Things you hate

[lozz]

There is a privacy option on it to stop all that but,
Failbook isnt safe, kids are hacking it for a laugh,

Im not impressed with it tbh, ive tried convincing my daughter whos 13 not to go on it but she wont listen,
it wouid be ok if they are friends family on the list of contacts but theyre total strangers some of them,

Ive had to Verify my Msn account by Telephone, why carnt they do this with Failbook,

[FarmerPug]

the general need for every detail on you is a bit stupid, every thing you register for there is a plethora of sh*t to fill out. Why when applying for a debit card does it matter how i travel to work, or is my house insured against flooding.

[steve_earwig]

I notice loads of other websites have "like" buttons for Basefook and others have "log in with your FaecesBonk account" and stuff like that, which I've never used so I reckon that's how it gets its tentacles into your life. And possibly the mere fact that you're still logged in to the damn thing means it leaves tracking cookies so it can actually follow what else you use.

Oh, a swift google says that's exactly what it's doing

Best log out of it when you're done, delete all the cookies and never admit to its existent anywhere else on the interweb.

I also don't like the way if you don't continuously look at the damn thing you loose track of what everyone's doing (and I certainly aint trawling back through all the garbage to see what I missed). It's just not designed for anyone with an attention span longer than that of a goldfish...

Not on the mac, but they did on my old dell slowed it down like mad, but google chrome seems to be faster than Internet explorer.

Everything's faster than Internet Explorer, hell even two tin cans and a piece of string outperforms it

I must admit to having zero knowledge of Mac system architecture

What I have noticed is Google Update, unlike everything else, activates itself whenever the hell it feels like. This usually means when I'm watching something on the BBC - suddenly the picture goes all blocky and the sound goes out of synch. Open Task Manager and there's that sodding Google Update using up all the system resources again

However, rather than just uninstall Chrome (G Earth went years ago for similar reasons) and seeing as how I have some spare "sitting" in front of the computer time just now, I've done some looking: If you delete GoogleUpdate.exe it'll put itself straight back (it protects itself just like a virus). Looking in the registry it's all over the damn place but if you just delete the keys it (surprise surprise) just sticks them straight back (just like a rootkit), so I've used Autoruns from System Internals (now unfortunately part of Microsoft Evil Galactic Empire Inc,) to turn off the keys. This does mean ignoring all the "If you do this your Google software won't be kept up to date and you will be vulnerable to any security attacks, Satan will fart in your face and your dick will turn green and fall off" style warnings but for 2 days now I've seen neither hide nor hair of the damn thing

[OdinEidolon]

Just stop moaning and get a proper oprative system, if you know what I mean. And no, I'm not talking about Cupertino nor Redmond.
I hate when people continues moaning about their OS and their programs but just don't bother to try something else.
either:
a- you stop complaining
b- you try a different OS
c- you stick with paper notes and postal mail

[steve_earwig]

ooo-OOO-oh - handbags at 20 paces

I've "done" Linux, the trouble was most of the programs I'm used to using either didn't work or needed paying for...

There's nothing wrong with running Windows but it's rather like running an ageing 406 - you must be prepared to get in there and tinker with it.

[OdinEidolon]

I've "done" Linux, the trouble was most of the programs I'm used to using either didn't work or needed paying for...

There's nothing wrong with running Windows but it's rather like running an ageing 406 - you must be prepared to get in there and tinker with it.

On the contrary, you must be prepared to get in there and tinker with it applies more to Linux than to Window$. It's just a matter of getting used to it.
90% of the people would be fine running a linux machine since they mostly do internet surfing and documents editing.
Ok if you do AutoCad, games or serious photoshop work (for most photoediting Gimp does it as well, word of a friend of mine who is a photograper) you need Microsoft, but for everything else it's just a matter of getting used to it.
By the way Linux's free softare source is huge compared to Windows', hardly any decent program needs paying!

[FarmerPug]

mac is rather expensive but it hasnt pissed me off once in the year (windows can do that in 10 minuites) ive had it a few programs freeze, but the computer shuts them down quickly without any fuss, and updates are done in the backround. not when you go to shut the bloody thing down and have to wait 20 minuites for update 1 of 33 to get to 33 of 33 as it is on the Dell.

[steve_earwig]

You can set windows to tell you about the updates so you can set it to do them when you don't need the machine for anything. That sound like my experience of my sis-in-law's Vista machine - "installing ušdate 1 of 87"..... "Your computer needs to shut down to continue installing updates"...."installing update 2 of 96"..."do not turn off your pc"... It's rebooting - hooray!!!!.... "Installing update 3 of 4,762" ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On the contrary, you must be prepared to get in there and tinker with it applies more to Linux than to Window$.

Your sales technique needs a bit of working on there

I thought that was the whole point of Linux, it's for people that like to tinker. Windows shouldn't need tinkering with but it does because it's amazingly sloppy and it's either that or a clean reinstall now and then to clear the junk that it builds up.

The Linux I tried was Fedora, it was ok until I tried to play an mp3 and it directed me to a download site that was full of software that I'd have had to pay for. It seemed a bit odd for an os that was meant to get me away from paying a fortune to an evil global company. I did read that there was free stuff out there but by this time I'd stuck the HDD I'd installed it on onto one side with the idea of investigating another day. That was about 4 years ago and I still didn't get to it...

[OdinEidolon]

On the contrary, you must be prepared to get in there and tinker with it applies more to Linux than to Window$.

Your sales technique needs a bit of working on there

I thought that was the whole point of Linux, it's for people that like to tinker. Windows shouldn't need tinkering with but it does because it's amazingly sloppy and it's either that or a clean reinstall now and then to clear the junk that it builds up.

The Linux I tried was Fedora, it was ok until I tried to play an mp3 and it directed me to a download site that was full of software that I'd have had to pay for. It seemed a bit odd for an os that was meant to get me away from paying a fortune to an evil global company. I did read that there was free stuff out there but by this time I'd stuck the HDD I'd installed it on onto one side with the idea of investigating another day. That was about 4 years ago and I still didn't get to it...

There's no sale, it's true. It doesn't necessarily need tinkering, really, but it's the beauty of it, customizing it. Having a Linux machine will inevitably lead to you trying to modify it. And most of the time you'll make a mess. Until you get to know enough to avoid disasters - then you have complete power over the system.
So it's the same as getting used to Windows - think of an 80 yr old that has never used a PC - he'll find Linux distros many times more easy to use than Wndows OSs - for example on the softwareinstallation side.
Mp3s, fact is that MP3 license isn't free, and at any time the owner of said license could forbit you to use it or make you pay for it. Fedora, for constitution, does not allow any non-free software in it's main software source, thus MP3s cannot be plaed by default. It's a cohoerent choiche from their point of view. Still, installing the necessary MP3s codecs is a matter of addng the "non-free" repository (the software sorces) and updating the system (3 clicks in total). Now this is automagically done for you upon system installation on many versions of linux (distributions - distros in short) such as the (in)famous Ubuntu and many others, among which I think there's Fedora too. The problem is that Linux gives you the possibility to choose - something that Windows simply won't.

By the way in 4 years Redmond has done near to nothing in making a better OS - if you try Linux today you'll find out how things can change in 4 years. 10 years ago Linux was for geeks only, now it's a completely different story.

[steve_earwig]

Hold on, that reads like I can choose to pay for stuff (because someone owns the license) or I can choose to, erm, move the icons on the desktop around a bit

[OdinEidolon]

Hold on, that reads like I can choose to pay for stuff (because someone owns the license) or I can choose to, erm, move the icons on the desktop around a bit

Omitting the fact that you can customize your desktop in far more extreme ways than you can imagine (much better than using rainmeter under Windows), not only increasing in "coolness" but also, and mainly, in usability. For example now that i'm used to having 4 virtual desktops and being able to navigate through them and moving windows around I feel uncomfortable whenever I need to work on a Microsoft environement, I feel there's not enough room to organize everything cleverly. Omitting the difference in speed and security too, I come to the first sentence. I probably explained myself wrong, due to my lack in english knowdledge!

Microsoft situation: install OS -> install drvers and codecs even though they may be illegal / pay-to-use / private use / possible-future-restrictions
You cannot have any judgement on how and if to install them, since most of them are included in the OS install.

Linux distro situation: upon install many distros ask you if you want to install non-free codecs. You may choose to get some of them, all of them or none. There's no difference in end user result.

So one side is immediately ready but gives you little or no choice, while the other needs a little bit of more tinkering but let you actually control what you do.
I prefer the second situation, many would prefer the first. In my opinion it's badly wrong to let someone choose something in your place, if you can do differently. I like to think with my own mind (EDIT: and that's why I got an old french bad-reputable car instead than a newer, more expensive, boring and common Golf or equivalent).

[steve_earwig]

Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean by non-free - they cost money?

I think I'd rather start off with everything and kill off what I don't need than start off with nothing and gradually work my way up.

I guess the real point is: I'm using Windows because I've been using it for years. I don't like Microsoft very much but my brief experience of anything else is it's not fun, so I'll stick with what I know.

I suppose really, while I can't do much else, I should have another crack at Linux. Any distro you'd care to recommend?

[OdinEidolon]

Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean by non-free - they cost money?

I think I'd rather start off with everything and kill off what I don't need than start off with nothing and gradually work my way up.

I guess the real point is: I'm using Windows because I've been using it for years. I don't like Microsoft very much but my brief experience of anything else is it's not fun, so I'll stick with what I know.

I suppose really, while I can't do much else, I should have another crack at Linux. Any distro you'd care to recommend?

Free as free speech, not as a free beer, even though they could, at some point, become non-free as much as a beer isn't. A free software (as in free speech) will always be.
Raccomandable distros - as you may know there are hundreds of them - you just need to grab an USB pen and try some of them out.
You need to know which desktop environement (what you see on the screen, how windows are, widgets etc.) to choose - there are tens of them, but the most common are Gnome and KDE. Applications are compatible between the two. KDE is the one that's been growing more in the recent years. It is more customizable and powerful and thus a little more resource heavy and difficult to use, the added difficlty comes from the thousands of dfferent customization options, bt you get used to it fairly fast. Gnome is more common since it is used in Debian and Ubuntu as standard. I personally prefer KDE, but it's a matter of tastes.

I use a more expert-oriented distro, Arch Linux, but there are many suited to beginners: Ubuntu (and it's KDE version: Kubuntu), Mint (in both gnome and KDE versions), Fedora (in both gnome and KDE versions), OpenSuse (in both gnome and KDE versions), Pardus (KDE only) etc.
Have a loot at distrowatch.com for a list of most distros, reviews and many informations.

If you feel brave, ArchLinux is pretty complex to install (installation is command-line), but teaches you how to deal with the system much more than any other distro, it also has the biggest and best linux Wiki of all distros (better than the Ubuntu wiki, and Ubuntu is the most common ditribution): https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Main_Page
and a huge help forum: https://bbs.archlinux.org/

[mjb]

My number one hate is Linux.

Preachy fanbois
Idiotic decisions by developers of applications and maintainers of distros making life extremely difficult for people who know what they're doing, because they want to make everything as user-friendly as possible
Idiotic developers thinking they know how to make software user-friendly
Complete and utter lack of anything resembling consistency between distributions, or even between different versions of the same distro
Dependency hell (Gentoo may be exempt from this)
Idiotic developers using non-POSIX linuxisms making their code as non-portable as possible
Ubuntu. Canonical even tried to hire me, and the job ad said fanboyism is more important than technical ability
Constantly changing APIs/ABIs
Preachy fanbois who think they know more about UNIX than anyone because they once read that their linux distro has a terminal emulator somewhere in the menu, and they could potentially use it for "hacking"...
Idiotic kernel developers who don't place "correctness" as a first priority

urgh

[OdinEidolon]

Preachy fanbois

Oh wait, you're talking about that apple thing right? Actually I don't know there but here people who use Linux are mostly friendly. We don't have many computers in schools usually and there are groups (LUGs, Linux user groups) in almost every city collecting old hardware and donating it to schools and associations with lightweight Linux distros installed on it. It's a pretty useful service really.

Idiotic decisions by developers of applications and maintainers of distros making life extremely difficult for people who know what they're doing, because they
want to make everything as user-friendly as possible
Idiotic developers thinking they know how to make software user-friendly

CLI versions exist for almost any application, if you please. I use an expert oriented distro and I don't find anything like that.

Complete and utter lack of anything resembling consistency between distributions, or even between different versions of the same distro

Agreed, still that's the beauty of it. If all the distros had the same startup mechanism, the same repos and the same user interface? That's called Windows and that's why Linux users avoid it, they want to be able to choose between different things.

Dependency hell (Gentoo may be exempt from this)

Then choose Gentoo. I agree dependencies are bad managed on most beginners distros like Ubuntu and Kubuntu. But then those are for beginners who don't care. If you want to control everything build up yourself every program or choose an advanced distro. But actually what about the thousands of Windows dependencies you don't even know are installed? Are you fine as long as you don't know they are there?

Idiotic developers using non-POSIX linuxisms making their code as non-portable as possible

Agreed again, but then that's gettng rarer luckily

Ubuntu. Canonical even tried to hire me, and the job ad said fanboyism is more important than technical ability

Couldn't agree more, i dislike Ubuntu and Canonical is wrong 90% of the time. But I install Kubuntu and Ubuntu to my parents and my gf's parents that are tired of using the other side.

Constantly changing APIs/ABIs

A problem only for developers, not for end users.

Preachy fanbois who think they know more about UNIX than anyone because they once read that their linux distro has a terminal emulator somewhere in the menu, and they could potentially use it for "hacking"...

Or was it the pear?

Idiotic kernel developers who don't place "correctness" as a first priority

Kernel developers do their best imho. They are only a few and those few (between those few) who are paid have a huge work to do. If you think you can do better have a snap at the linux foundation and offer yourself as a developer! That's the spirit.

But then, what OS do you use? I really cant imagine if you are so critic about Linux what you think of M$ and uncle Steve's...