Windows is !easy, Linux is !hard

Status
Not open for further replies.

shady_inc

Pee into the Wind...
Actually, if you are going to disable all the effects then all u need is 512 MB RAM & Intel 865G/GeForce 4 MX level chipset or similar graphics card with 64 MB RAM
With all effects disabled ubuntu will work on pretty much any piece of trash with even as little as 128 mb RAM and 32 mb onboard gfx..:|
U said u were going to disable effects?
That I said just to highlight my desperation to try out Vista which is impossible for me at the moment..:( .
Hey, how much does it costs for Geforce 6200 these days? Rs 1600 i think, & 1 GB is fine for Vista
Total cost of vista plus the gfx card is >6000 Rs.
Total cost of Ubuntu......;) .Hope you understand.
In that case, he already has 1 GB RAM, all he needs is a Geforce FX 5200 with 128 MB RAM which can be bought 2nd hand today for Rs 1000 or less. This is just an example as I don't know what motherboard he has.
Nah..My good for nothing mobo[intel 845] doesn't even have a AGP slot.[forget PCI-e].I have a spare 7600GS lying around but can't use it due to lack of AGP slot.
 
Last edited:

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
total cost of vista plus the gfx card is >6000 Rs.
Total cost of Ubuntu......;) .Hope you understand.

I was right, for u, time isn't money.:D cos u r ok with all the configuring & what not

nah..My good for nothing mobo[intel 845] doesn't even have a AGP slot.[forget PCI-e].I have a spare 7600GS lying around but can't use it due to lack of AGP slot.

Then why r u blaming Vista for high system requirments if despite of having a card, u r unable to use it. It's not the fault of vista that u can't use it, it your motherboard. Blame that....

Calling a computer with 512 MB RAM & onborad DirectX 9 capable gfx like GMA 950 or ATI xpress 200 or nvidia in 2007 a high system requirment is absolutely rubish.
 
Last edited:

shady_inc

Pee into the Wind...
Then why r u blaming Vista for high system requirments if despite of having a card, u r unable to use it. It's not the fault of vista that u can't use it, it your motherboard. Blame that....
The point is clear....I have onboard gfx.Ubuntu works fine while vista won't even run.Ubuntu wins.Vista loses.Next point please.!!:D
And BTW, the idea of a OS requiring gaming level gfx card to run with all bells and whistles doesn't appeal to me at all.:evil:
 

x3060

A LOTR fan
my bad , i did not read that carefully . . but anyways vista is too costly . you can give it a full skip.and the way Linux is getting flourished ,its going to be too hard for MS.
 
OP
Cyrus_the_virus

Cyrus_the_virus

Unmountable Boot Volume
but gx started it . . :-D

That's what he does best, twist the topic, manipulate the subject and then blame your motherboard for Vista's failure or make the thread into some manipulative Vista black hole which sucks you into irreversible failure :D

Please stick to the topic, especially you @gx
 

shady_inc

Pee into the Wind...
Are we supposed to discuss the system requirements of Windows and Linux is this thread?
Alrite,alrite.!!:D
Someone who has been using windows all his life [a very common scenario in India], will obviously find windows more intuitive than linux.!!
Also, MS always plays smart and makes it OS backward-compatible to make XP-to-Vista switchers feel at home.Smart Guys.!!:cool:
Linux on the other hand, still requires using the terminal commands to get certain tasks done.The very idea of having to 'type' something to get work done doesn't appeal to most casual PC users.So they shy away from linux FORGETTING that there is a GUI for doing all the things that can be done in windows and the commands provide an easier way to get things done.
 
F

FilledVoid

Guest
Yay lots of posts and lots of time. A bad combo to have on a Rant Forum. Anyway here we go!
I guess it's not Linux compatible.
He says he posted his configuration somewhere but I can't find it in any post other than one of his recent ones. Ive looked in Open Source Forum for questions he has on Display issues and nVidia and I couldn't find it.
@exx 2000
If you have read my posts properly, you would know that I have already solved the problems of display and mentioned how complicated graphic driver installation is. I have 17" CRT and XFX7600GT. If you got an easier way to do it, suggest it to me. I need the control panel like the one that comes with windows called NVIDIA Control Panel allowing me change basic settings.
Your queries have been adequately answered in each case. But forgive me when I don't take your word for granted . But I think that a person who has had experience of 100 + installs would know that nvidia-settings would possibly exist. How many months were you searching for a control panel? By any chance did you try to search for -> nvidia control panel linux <- in google? I'm sorry if I sound mean but was the above also a hyperbole.
I didn't call anyone fanboy because of "you stick to windows" but because "linux users are wisest" kind of smug posts.
Regarding me calling all linux users of this forum fanboys, I was speaking in hyperbole since most of the posts are simply like that lately. It could be a reaction to fanboyish posts of windows users or mac users which again might be reaction to fanboying posts of linux users. This vicious cycle has to end somewhere.
You can't end anything while adding fuel to the fire. You posted something and were expecting flames. Not to mention that you address every single Linux user as a Linboy or whatever and then criticize the help that they posted. You're the worst person to end any kind of cycle.
cyrus try slacware all ur bull sh1t ur typing is based on ubuntu give some of the other 10 thousand different useless linux distros out thr a try
ubuntu is not equal to linux ur talking like the frog who thinks his pond is the whole world
I agree with this. Wtf 10000 distros each with different features and stuff. Why can't their be some kind of standardization or something :/ . But why isn't Ubuntu Linux? I'm confused please clarify what you meant.
windows being easy is not a myth it is easier and has been accepted by members and linux being hard aditya has proved our points of linux being stupid for day to day users once again ubuntu is not equal to linux
Windows is definitely easier no doubt here. However saying that Linux s for geeks is absolutely rubbish. Im no geek and I still can run my Ubuntu box with no problem not to mention about 14 PCS all around my town which I haven't been getting calls about yet.
and the linux fan boys are not ready to listen to truth
Windows is paid because it is much easier and easy to understand interface
i still remember the day when i have switched to linux and i have made
several query and after that i was handed over a link which was teaching
me linux is not windows WT*
Which bandwagon did you jump off? You had Windows then installed Linux? If you were satisfied by Windows you should have stuck with it. Is it possible you wanted something like Windows which worked like Windows and gave you the same results you got in Windows ? Then yes, the answer was in the link. If you didn't find it keep on looking it should still be there.
Most of the company's offer windows with new computer because they too know that if they will hand linux to the buyer they will call them regularly asking thousands of questions
I agree that linux is also distributed but it is only distributed to lower the cost of comp
I guess thats why Dell introducing their own customized version of Ubuntu to go on their laptops? Obviously they must be doing this because they hate their tech support. Did you know that Dell has its own forum on ubuntuforums. The reasons why Linux is given is because they can't give you pirated copies of Windows. Would you purchase an original copy?
Now lemme tell you linux is free that is why it is used if it was paid then you must have thrown that os since ages
Yet I wonder how it is that the cheapest Web Hosting solutions work on Linux servers. Have you subscribed for any distro in Linux? No I didn't think so. Are you acting ignorant or are you really that dense?
Regarding the explanation for why office 2007 is better than openoffice- In my last semester I had to do some reports and presentations. I have no experience in word processing or presentations except for making lion come and fart and go away. I spent 1 hour trying open-office org. I was spending more time searching trough boxes and menus. I tried office 2003 and it was the same. I got 3 trial version CDs from MS. Office 2007 was way too easy with learning curve of 5 mins. I got very high marks in my reports (highests in all) and presentations (highest and 2nd highest).
I did every single assignment I had in OOo which amounts to 189 pages it uses ToC's , Styles, Multi-level bulleted lists, the regular bold , italic etc, diagrams etc and I found no problem whatsoever. Please note I don't use Office 2007 but rather Office 2000/ Nor am going to pay that huge amount to get it. Not all of us are that well off. By the way you can customize the menus to keep those "buried items" on front in OOo as you could do in Office (previous versions) at least. I have heard you can't do that in Office 2k7 ? Could anyone confirm? Oh by the way, I have the opportunity to mark a few assignments myself and if anyone thinks that they are going to get an extra mark cause their assignment looked prettier .... Well all I can say is "Good Luck with that".
I actually planned to write my report in notepad. But my technical report writing teacher was visiting faculty from ICFAI business school HYD. She wanted various levels of headings, with various indentations and lots of minute details. Each visual aid had to be labeled.. you get the idea.
As I said above you can use various levels of indentation if in fact the bullets and numbering tool bar has that feature if I recall correctly.

To conclude may I add the following.
The Sacred Fanboy Commandments

1. Thou shall not spread FUD.

Quite obvious. Example. Windows doesn't come packed with Office 2007 or Viruses. Neither does Linux comes with every single repository available on a CD. Neither

2. Thou shall not force thy product on me.

We do not care if you can install all the Gold from Fort Knox on to your computer with a single click. Neither do we care if you come up with Latest Catch Phrase 22 "Yo *Nux is ph4t j01n the b4ndw4g0n noobzors".

3. Thou shall not compare Apples and Oranges.

I shall not start random fight threads cause Windows could do this while Linux does the same this way. Doing so I openly invite any posted to kick me in the vital areas.

4. Thou shall not start random threads which retards normal people.

Example : YAY . I couldn't install Linux you all suck cause I was able to install Vista and it comes in a cool cover too. Another instance would be. HAHAHA I installed Linux I plan on word domination join me or die.

In simple words. No one gives a %$#% what you were able to run or what you were not.
 
OK guys, why not come here for a change and some enlightenment?
*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=76968
lets stop flaming an OS whose name I forgot;)
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
That's what he does best, twist the topic, manipulate the subject and then blame your motherboard for Vista's failure or make the thread into some manipulative Vista black hole which sucks you into irreversible failure :D

Please stick to the topic, especially you @gx
sir as far as the ur topic the 1 u have started namely this 1 in particular has proven to be a stupid FUD ;)
 
OP
Cyrus_the_virus

Cyrus_the_virus

Unmountable Boot Volume
sir as far as the ur topic the 1 u have started namely this 1 in particular has proven to be a stupid FUD ;)

what kind of FUD did this thread start??? What kind of negetive publicity did this thread give to Windows? All your so called FUD's have been posted by Windows users, not anyone else.

The purpose of the thread was to dispel the myth that Linux is hard. Not to create any your so called 'stupid FUD'
 

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
what kind of FUD did this thread start??? What kind of negetive publicity did this thread give to Windows?

This thread tried to show that application setup in Windows is harder then Linux, while in reality they both are equaly usefull.

Linux gives u no option to configure the installation, like path, locking of installation package, choosing which components to install etc, while Windows does.
 

praka123

left this forum longback
^YOU ARE IGNORAT REG, GNU/LINUX :x
all what u showed are available in apt+dpkg and in dpkg,around 10 operations can be achieved with a package before pre-install and post-install and that includes the path(install dir),locking of version of package or the package itself,which components to install(well,this is tough but via dpkg it can be!).
almost same is achievable with rpm+yum too!try to overcome fanboyishness :rolleyes:
Happy?
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
@cyrus: we both know the truth abt this stupid thread of urs and the comments that followed abt which of the 2 is easier to use ;)
 
OP
Cyrus_the_virus

Cyrus_the_virus

Unmountable Boot Volume
@cyrus: we both know the truth abt this stupid thread of urs and the comments that followed abt which of the 2 is easier to use ;)

Dude, if all your parents taught you are the words stupid and bull$hit, you seriously need to go back to school for some manner leasons, if you think this thread was stupid, then you are even more stupider to post anything here.

@imeov, stop trolling and either post something useful or stay away from the thread!:cool:
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
GX is sticking to the point of custom install like superglue!! :D Stop it man. It has been said.. and accepted... how many thousands of times more will you repeat the same thing.

Both the windows loyalists are simply trolling here...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom