Re: Linux. It's all about LIES AND DENIAL.
From: TokaMundo (TokaMundo_at_weedizgood.org)
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 01:23:23 GMT
On 27 Aug 2005 17:39:05 -0700, "The Homo K" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>The Linux community is comprised of sicko zealots who will try and
>foist Linux on unsuspecting fools just to sucker them into Linux.
You're an idiot. The people that run Linux do so from a desire to
investigate it as an alternative.
>The truth is Linux sucks.
The truth is, you are a troll retard, Flatbrain.
> I have used Suse and Mandrake as well as
>Mandrival and they all are so slow it's not even funny.
You didn't "use" anything. You piss and moan your entire way
through life, everyday. You are worse than "Bob" over in the BeOS
group. He too is an idiot.
>Konqueror takes minutes to display a directory of 40k mp3 files
>including info and that's the same even after multiple times of opening
Sounds like your shit is weak.
>Windows XP does it in 3 seconds, every single time.
Windows' file explorer take several seconds to return control to the
user when opened. I wouldn't be surprised if it still doesn't crash
when a bad CD is inserted. Never saw windows able to read any other
file systems either. Linux can read nearly any if not all file
>Juk takes 2 hours to add the above mp3s to it's database.
Whoopie doo. I think you're an idiot. 40,000 files in one
directory is only about as stupid as it gets.
>Amarok crashed trying to do it.
>Winamp takes 7 minutes.
>Musicmatch takes 4 minutes.
So what? It doesn't preclude the fact that you are stupid for
handling the task the way you did.
>Openoffice takes 45 seconds to start.
Open office is an integrated package. The entire suite is available.
MS Office opens ONE applet in their suite at a time.
Time how long it takes to open all five apps.
>MSoffice 2003 takes 3 seconds.
No. MS Word, OR MS Excel OR....
There is a difference. Also, try opening Open Office again, once it
has been run once. It opens nearly instantly. One won't see that
with MS Office products. Also, Billy make windblows and office work
together. Open Office is made by one author, and the OS by others.
Not bad, considering the way the open source realm works.
>k3b takes 4 minutes to burn a 650mg CD.
At one given speed.
>Nero takes 2.7 minutes.
At an entirely different speed.
Try it again where both sessions are done at the same speed, and
you'll get the same time elapse, dumbass.
>Firefox with Linux takes 20 seconds to load, 10 seconds with Windows.
>Internet Explorer takes 2 seconds or less to load.
Internet exploder is part of the vulnerability problem idiots like
you seem to ignore being an issue.
>Linux transfers between 7krpm disks at about 6mb/sec.
There are no hard drives that run at 7000 RPM. Get your numbers
>Windows is over 20mb/sec on the same disks.
>DMA is turned on for both.
You're an idiot.
>WindowsXP regularly gets higher data transfers on dslreports.com and it
The word is spelled consistent, dumbass.
Bullshit. I have done both cable and DSL speed tests and the speed
is the same for whichever OS is used, and that is across several.
>Linux is all over the map but always slower than Windows.
There is no map, and you are a retarded troll.
>Kontact opens so slow that if you move the mouse around you get trails.
>Kontact/kmail is also very buggy at getting mail, not to mention it's
>also very slow compared to eudora.
So don't use kontact. You act as if that app is somehow connected
to Linux. They are distinctly separate entities.
>Machine is a 2.6ghz P4HT with 1g memory and 7k WD drives with 8mb
>Motherboard is Asus.
You're an idiot.
>So go ahead and bury your heads in the sand going into denial.
I don't see any sand around here, nor anyone looking for any.
>You might want to take a look at "why is Linux so slow" threads because
>their seems to be an awful lot of them.
Why are you a troll?
Ever heard the expression "sit on it and spin"?