A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Homebuilt PC's
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machine on anetwork?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old March 31st 10, 11:57 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
John Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 12:47 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
John Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 12:53 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
RayLopez99
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 897
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 01:05 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
RayLopez99
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 897
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 02:46 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
John Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 02:51 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
John Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 02:57 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
AZ Nomad[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 04:56 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Moshe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 07:47 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
JEDIDIAH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40
Default 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  
Old March 31st 10, 07:48 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
JEDIDIAH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 03:25 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.