If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
RayLopez99 wrote:
On Mar 30, 11:33 pm, John Williamson wrote: I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." Yeah, after YEARS and YEARS of working on it John. Let's face it: Linux has no Plug-and-Play. 'Nuff said. When was the last time you actually *used* a Linux system? If the answer is more than a couple of years ago, then you'll be surprised how much more "just works" nowadays. You may also be surprised at how much can be done through the GUI, too. Take a while to download Ubuntu, then install it inside Windows. It uninstalls afterwards just like any other program, and you can see how it's improved lately. The install you get has certain deliberate limitations, though, which can be worked round by installing as a dual boot system. Find it he- http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2010-03-30, Moshe wrote: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...ighlight=samba That's 90+ pages showing how "easy" it is to set up Samba. That doesn't alter the fact that people have been using it for years and years and years and doing so in a manner that's transparent to the relevant Windows or MacOS users. I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." For setting up file and print shares, 90 pages of explanation of Samba aren't necessary. The first page does it with room to spare. The other 89 are replies and replies to replies, mostly (In the first dozen or so pages, ICBA to read more.) asking questions about wireless networking and minor points relating to their Windows network setup. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
On Mar 31, 12:57*pm, John Williamson
wrote: RayLopez99 wrote: Yeah, after YEARS and YEARS of working on it John. Let's face it: *Linux has no Plug-and-Play. 'Nuff said. When was the last time you actually *used* a Linux system? If the answer is more than a couple of years ago, then you'll be surprised how much more "just works" nowadays. You may also be surprised at how much can be done through the GUI, too. Fair point. That is indeed the allure of Linux. But the way I see it, it's like passing by a crummy bar, club or pub that you visited years ago and had a bad time in: no service, bad beer, rude bartender, ugly barflies or worse, no girls at all. Now you pass by the storefront a second time and see a new sign: "Under new management!". Do you check it out, or do you assume it's just another ploy by the owner to get customers (it's well known in the club management scene that one owner typically controls several pubs/bars/clubs, even though they seem to "compete" against each other--at least that's the way it is in the USA and in GRE as well). Nope, I may be a fool, but I'm no sucker. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me"--Yiddish proverb. Shame on you John. RL |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
On Mar 31, 1:47*pm, John Williamson
wrote: Chris Ahlstrom wrote: John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: -- Tciao for Now! John. You reply to Chris Angstrom (small minded, as in Angstrom) after he sarcastically says "John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner"? You must like abuse or something. What's a nice guy like you doing in a place like this? No that's not meant as a pickup line either. ;-O The one constant I find in COLA is that the people here don't talk about how great Linux is, but rather how poor Windows is. So it's not their advocacy of Linux as much as their hate for Windows that's driving them. A strange business model if you ask me, akin to a boycott, and as the history of boycotts shows these movements peter out eventually. Same with Linux. But for Big Blue and indeed MSFT's adoption of the same, it would have died by now. RL |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
RayLopez99 wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:57 pm, John Williamson wrote: RayLopez99 wrote: Yeah, after YEARS and YEARS of working on it John. Let's face it: Linux has no Plug-and-Play. 'Nuff said. When was the last time you actually *used* a Linux system? If the answer is more than a couple of years ago, then you'll be surprised how much more "just works" nowadays. You may also be surprised at how much can be done through the GUI, too. Fair point. That is indeed the allure of Linux. But the way I see it, it's like passing by a crummy bar, club or pub that you visited years ago and had a bad time in: no service, bad beer, rude bartender, ugly barflies or worse, no girls at all. Now you pass by the storefront a second time and see a new sign: "Under new management!". Do you check it out, or do you assume it's just another ploy by the owner to get customers (it's well known in the club management scene that one owner typically controls several pubs/bars/clubs, even though they seem to "compete" against each other--at least that's the way it is in the USA and in GRE as well). Personally, I check it out, and more often than not, it's improved. Just as the one that I used to like a few years ago has sometimes turned into a dive. After all, what's the cost of the effort of walking through the door compared to the pleasure of finding that it *has* become a pleasant place to meet people? It's not hard to walk (straight) back out of the door, after all. The same way that installing Linux inside Windows takes a couple of hours for the computer, including the download time on broadband, of which you need to pay attention for maybe ten minutes, and uninstalling happens even more quickly. You can even use the computer while you're installing it, so there's very little time and effort involved for you. Nope, I may be a fool, but I'm no sucker. So, you're just spamming us with your opinions, which seemingly are based on a single experience with Open Source software in the dim and distant past, then. You're not willing to make a minimal, no risk experiment to prove the validity of your claims to yourself, either. After all, someone clever enough to be a rocket scientist, who also claims not to have to work because they're so rich could easily make time for such an experiment, *if* they were telling the truth and were interested in finding things out. That indeed makes you a fool, and deliberately ignorant, and proves that your mind is inflexible and closed to new experiences. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
RayLopez99 wrote:
You reply to Chris Angstrom (small minded, as in Angstrom) after he sarcastically says "John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner"? You must like abuse or something. It's an automatic insertion by his newsreader. He starts *all* his posts off like that. The same way you've never learnt to use a sig separator. He probably thought it was a cool thing to do a few years ago. What's a nice guy like you doing in a place like this? No that's not meant as a pickup line either. ;-O Trying to bring some balance to the discussion. IME, both systems have good and bad points. dash dash space return aannnddd sig! -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:47:57 +0100, John Williamson wrote:
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2010-03-30, Moshe wrote: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...ighlight=samba That's 90+ pages showing how "easy" it is to set up Samba. That doesn't alter the fact that people have been using it for years and years and years and doing so in a manner that's transparent to the relevant Windows or MacOS users. I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." For setting up file and print shares, 90 pages of explanation of Samba aren't necessary. The first page does it with room to spare. The other 89 are replies and replies to replies, mostly (In the first dozen or so pages, ICBA to read more.) asking questions about wireless networking and minor points relating to their Windows network setup. rlopez is being an asshole again. Pay him no heed. He couldn't care less about wether or not linux can play with windows He couldn't care less about the fact that linux supports just about every file sharing protocol ever created or that distributions like ubuntu make it trivialy easy. He is only interested is making an ass of himself. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machine on a network?
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:47:57 +0100, John Williamson wrote:
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2010-03-30, Moshe wrote: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...ighlight=samba That's 90+ pages showing how "easy" it is to set up Samba. That doesn't alter the fact that people have been using it for years and years and years and doing so in a manner that's transparent to the relevant Windows or MacOS users. I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." For setting up file and print shares, 90 pages of explanation of Samba aren't necessary. The first page does it with room to spare. The other 89 are replies and replies to replies, mostly (In the first dozen or so pages, ICBA to read more.) asking questions about wireless networking and minor points relating to their Windows network setup. The point is the first page didn't do it for the other 90 pages of posts. IOW people *do* have problems setting this up. Also, the instructions on the first page are a dynamic which changes with updates all the time. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
On 2010-03-31, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2010-03-30, Moshe wrote: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...ighlight=samba That's 90+ pages showing how "easy" it is to set up Samba. That doesn't alter the fact that people have been using it for years and years and years and doing so in a manner that's transparent to the relevant Windows or MacOS users. I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." For setting up file and print shares, 90 pages of explanation of Samba aren't necessary. If you have half a brain, the smb.conf file was always pretty self explanatory. It's very well (self) documented. There have been shiny happy tools available over the years but I've never bothered. Stuff stays setup in perpetuity. -- Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! ||| / | \ |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machineon a network?
On 2010-03-31, Moshe wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:47:57 +0100, John Williamson wrote: Chris Ahlstrom wrote: John Williamson pulled this Usenet boner: JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2010-03-30, Moshe wrote: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...ighlight=samba That's 90+ pages showing how "easy" it is to set up Samba. That doesn't alter the fact that people have been using it for years and years and years and doing so in a manner that's transparent to the relevant Windows or MacOS users. I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." For setting up file and print shares, 90 pages of explanation of Samba aren't necessary. The first page does it with room to spare. The other 89 are replies and replies to replies, mostly (In the first dozen or so pages, ICBA to read more.) asking questions about wireless networking and minor points relating to their Windows network setup. The point is the first page didn't do it for the other 90 pages of posts. IOW people *do* have problems setting this up. Nope. As the other guy that actually read the thread said: Most of the rest was stuff from out in left field that borders on the purely academic and doesn't even touch on the question of how hard stuff is to setup. -- Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! ||| / | \ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What Linux distro to use for old Intel machine, that fits on CDs? | Robert Heller | Homebuilt PC's | 22 | July 5th 08 05:38 PM |
What Linux distro to use for old Intel machine, that fits on CDs? | Robert Heller | Homebuilt PC's | 0 | June 28th 08 01:38 PM |
Linux machine check message | hyc | AMD x86-64 Processors | 0 | December 3rd 06 02:25 PM |
ATI driver on Linux machine | michelus34 | Ati Videocards | 5 | October 9th 05 01:13 AM |
BIOS update for Linux machine. | Graham P Davis | Gigabyte Motherboards | 3 | June 11th 05 12:34 AM |