been nothing but a pleasure to work with.  I hope to move over to OSX
shortly though.

Cheers

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Chris Ahlstr » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 00:58:45


While stuck in the full lotus position, Mark Berry chanted this mantra:

Quote:>>I, too, am spoiled at Linux, and I am becoming a jerk at work, where
>>I complain loudly from my cubicle:  "I hate Windows (2000).  How
>>can it be so *ing slow?  Come on, Outlook, respond!  Get that
>>fricking hourglass off the screen!"

> Trying to blame windows for bad outlook/outlook express performance is
> as absurd as blaming Linux for the POS called Netscape.

Actually, I did not enter into the entire litany of problems I have
with Win 2000.  Do you _really_ want me to?  I thought not. <grin>

The Outlook slowness probably derives from the network setup.  Not only
is Outlook slow, but so are file-dialog boxes and NT Explorer.  Rather
than showing you what it has, Windoze makes you wait until it has everything,
I guess.

Quote:> I can give you 45 examples of software that runs on Linux that is so
> god-awful bad it would make you want to crawl back to Windows.

Konqueror and Netscape are pretty slow on Linux, but things are much
worse on this Windoze machine.

The problems on the Windoze machine are universal, and not restricted
to apps.  Even the video on this machine shimmers when CPU usage
goes up.  Shitty kernel-mode video drivers!

Quote:> Not trying to start a flame here, but your opinions will be taken much
> more serious if you base your 'I hate windows 2000' on terms of
> outlooks hourglass.

I have a text-file full of annoyances that I have compiled while
running Win 2000 and MS's "2000" series of products.  It's not just
one hourglass I * about.  It's a nearly constant run of poor
response times to my commands.  Using Linux at home is so much
more pleasant [ignoring some * VM issues in the 2.4.7 kernel,
ahem.]

Quote:> I use Windows and Linux all day long (Linux server dev from a win2k
> workstation) and I have absolutely no problems at all.  Actually, it's
> been nothing but a pleasure to work with.  I hope to move over to OSX
> shortly though.

Again, maybe some of my problems are the fault of the network
infrastructure at spawar.navy.mil.  Maybe it will improve when
NMCI takes over!!!!!!

Chris

--
Kick Microsoft off of the Internet!

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 01:57:29



Quote:> While stuck in the full lotus position, Erik Funkenbusch chanted this
mantra:

> > That settles it.  The drives must not be running on DMA, otherwise you
> > wouldn't have burned a coaster either.

> Yeah, Ed, you shoulda known that Windows won't set up that
> particular item for you.

I haven't seen a single Linux distro that does either.  I've been forced to
use hdparm for every one.
 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by T. Max Devli » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 04:15:31


Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 1 Oct 2001
   [...]

Quote:>> I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

>That's awfully vague.  One quirk in one program (with others that are
>exactly like linux available to you) and you * about the entire system.
>Predictable I suppose.

I think you mis-spelled 'criminal monopolization', Erik.  Doh!

--
T. Max Devlin
  *** The best way to convince another is
          to state your case moderately and
             accurately.   - Benjamin Franklin ***

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by T. Max Devli » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 04:15:32


Said Mark Berry in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 02 Oct 2001 13:47:14

Quote:>>I, too, am spoiled at Linux, and I am becoming a jerk at work, where
>>I complain loudly from my cubicle:  "I hate Windows (2000).  How
>>can it be so *ing slow?  Come on, Outlook, respond!  Get that
>>fricking hourglass off the screen!"

>Trying to blame windows for bad outlook/outlook express performance is
>as absurd as blaming Linux for the POS called Netscape.

Now if only Netscape was entirely proprietary to a single company which
entirely owns Linux, you might have a *ing point, moron.  You
apparently don't understand what "absurd" is, if you think blaming the
producer of both Outlook AND Windows for the pathetic performance of
either is 'absurd'.  But you make a good example of it for others to use
in trying to understand what 'absurd' means.

--
T. Max Devlin
  *** The best way to convince another is
          to state your case moderately and
             accurately.   - Benjamin Franklin ***

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by mjcr » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 04:18:11




>> To add insult to injury, the new Adaptec EZ-CD seems to have sprouted
>> some kind of office style assistant. Not only that, it seems to have
>> turned incredibly patronising. Why in hells name does it feel it
>> necessary to tell me that creating music CDs is fun. It's not fun,
>> especially

>> The *ING *JUST BURNT A *ING COASTER BECAUSE OF A *ING
>> BUFFER UNDERRUN * * * *!!!!!!

>> I hate this shit, why can't they run Linux?

> I've never used Windows to burn a CD.

I have never once made a coaster when trying to burn a CD.  My burner came
with a bundled CD that contains this ever so nifty and cute CD burning
software, that I have never looked at.  I have not even mounted the CD.  I
have used mkisofs and cdrecord, and they have never let me down once.

Too bad that with all the money that goes into research and development
moeny that has been spent for developing Windows based CD burning software
that it can not work as well as these two basic programs of Linux can.

What is most shocking is the lack of a loop block device provided by the
basic Windows installation.  With Linux when I generate an ISO image, I
can mount it through the loop block device and use it as though it were
already on a CD.  This way I can test and verify that the actual CD image
is as I want it without burning it first.

I understand that there is Windows based software that permits you to look
through a CD image, but that is not the same thing.  You can not use
the files on the image file, you can not test software installation from
the image file, and you can not run software stored on the CD image
without mount it via such a device.  After all there is more to CD image
testing than just browsing it.

It is unforgivable and stupid of Microsoft to not provide such a handy and
basic feature as a loop back block device in their standard distributions.
Perhaps someday Windows will be as easy to use as Linux--until then
Windows can never win.

I guess CM was right when he said, "That's right, 95% of computer users
use Windows because they are stupi."

--
I run Linux, no *y RedHat, Debian, Slackware, or Corel, just Linux.
Linux accepted my new hardware without any effort on my part.
Windows took one look at my new hardware and committed suicide.

 
 
 

Linux has spoilt me rotten (rant)

Post by mjcr » Thu, 04 Oct 2001 05:28:55






>> While stuck in the full lotus position, Erik Funkenbusch chanted this
> mantra:

>> > That settles it.  The drives must not be running on DMA, otherwise
>> > you wouldn't have burned a coaster either.

>> Yeah, Ed, you shoulda known that Windows won't set up that particular
>> item for you.

> I haven't seen a single Linux distro that does either.  I've been forced
> to use hdparm for every one.

You need to set the use DMA by default option in the kernel configuration.

--
I run Linux, no *y RedHat, Debian, Slackware, or Corel, just Linux.
Linux accepted my new hardware without any effort on my part.
Windows took one look at my new hardware and committed suicide.

 
 
 

1. How to re-install windows whithout spoiling Linux

Hi Gurus,

I have Windows98 and Caldera installed in my machine. Now my windows got
screewed up because i did a windows update. So i have to re-install
windows. If i re-format my windows partition and re-install windows, will
it over-write my LILO and make my Linux un-usable or still i can use both
like it is now?
Please give me advice about how to go about it?

Thanks

--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/

2. Apache install on Solaris 8 - make errors

3. Rant: Linux Copy and Paste is not "Linux"

4. Adding a new hd and extending an existing volume.

5. I think I'm spoiled, how long should I wait?

6. Madge TokenRing 16/4 - Anyone got it to work?

7. Too many cooks spoil ...

8. icon editor

9. Does one bad address spoil all the rest?

10. Proxy spoils log files...

11. Help: Mach32 on XF 3.2 spoils text screen

12. Spoiled by Visual C++

13. A humorous way of looking at Windows XP + Mudie's Rant + Linux