Re: What Linux distro to use for old Intel machine, that fits on CDs?

General Schvantzkopf <schvantzkopf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You're right, we've all been down this road several times with this guy.
However there is a reason to play along and that is that there are other
people reading this thread. This particular poster always starts his
thread with a reasonable question, in fact this time it was more
reasonable than usual because the specs of the system that he started with
weren't impossible.

Indeed, which was why I answered in the first place (but added a footnote at
the bottom that it was for the benefit of people googling for an answer
rather than him). :)

Quite a few people seem to have been suckered in though...
(looked like you were one of them...)

His subsequent questions have also been reasonable so
far, i.e. about what his expectations should be vis a vis the Win2K that
came with his antique system. His usual pattern is to try and post some
impossible requirement and then when he's told that you can't do that he
gets to call Linux useless. But the fun part here is that it's getting
harder and harder for him to come up with an impossible requirement. I
think his request for a one click install was his attempt to do that in
the current thread. However as all of us know, Ubuntu Live CDs have had
one-click installs for a long time and as of Fedora 8 so has the Fedora
projects. He also usually tells a tail of woe about having to use dial-up,
which I doubt he does. He does this at the end of all of his threads, but
of course that's never been an issue because you can buy CDs or DVDs for
any distro for a pittance, and for the truly impoverished Ubuntu is happy
to send you a free CD.

Indeed... I think he's been directed towards cheapbytes dozens of times.
(note to readers, in the UK, linux emporium...)


So for the non-troll readers of this thread we've been able to discuss the
merits of putting money into old machines versus spending the money on the
new ultra cheap machines. We've been able to discuss what's reasonable to
expect if you do pull some old shitbox out of the closet and put Linux on
it (i.e. it's still a shitbox but it's a stable shitbox). And which
distros are good for which types of users.

BTW I keep hoping that one of these days he might actually grab a LiveCD
and actually try Linux. And if he has a lot of MS in his portfolio my free
advice is to sell it and put the money in a market index fund. MS stock
hasn't moved in years and it's not likely to in the future.

Oh, I think it's likely to move...
down down down...
:)


We aren't in
the MS age anymore, it's the Google age now. IBM stock has underperformed
the market for years, that's what happens to companies that were once
completely dominant and then time passes them by. They can still be very
solid companies, IBM certainly is, but their days of stellar growth are
over. Microsoft has reached that point now. They displaced IBM as the 800
pound gorilla of the computer market, now Google has replaced Microsoft.
Someday another company will come along and displace Google, but it won't
be Microsoft (even if they ha bought Yahoo), and it won't be IBM, it will
be someone new.

Most probably, yeah...
But it's POSSIBLE it could be IBM again, we don't know what the future of
technology has in store and if IBM came up with an optical CPU or a quantum
computer, they could be on their way to a new high...

Tech is the fastest moving of all industries after all. Who can say what'll
happen 10 years from now if someone makes a breakthrough?
--
| spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
.

Quantcast