Re: WARNING to potential LINUX users

From: Peter Köhlmann (Peter.Koehlmann_at_t-online.de)
Date: 10/22/04 

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:58:34 +0200

begin Darrell Stec wrote:

> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
< snip >

>> I have not bought a single computer the last 4 years which was not
>> supported by linux completely, except laptops.
>>
>
> How many computers have you bought in the last four years?

5 desktop, 2 laptop

> I usually do
> not change computers every couple of months.

I change my working desktop every year, as I am a developer

> Before this one (bought a
> few weeks ago) my last personal purchase was in March of 97. It is also
> obvious that you don't pay attention to what a poster writes, but rather
> spew forth bucolic invective when one holds an alternate opinion. It is
> also obvious that you never purchased an HP Pavilion a720n computer.
>

Why do you buy such garbage? HP has much better ones

>
>> The only advice anyone should heed is: Completely forget about
>> Win-hardware. These are atrocious under windows itself, and very often
>> are no longer supported in the next release. So, simply refuse to buy
>> win-modems (I have no need for any modem since I use ADSL and ISDN), and
>> don't buy GDI-Printers.
>>
>
> And of course if you had read what I have written, you might have
> discovered that Win-hardware is exactly that with which the Pavilion
> comes bundled and so do quite a few other computers which many on a
> budget may be "forced" to purchase.
>

You are not "forced" to buy such toys, budget or not
You always get similar prices for better hardware when doing a little
shopping

>>
>>>I've been around computers for a very long time. I built my first
>>>computer from scratch from discrete components (read that IC chips,
>>>transistors, diodes, capacitors,etc.). Built my own Centronics printer
>>>interface and wrote a driver for it. I also built my own modem (way
>>>back when state of the art was 300 baud) and wrote comm software. So I
>>>am not adverse to the learning curves that go with something new.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Bravo, bravo. Clapping hands.
>> Just for the record, so did I. You don't impress me with such stories
>> I have done maintenance on Mainframes more than 25 years ago
>>
>
> Should I make the assumption that you are lying when you say you have
> built a computer from scratch with discrete components, in light of the
> fact you are so sure fired to call everyone else a liar?
>

I don't call everyone else a liar. I simply have the distinct impression
that you want to impose the image of you being knowledgeable by telling
such stories, be thy true or not.
And yes, I have built my own small computer, at the start a Z80 with 4KBytes
of memory. And I did maintenance on Honeywell mainframes

> And it wasn't meant to impress but rather to demonstrate that I was not
> new to computers nor adverse to learning something new.
>
>>
>>>However I do understand the outrage that markzoom felt.

"Trolling" is now "feeling outrage"? Interesting definition

>>
>>
>> No, you feign it. What he did was pure and simple trolling, nothing else
>> While his initial post might have had some (very little) merit, from then
>> on it degraded really fast and he showed to be either really clueless and
>> criminally stupid *or* deliberately obstuse and trying anything to make
>> things complicated and wrong
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>
> Is there anyone who posts in these several Linux newsgroups that you do
> not denigrate?

Yes. If you would read those several linux newsgroups, you would notice

> While markzoom may have been acerbic in his denunciation
> of Linux, it seems it was borne out of frustration with his initial
> experience.

Really? If you believe that, you are dumb as a brick

> Yes he could have been less demonstrative in his approach,
> but you (and/or your sock puppet) seem to be the only one to
> misunderstand his motive.
>

I certainly did not have the impression that I was the only one. And you may
explain who should have been my "sock puppet", since I have no need of such

>>
>>>Installing SuSE was FULL of unpleasant surprises even though I read both
>>>manuals cover to cover. On my first go-round I decided to custom select
>>>my own partitions (as I did formerly with the Caldera eDesktop on the
>>>old computer) but decided to change my mind at the last moment as the
>>>manual said I could do and opted instead for the recommended partitions.
>>> The very first thing I noticed was that there was NO SOUND even though
>>>the sound events were turned on and the mixer showed volume was maximum
>>>on everything. That was no biggie as it took a while to find the
>>>correct sound modules through trial and error for the Sound Blaster on
>>>the old comp.
>>
>>
>> You are lying. Soundblaster is recognized and will be installed with
>> right modules. I simply don't believe you when you say a standard old
>> soundblaster is not recognized
>>
>
> Your misbelief originates from your hasty perusal of newsgroups
> articles. Had that been slower or your comprehension a tad better, you
> would have noted that the Sound Blaster (Creative Labs 16 PNP) card was
> installed in the OLD computer and not the HP Pavilion which lacked ISA
> slots,

Here your own words:

/quote
That was no biggie as it took a while to find the correct sound modules
through trial and error for the Sound Blaster on the old comp.
/unquote

Do you deny that you claim to have to "do trial and error" for the
soundblaster? For a card which is recognized by *every* linux distro out
there?
And *you* wonder why I call you a liar? Since this is exactly what you are

>>
> and further more that the sound in the Pavilion was generated by
> the onboard a97c VIA chip set, and NOT a separate sound card. Please do
> try to pay a little more attention, or quit reading others' posts which
> you seem to find too contrary.
>

To that "problematic" via chip a have later added my comments.
It still runs just fine, btw

>>
>>>My second surprise was that when I rebooted to WinXP it
>>>had been trashed. So I wiped everything clean, reinstalled WinXP and
>>>started over with SuSE. So much for installing right out of the box on
>>>a new system.
>>
>>
>> Sure, the old flatfish troll. You *could* make XP not booting when using
>> the wrong BIOS-settings, but you did *not* trash XP. And there was a
>> simple workaround to make it boot again. So you, the ubergeek with
>> monstrous abilities having build his own computers, proved to be so
>> clueless?
>>
>
> There was no reason for me to alter any BIOS settings prior to the first
> attempted installation of SuSE.

This may be, depending on *when* you tried the install

> Everything worked fine as purchased with WinXP.

Good for you

> Next you will be telling me that you too wrote your own HD
> disaster recovery software as I once had.

Again this claiming of stuff you did.
I could do also, but will refrain. You look dumb enough doing so

> Pray tell, what was this
> "simple workaround to make it boot again?"
>

Oh, it was just prominently on the SuSE site.

> Since you were not present you could not have known whether XP was
> trashed or not,

It was not trashed

> as your knowledge of what happened during the original
> install of SuSE 9.1 is pedantic.

I don't need to know what happened there. SuSE will not trash XP, only
XP /may/ be /unbootable/ after install. It can be resurrected, though,
without any data loss

> Are you troglodytic to the many
> warnings in these newsgroups that HD partitioning software that comes
> with the Professional distro is less than perfect?
>

I know that there was an error in parted. It is long corrected

>>
>>>My old system had a Sound Blaster card but because it was
>>>ISA could not be installed in my new computer. The new computer had
>>>onboard sound -- A97C Via chipset. It took three installs before I got
>>>the sound card working, and to-date I can give no reason why it didn't
>>>take the first several times.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Oh, these oh so complicated VIA sound chips...
>> I have such a thingy in on of my computers, and it was detected and setup
>> correctly in *every* SuSE I have thrown at it, be it 8.2, 9.0 or 9.1
>>
>
> Judging from the many, many posts in various newsgroups and forums,
> yours is not the common experience.

Well, yours much less.

> Everything always works perfectly
> for you no matter what the hardware, or what the Linux distribution.

Oh no, not everything works perfectly. Just my computers and the peripherals
do, since for the peripherals I tend to do some google search before
buying.
For computers this has proved to be not necessary, except certain Dell or HP
models. I don't buy these anyway, so it does not apply to me

> I don't believe you.

I don't care.

> Not a single reincarnation of Windows can make that
> claim.
>

I know, since I have nearly every incarnation of windows around. Why do you
think I need that many computers? I develop software, and part of it is for
windows.

>>
>>>Second surprise was that the DVD CDR/+RW would not play DVD movies.
>>>Searching Google lead to an explanation about licensing (which NONE of
>>>the Windows applications seemed to have) and a shopping list full of
>>>additional programs and libraries one must install to make it work (not
>>>a high priority but frustrating nonetheless).
>>
>>
>> May I suggest you tell us what DVD play in Win-XP out of the box?
>> Is it about the same or even less than in SuSE? Why do you complain about
>> a situation when bashing linux, but don't do when talking about windows?
>> Truth is, you *can't* play DVDs in Win-XP out of the box, without
>> additional codecs.
>>
>
> You are simply WRONG.

No, I am not. XP as supplied by MS has *no* codecs to play DVDs.
Believe it or not

> My HP Pavilion a720n with the Philips DVD8421
> played Pirates of the Caribbean within ten minutes of turning on the
> computer for the first time with no additional software or upgrades
> necessary, i.e. right out of the box.

Meaningless. The OEM (in this case HP) already supplied the DVD player
software and codecs. Again, a XP bought in the shop is unable to play DVDs,
in just the same sense as SuSE is.

> The SuSE website itself has a
> bulletin concerning the copyright infringement when discussing Xine and
> Kaffeine. Apparently either Microsoft or HP sees no copyright
> infringements.
>

Oh, they don't, since they supply the (licensed) codecs. It still does not
change the fact that XP (or any other windows) out of the box will not play
your precious DVDs

>
>>
>>>The CD player (DVD too)
>>>has no audio. Apparently a sound cable is necessary.
>>
>>
>> No, it is not, modules for digital audio via IDE bus exist. Although it
>> is better to use a cable. It is simply wasteful to spend system resources
>> like processor time and bus bandwith for such frivolous things like
>> *playing* audio that way. And ripping works with or without that cable
>>
>
> Be that as it may, they were NOT loaded during the installation of SuSE,
> and I still have no digital audio.

Too bad for you

> This can be very disconcerting to
> one first introduced to Linux, especially if fearful of opening the
> computer case and installing a cable. You might notice that is one of
> the more prominent fixes suggested on these newsgroups.

For good reason. It is wasteful to do digital play. You may that do in a
Toys-R-Us-OS like windows

> Do you have
> anything helpful to suggest as to what particular modules one might load
> to obtain sound for the CD, or do you forever wax brilliant with your
> undivulged arcana?

Your wording indicates that you do not really want an answer, right?

>
>>
>>>The manuals
>>>accompanying the HP a720n show no sound connection on the motherboard
>>>although a visual inspection might evidence one. But I doubt there are
>>>two such connectors, so how would one get sound on both the CD and DVD?
>>> Incidentally I did try the fix in XMMS to enable digital sound which
>>>had no effect.
>>>
>>
>>
>> It had no effect for *you*
>> Which in itself simply says nothing.
>
> Does it say something for the 67,000 posts others have made on the very
> problem which are found through a Google search?
>

Show me the google search string

>>
>> < snip more bull*** from some clueless wintendo luser >
>
> Had you done less snipping and more reading, perhaps you might have
> actually been able to volunteer concrete suggestions instead of your
> usual diatribe.

No

> Have you ever contributed anything of value to these
> Linux newsgroups?

It is not difficult to do a search. Try it. You might be surprised

> If so I haven't seen one yet.

Well, you did not take too good a look

> The "bull***" happened
> to be specific real problems with a specific manufacturer's product,

Really?

> mentioned to demonstrate that not every computer system is unproblematic
> as you so illustriously seem to suggest.

Well, you certainly /can/ get a problematic one if dilligent enough. Try
some google, and you will be able to come up with a system which can prove
problematic. You have to work at it, though

> What is a wintendo luser?

Oh, lack of imagination?

> Is that a pet phrase you use for everyone you encounter who might disagree
> with you?
>

No. It is the (very apt) description of someone with a windows mindset
unwilling to do a little thinking ahead of rushing into the shop
Those tend to buy win-thingies which will not even be supported in the next
windows release and have to be thrown away to be replaced by the next
toy-hardware

< snip > 

-- 
To start your shiny new Pentium IV in Gameboy mode just enter
C:\win