 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:27:13 +0100, andrel wrote:
> On 15-Dec-08 23:15, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>>> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> And then I had to reboot the PC to get out of Vi. :-P
>>>
>>> WTF?
>>
>> Do *you* know what the keystroke to quit the program is? :-P
>>
> q or q! if you made changes. Am I missing something?
technically, :q or :q! - the first will exit and prompt you if you made
changes, the second will quit and not save your changes. If you want to
quit and save changes, then :w will write. I prefer shift+ZZ myself, it
quits and writes changes. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Wow... The concept of using a free OS on a product specifically designed
> for vendor lock-in seems astounding to me...
Nobody can stop free software from running anywhere, not even Apple or Dell!! :D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> On 15-Dec-08 23:15, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> > Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> >> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> >>> And then I had to reboot the PC to get out of Vi. :-P
> >>
> >> WTF?
> >
> > Do *you* know what the keystroke to quit the program is? :-P
> >
> q or q! if you made changes. Am I missing something?
Yes, : before q. ;)
Andrew, both emacs and vi come with quite good interactive tutorials.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> There are better chances now that it will than ever before. And if you
> go for Cedega (or Transgaming, or whatever they're calling themselves
> now), they've expanded the supported function calls so there's actually a
> very good chance it *will* work.
I tried Cedega some years ago. It didn't do it for me. Perhaps it was a
bit better, but overall it wouldn't let me play what I wanted. This is
also compounded by the fact that most games I play are *not* one of the
top 10-20 games around.
Also, having a Radeon 8500 LE doesn't help. Especially my version of
the chip, which a number of projects have washed their hands off of. I
have 3-D working, but not all of it. Currently, Wine knows about the
issue and aren't too interested in coding to fix it (and they're not
even sure they can).
Transgaming's attitude in those days was more like "You're card is not
commonly used among our customers - so low priority (i.e. never)."
Same comments for the games.
--
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
>> Except a lot of those Linux apps.
>
> And guess what? I don't miss any of them. I can't remember the last time
> I needed a program to do something, did a google search, and only found a
> Linux app that wouldn't run under Windows.
>
> Fact is, for the foreseeable future, I'm writing Linux off and sticking
> with Windows. It does what I want, and better than the critics give it
OK - to each his own. I long stopped trying to get people to switch to
Linux, because I figured if they're happy with Windows, why switch?
That and a number of other experiences taught me something about the
market. People don't choose the "better" product if they're using one
that's "good enough". For a few people (don't know about you), I believe
Linux will benefit them, but their lives simply are not all that bad in
Windows - hence no change. However, the catch as you noticed, is that
with Linux, you really do have to put in the effort to get those gains.
There are annoyances to overcome (although once you overcome them, you
don't deal with them again - not sure if that's true for Windows). And
it's hard for people (including me in other spheres of life) to put in
the effort for gains that are not immediately obvious.
For me, Linux works better than Windows as an environment. I do like
the apparent greater flexibility in work environments you get with it.
As for software, I think a good financial app is the only non-game
thing I lack in Linux. Of all the things I feel I need, I somehow doubt
Windows has anything (free) to offer that's necessarily a great
improvement over what I had in Linux.
I could probably find a number of things I prefer in Linux over
Windows, if I really thought about them. But they're more or less
subjective, and you may not feel the same way about them. Additionally,
I probably don't care much for many of the touted benefits of Windows
(other than games).
--
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> You keep talking about "headaches". I've been using it for 12 years, and
> most of that time no headaches at all.
Let's be realistic: Linux could be a huge headache, especially for one
who's not very computer-savvy.
Especially only a few years ago. Back in 2003, most Linux distributions
would not automatically get 3-D working on my card. A few had problems
with sound as well (my chip is on the motherboard, and is not an obscure
one).
Then there's the headache of installing software. If your binary
repository doesn't have it, you have to compile it. And sometimes your
distro will put libraries in a place that the source code doesn't know
about. That's already way too much for even sophisticated users who've
never dealt with compiling with source code.
And then learning how to use Linux can be a pain. I'll admit that stuff
like Ubuntu really does make life a *lot* easier for new users, but I
bet you still need to do command line stuff occasionally. And as much as
I like it, it really is a mess. I grew up on DOS, so it wasn't a big
pain for me.
I'm sure there are other annoyances if I actually sat and tried to
think about them.
--
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> And guess what? I don't miss any of them. I can't remember the last time
> I needed a program to do something, did a google search, and only found a
> Linux app that wouldn't run under Windows.
I didn't really address this. I don't know how true this is today, but
5 years ago, it wasn't unusual that I'd have trouble finding a _free_
program to do what I needed in Windows, whereas Linux would have it. Go
back even a few more years and this was even more common. In those days,
getting quality free software on Windows was rare.
--
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
>>>>> So I decided to stick with Windows, and guess what? Things just
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> Except a lot of those Linux apps.
>
> Unfortunately, free software means the source is available even to Windows
> whinners to use because there will be always someone willing to port them to
> Windows.
Why is that unfortunate?
And as I mentioned to Ben, a few years ago this wasn't all that true. A
number of programs I used were ported to Windows only recently.
--
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:21:04 -0600, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Why is that unfortunate?
I wondered that as well. I may not like using Windows, but that doesn't
mean that those users should be forced to a particular platform for OSS
applications. That's a Microsoft attitude. <g> <scnr>
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> That and a number of other experiences taught me something about the
> market. People don't choose the "better" product if they're using one
> that's "good enough".
Hence the popularity of languages like C, for example. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
