First off, what exactly is Ubuntu One? Well basically it's a file sharing and synchronisation service from Canonical. The basic package is free and provides a reasonable 2GB of storage. Canonical claims it's your personal cloud.
So my first impressions? It sucks. Canonical produces client software for both Ubuntu 9.04 and Ubuntu 9.10. However support for 9.04 seems pretty feeble. There's no Tomboy notes synchronisation for 9.04 as there is in 9.10. Which makes that feature useless if your not the type to dive in and upgrade all your PCs all at once.
Even worse however is the file synchronisation feature. It just doesn't seem to work. This being the basic concept of the whole package anybody would have thought Canonical would have gone out of their way to make this work. But it seems not.
So far I've been able to get files and indeed whole folders to upload my Ubuntu One storage space. But they don't ever seem to download to the other PC. It doesn't matter which PC does the uploading. The other PC just doesn't "synchronise" with my on-line Ubuntu One storage space.
Now the client software isn't the only way to interact with Ubuntu One. There is a web interface. But then again there are loads of places on-line for me to upload my stuff to that I can later download from using a web browser. The point and attraction of Ubuntu One is the desktop integration. Which just doesn't seem to be working properly.
Frankly I get a better service using the 50MB of free web space my ISP provides me with. It's simpler to set up as well. All I need to do is FTP into my web space from Places > Connect To Server. No software to install. No PPA to setup. Just a user name, password and FTP address. It's also 100% compatible with both versions of Ubuntu I'm using at the moment.
Perhaps Ubuntu One will work better when I'm running Ubuntu 9.10 on both PCs.
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
Monday, 2 November 2009
Ubuntu 9.10: First Impressions
My first impression of Ubuntu 9.10? A whole lot of people are interested. My first few attempts to download the ISO file resulted in a corrupted ISO. After waiting a few days for the traffic to calm down, I downloaded new ISOs and they work fine.
So far I've only just finished the initial installation on my Dell M1330n laptop. Since I want to take advantage of the new ext4 file system this is a clean install. To get all my applications installed and running I've created a script based on this How To from Ubuntu Forums. Personally I feel strong command line scripting is one of the greatest strengths of Linux. It just makes migrating to a new system so easy.
My laptop is equiped with an SSD. Which is why ext4 is so important to me. So far as I can work out ext4 has supposedly been optimised to work better with SSDs. Boot times are fast. Although I'm not sure if they are a massive improvement on 9.04 which was already very fast at boot time on my laptop.
Speaking of impressive boot-ups! The little animation that appears where the grub menu would normally appear is awesome. If that is the effect using Grub2 has on the overall polish to the OS then Canonical and the Ubuntu devs made an excellent choice here. It makes the OS feel like some sat down and made an effort to polish the final product rather than just make it work.
The new login screen is pretty cool. It functions very smoothly indeed. It was also a bit of a surprise. I can't remember anybody mentioning anything like that would be there. The new functionality (that I've seen so far) is purely cosmetic. However good looking OS that operates smoothly does make using PCs less stressful and irritating. It's reasuring to know that Canonical and the rest if the Ubuntu development team understands little tweaks can make a huge difference to the user experience. The fade to the desktop is very cool. Windows 7 does the same sort of thing. But over all I think Ubuntu does it better with the initial animated logo at the very start, through the updated boot screen to the very smooth new log-in screen, to the desktop. The whole thing just feels more polished than Windows 7.
The wider selection of desktop backgrounds and themes is also a welcome addition. Although I do get the feeling some of the wallpapers were grabbed off the web at random at the last minute. For some reason they just don't seem to fit with the prodominantly dark brown earthy window themes. Just five more minutes of effort could have avoided that. But it's easily fixed.
A big dissapointment was the restricted drivers manager. For some reason it just doesn't seem to work. I had to install my Nvidia drivers from Synaptic manually. Something for Canonical to work on for 10.04.
My next task is to migrate all of my personal data back to my laptop. Which won't be too hard as I don't keep much on the laptop anyway.
Update 03-11-2009: Added link to Ubuntu Forums. Forgot to do that. DOH! http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=766683
Update 04-11-2009: Some videos to make life more interesting.
So far I've only just finished the initial installation on my Dell M1330n laptop. Since I want to take advantage of the new ext4 file system this is a clean install. To get all my applications installed and running I've created a script based on this How To from Ubuntu Forums. Personally I feel strong command line scripting is one of the greatest strengths of Linux. It just makes migrating to a new system so easy.
My laptop is equiped with an SSD. Which is why ext4 is so important to me. So far as I can work out ext4 has supposedly been optimised to work better with SSDs. Boot times are fast. Although I'm not sure if they are a massive improvement on 9.04 which was already very fast at boot time on my laptop.
Speaking of impressive boot-ups! The little animation that appears where the grub menu would normally appear is awesome. If that is the effect using Grub2 has on the overall polish to the OS then Canonical and the Ubuntu devs made an excellent choice here. It makes the OS feel like some sat down and made an effort to polish the final product rather than just make it work.
The new login screen is pretty cool. It functions very smoothly indeed. It was also a bit of a surprise. I can't remember anybody mentioning anything like that would be there. The new functionality (that I've seen so far) is purely cosmetic. However good looking OS that operates smoothly does make using PCs less stressful and irritating. It's reasuring to know that Canonical and the rest if the Ubuntu development team understands little tweaks can make a huge difference to the user experience. The fade to the desktop is very cool. Windows 7 does the same sort of thing. But over all I think Ubuntu does it better with the initial animated logo at the very start, through the updated boot screen to the very smooth new log-in screen, to the desktop. The whole thing just feels more polished than Windows 7.
The wider selection of desktop backgrounds and themes is also a welcome addition. Although I do get the feeling some of the wallpapers were grabbed off the web at random at the last minute. For some reason they just don't seem to fit with the prodominantly dark brown earthy window themes. Just five more minutes of effort could have avoided that. But it's easily fixed.
A big dissapointment was the restricted drivers manager. For some reason it just doesn't seem to work. I had to install my Nvidia drivers from Synaptic manually. Something for Canonical to work on for 10.04.
My next task is to migrate all of my personal data back to my laptop. Which won't be too hard as I don't keep much on the laptop anyway.
Update 03-11-2009: Added link to Ubuntu Forums. Forgot to do that. DOH! http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=766683
Update 04-11-2009: Some videos to make life more interesting.
Saturday, 17 October 2009
PC Gamers Need To Vote!
I've just been to Dells IdeaStorm web site and submitted an idea asking Dell to help the PC gaming industry establish a long term base level of hardware to help bolster the PC gaming industry and pull it out of decline. I'll post the text of the idea below. But first let me say PC gamers need to do something to push the hardware and software industry together to establish a base level of hardware that will support all games at decent settings.
When developers develop for the Wii or Playstation they know it's a long term commitment. The hardware will be supported for at least the next 5 to 10 years. It takes on average 3 to 5 years to develop, test and polish a major gaming title. If not, then longer. Microsoft want to refresh Windows every 2 to 3 years. As we've seen with Vista there is no guarantee of backwards compatibility.
So a game which started development with one Windows platform in mind might suddenly become usless unless the developers alter the game to support the new platform. This is very costly and time consuming. We need a better solution for PC gaming than Windows!
The Dell IdeaStorm post: Establish A Base Level For PC Gaming Hardware.
When developers develop for the Wii or Playstation they know it's a long term commitment. The hardware will be supported for at least the next 5 to 10 years. It takes on average 3 to 5 years to develop, test and polish a major gaming title. If not, then longer. Microsoft want to refresh Windows every 2 to 3 years. As we've seen with Vista there is no guarantee of backwards compatibility.
So a game which started development with one Windows platform in mind might suddenly become usless unless the developers alter the game to support the new platform. This is very costly and time consuming. We need a better solution for PC gaming than Windows!
The Dell IdeaStorm post: Establish A Base Level For PC Gaming Hardware.
Ever since games consoles could hold their own against the processing muscle of the PC, the PC gaming industry has been in decline. There are a number of reasons for this. Which I will detail below.
1) The PC as a gaming platform shifts far too rapidly for games developers to keep up with. There is no base level of hardware to target. This makes it very difficult and costly for games developers to develop for the PC.
When a games developer target the Playstation, they know the hardware spec will be good for at least 5 to 10 years. Typically it can take 3 to 5 years just to develop, test and polish a game for distribution. So an unchanging stable platform is absolutely essential!
2) Security is an issue!!! Increasingly modern games are becoming on-line affairs. We no longer pit our wits against AI. We join virtual battle with each other. However PC gamers are at a disadvantage. Windows.
Making Windows secure for on-line activities can be a costly business. PC gamers take a hit in the wallet and performance of their gaming rigs. As though Windows it's self wasn't enough of a resource hog. PC gamers need to shell out for anti-virus software, anti-malware software, spam filters and firewalls.
Now it's true all this software can be had for free. But the free versions are always crippled in some way. They're never as fully functional as their paid for equivalents. Even worse! Some malware has now started pretending to me anti-malware! Gamers who get duped risk losing their passwords and privet details. Including payment details. Credit card numbers, bank account numbers and the like. The potential for fraud here is massive!
The solution is quite simple and one the likes of Sony has been using for years now. Don't use Windows for gaming. The Sony Playstation doesn't use Windows as it's OS. But the games run just fine all the same. The graphics are excellent and the games have on-line connectivity. Nobody seems to be worried about viruses or malware.
Dell already supports Ubuntu. The World of Goo and the Penumbra Trilogy both run flawlessly on Linux and sold well. It might be an old game now but Doom 3 runs perfect with no loss of detail or functionality. Clearly Linux can handle complex and demanding on-line multi-player games.
A secure PC platform for gamers is essential! That security shouldn't bring with it a performance cost. Gamers should not be installing additional software just to make their gaming rigs secure. Linux is the answer.
3) Performance and Stability. Anybody who has played a game on Windows knows the frustration of BSODs at just the wrong moment. It's unacceptable. All gamers also know the reason they need PCs with fans so loud they are in danger of suffering industrial deafness is because Windows needs a reasonably beefy system just for its' self if its' to be responsive and sprightly.
Adding a demanding game with high resolution graphics and a web connection adds a load Windows often just can't handle. So Windows throws it's hands in the air and hides behind a BSOD. The problem is resource management. Windows just can't do it well enough.
Linux on the other hand does a much better job out of the box. No tweaking. No over clocking to squeeze some sort of performance out of the processors. No industrial refrigeration required. That doesn't mean Linux can run Halo on the BBC Micro. But it does mean more of the systems resources are freed to help the game run smoother with greater stability.
But even Linux software crashes sometimes. So what then? Well Linux crashes in a graceful manner. Normally the app will simply shut down and the user will return to the desktop. In very bad crashes the user will be kicked out to the log-in screen. However the system will almost never lock up completely in a BSOD like scenario no matter how badly the game is written.
A robust OS like Linux is essential for high-end demanding games. Linux is that OS.
Dell needs to serve its' gamers better. Help the PC industry establish a base level of hardware by producing a gaming rig and commiting to that hardware spec for 5 to 10 years. Preferably 10 years.
Choose hardware that is Linux compatible. The XPS 700 series is already Linux compatible. This will allow the industry and gamers to choose their OS. Gamers who want more security and performance can choose Linux. Gamers who want to be compatible with yesterday can choose Windows. Or we can dual boot and be compatible with everything.
Don't be Gartner Sheep!
Okay I'm confused. But since when was it written in law that people or businesses absolutely had to refresh their hardware? Surely it's good business sense to only buy what you need? Right?
Apparently not. Gartner has decided it's time we all bought new PCs. Why exactly? Well obviously because Microsoft are bring out Windows 7. Since nobody bought Windows Vista it's time we upgraded right?
Wrong! The time to upgrade or refresh is when you can predict your current IT investment is no longer going to meet your needs. How close you can wait until that time comes depends on how large your organisation is and how efficently it can move through the refresh cycle. A single person working self employed can make the transition in as little as a few hours. Larger business will take days to weeks. While other will take months or even as much as a year or more for full deployment of a new operating system.
So given that this guilt trip induced refresh can be so costly in terms of money, lost man hours and man hours expended on the refresh, what is the single most crucial question to ask? What's in it for me? What will Windows 7 deliver that other operating systems can't? Is it security? Better resource management? Cloud connectivity and integration?
Do you really want to trust a Microsoft cloud solution after the Sidekick debacle?
One of the most recently touted selling points for Windows 7 has been it's ability to run Windows XP software. This might come as a shock to some. Windows XP runs Windows XP software! But if you're running a business and you're gullable enough to follow the fasion trends the like of Gartner demand then at least look around before commiting all your money to Microsoft.
There are alternative options out there. Some other operating systems also run Windows XP software. Intall WINE on an Ubuntu desktop or laptop and it'll run most XP software just fine. It might struggle with MS Office. However OpenOffice.org comes pre-bundled with Ubuntu. For free!
So please do consider refreshing your hardware and software. But when you do. Ask yourself what your business really needs. Do you need Windows 7? Would a cloud solution be better? Could you ditch the Microsoft lock-in cycle all together and use something completly different? What software do you use? What do you use it for? Is it unique? Could you migrate? Would migration save you money? How much money? Will Windows 7 be good value for money? Windows needs licences, Ubuntu doesn't. Can you reuse your old hardware?
Can you save money on an IT refresh during a recession?
Consider your options people! Don't be sheep!
Apparently not. Gartner has decided it's time we all bought new PCs. Why exactly? Well obviously because Microsoft are bring out Windows 7. Since nobody bought Windows Vista it's time we upgraded right?
Wrong! The time to upgrade or refresh is when you can predict your current IT investment is no longer going to meet your needs. How close you can wait until that time comes depends on how large your organisation is and how efficently it can move through the refresh cycle. A single person working self employed can make the transition in as little as a few hours. Larger business will take days to weeks. While other will take months or even as much as a year or more for full deployment of a new operating system.
So given that this guilt trip induced refresh can be so costly in terms of money, lost man hours and man hours expended on the refresh, what is the single most crucial question to ask? What's in it for me? What will Windows 7 deliver that other operating systems can't? Is it security? Better resource management? Cloud connectivity and integration?
Do you really want to trust a Microsoft cloud solution after the Sidekick debacle?
One of the most recently touted selling points for Windows 7 has been it's ability to run Windows XP software. This might come as a shock to some. Windows XP runs Windows XP software! But if you're running a business and you're gullable enough to follow the fasion trends the like of Gartner demand then at least look around before commiting all your money to Microsoft.
There are alternative options out there. Some other operating systems also run Windows XP software. Intall WINE on an Ubuntu desktop or laptop and it'll run most XP software just fine. It might struggle with MS Office. However OpenOffice.org comes pre-bundled with Ubuntu. For free!
So please do consider refreshing your hardware and software. But when you do. Ask yourself what your business really needs. Do you need Windows 7? Would a cloud solution be better? Could you ditch the Microsoft lock-in cycle all together and use something completly different? What software do you use? What do you use it for? Is it unique? Could you migrate? Would migration save you money? How much money? Will Windows 7 be good value for money? Windows needs licences, Ubuntu doesn't. Can you reuse your old hardware?
Can you save money on an IT refresh during a recession?
Consider your options people! Don't be sheep!
Sunday, 11 October 2009
How Bad Is The Malware Issue?
Okay this is just a quick post to pose the question. Just how bad is the malware problem really? It's a fair question to ask. Indeed a very important question to ask since some pundits claim 9 in every 10 PCs sold in the world has Microsoft Windows pre-installed.
That's a lot of PCs running an OS that is not only the prime target for criminals, but has also been criticised time and again for being too lax with security. As people depend on their PCs more and more for essential basic services in modern life like banking, security becomes a major issue. One that flies in the face of conventional wisdom.
Traditionally home users have taken second place in the security stakes. Especially on the Microsoft Windows platform. Without third-party products, which cost extra to the consumer, Windows is wide open. Windows 7 clearly doesn't address this security issue. If it did Microsoft would be pushing their "Security Essentials" free product. Well at least it's free.
But back to my question. How bad is the malware issue? Well since subscribing to the Avira Anti-Virus update notifications about a year ago I've had 1573 update notifications. The vast majority of which are simply virus definition updates. None of these notifications are duplicates. 1573 from 1st October 2008 until 9th October 2009.
My advice to anybody using the web to do essential things like banking is to use a secure platform. Windows is not that platform. It's just to big a target with too many holes.
That's a lot of PCs running an OS that is not only the prime target for criminals, but has also been criticised time and again for being too lax with security. As people depend on their PCs more and more for essential basic services in modern life like banking, security becomes a major issue. One that flies in the face of conventional wisdom.
Traditionally home users have taken second place in the security stakes. Especially on the Microsoft Windows platform. Without third-party products, which cost extra to the consumer, Windows is wide open. Windows 7 clearly doesn't address this security issue. If it did Microsoft would be pushing their "Security Essentials" free product. Well at least it's free.
But back to my question. How bad is the malware issue? Well since subscribing to the Avira Anti-Virus update notifications about a year ago I've had 1573 update notifications. The vast majority of which are simply virus definition updates. None of these notifications are duplicates. 1573 from 1st October 2008 until 9th October 2009.
My advice to anybody using the web to do essential things like banking is to use a secure platform. Windows is not that platform. It's just to big a target with too many holes.
Saturday, 10 October 2009
Desktop Linux Is Ready!
For a long time Linux was criticised as being too complicated and difficult for non-technical people to use. Personally I don't think that was ever really the case. I mean if Linux came pre-installed like Windows then the OEM would tweak it and install it to suit their hardware.
However Canonical has gone out of it's way now to prove to bury this myth once and for all. Take a look at the installation slide show for Ubuntu 9.10. Linux is ready for the desktop. It's ready for the mass market. It's ready for anybody that wants to use it. It doesn't matter if it's pre-installed or installed after market.
With respect to the basic installation, Ubuntu is now on par with Windows XP, Vista and even Windows 7. After the compiz effects have been enabled Ubuntu goes well beyond what Windows 7 is offering in terms of entertaining and useful desktop effects. And lets not forget the host of free software applications available directly from Canonicals Ubuntu repositories. Which contain everything from games to office productivity suits to web browsers to e-mail clients to extremely powerful tools for ICT professionals.
Ubuntu is also an OS well suited to "power users" with it's extremely high degree of customisability. There's nothing that can't be changed or tweaked. You can even change the entire desktop environment!
Now since Windows 7 has been available for testing many different sources have been quoting "boot times" of 20 to 30 seconds for Windows 7. It's become something of a selling point due to the fact Vista was so slow and a 6 month old installation of XP crawled along at a snails pace.
Well a default installation of Ubuntu 9.04 boots in around 15 to 20 seconds. From a cold start. Potentially 5 to 10 seconds faster than Microsofts latest and greatest Windows 7. The "boot times" for which by the way are actually restore from hibernation times!
At the time of writing, 10th October 2009, we're about 19 days from the final release of Ubuntu 9.10. Windows 7 will be out on October 22nd 2009. Ubuntu 9.10 has already been quoted as being able to boot from a cold start in 5 seconds when installed to an SSD.
So desktop Linux can now claim feature parity with desktop Windows. And as an added bonus it can also claim faster boot times as well as many other advantages. Linux is ready! Ubuntu is ready!
Microsoft and Apple are not the only game in town any longer!
http://www.workswithu.com/2009/10/09/installer-slideshow-in-ubuntu-910-helps-new-users/
However Canonical has gone out of it's way now to prove to bury this myth once and for all. Take a look at the installation slide show for Ubuntu 9.10. Linux is ready for the desktop. It's ready for the mass market. It's ready for anybody that wants to use it. It doesn't matter if it's pre-installed or installed after market.
With respect to the basic installation, Ubuntu is now on par with Windows XP, Vista and even Windows 7. After the compiz effects have been enabled Ubuntu goes well beyond what Windows 7 is offering in terms of entertaining and useful desktop effects. And lets not forget the host of free software applications available directly from Canonicals Ubuntu repositories. Which contain everything from games to office productivity suits to web browsers to e-mail clients to extremely powerful tools for ICT professionals.
Ubuntu is also an OS well suited to "power users" with it's extremely high degree of customisability. There's nothing that can't be changed or tweaked. You can even change the entire desktop environment!
Now since Windows 7 has been available for testing many different sources have been quoting "boot times" of 20 to 30 seconds for Windows 7. It's become something of a selling point due to the fact Vista was so slow and a 6 month old installation of XP crawled along at a snails pace.
Well a default installation of Ubuntu 9.04 boots in around 15 to 20 seconds. From a cold start. Potentially 5 to 10 seconds faster than Microsofts latest and greatest Windows 7. The "boot times" for which by the way are actually restore from hibernation times!
At the time of writing, 10th October 2009, we're about 19 days from the final release of Ubuntu 9.10. Windows 7 will be out on October 22nd 2009. Ubuntu 9.10 has already been quoted as being able to boot from a cold start in 5 seconds when installed to an SSD.
So desktop Linux can now claim feature parity with desktop Windows. And as an added bonus it can also claim faster boot times as well as many other advantages. Linux is ready! Ubuntu is ready!
Microsoft and Apple are not the only game in town any longer!
http://www.workswithu.com/2009/10/09/installer-slideshow-in-ubuntu-910-helps-new-users/
Saturday, 3 October 2009
In the time it takes your computer to boot up ...
"In the time it takes your computer to boot up ..." is a phrase I have heard over and over. What people should be saying is "in the time it takes Microsoft Windows to boot up you could go make a cup of tea, some toast, cook a Sunday lunch and dash out to the shops." This generalisation bothers me. It bothers me because not all computers are the same. They might contain the same hardware. But the software that makes that hardware do useful things makes all the difference.
Even with Linux, which generally boots fairly quickly the hardware and software setup makes all the difference. With an SSD drive at it's disposal Ubuntu 9.10 will boot in 5 seconds. Without the SSD drive it will be more like 10 to 15 seconds. The last time I tested Windows 7 Beta 1 on my Dell XPS 720, which has an Intel Core 2 Quad CPU runnung at 2.66 GHz and 8 GB of RAM, I was still counting Windows boot times from a cold start in minutes. Ubuntu 9.04 boots in 15 to 20 seconds on the same machine.
So bloggers and particuarly Priya Ganapati who is the latest offender to annoy me with this rediculous generalisation. Get it right! If you're talking about Windows PCs then say so. If your talking about Macs? Say so. If you're talking about Linux based PCs. Say so!
This is an important distinction to make. The PC landscape is changing rapidly. New OS players are coming into the market and they're all fighting for their slice of the pie. People tend to look to the media, blogs, forums etc to help them understand and figure out the differences between new products coming to the market. So it's important to get it right. Slow boot times are no longer an issue for everybody.
Apple seems to be able to do no wrong. Even though some of their business practices are worse than Microsofts'. Google is trying to muscle in with Android and Chrome OS. Both Linux based OSs. And of course we can't forget Linux it's self. Ubuntu is making good ground. Canonical, the parent developers of Ubuntu, are gaining support from the likes of IBM, Intel, Dell, HP and Sun Microsystems. All big names with interests in making Linux success.
So in the time it takes your PC to boot. Try and see if you can figure out with OS you're running!
Even with Linux, which generally boots fairly quickly the hardware and software setup makes all the difference. With an SSD drive at it's disposal Ubuntu 9.10 will boot in 5 seconds. Without the SSD drive it will be more like 10 to 15 seconds. The last time I tested Windows 7 Beta 1 on my Dell XPS 720, which has an Intel Core 2 Quad CPU runnung at 2.66 GHz and 8 GB of RAM, I was still counting Windows boot times from a cold start in minutes. Ubuntu 9.04 boots in 15 to 20 seconds on the same machine.
So bloggers and particuarly Priya Ganapati who is the latest offender to annoy me with this rediculous generalisation. Get it right! If you're talking about Windows PCs then say so. If your talking about Macs? Say so. If you're talking about Linux based PCs. Say so!
This is an important distinction to make. The PC landscape is changing rapidly. New OS players are coming into the market and they're all fighting for their slice of the pie. People tend to look to the media, blogs, forums etc to help them understand and figure out the differences between new products coming to the market. So it's important to get it right. Slow boot times are no longer an issue for everybody.
Apple seems to be able to do no wrong. Even though some of their business practices are worse than Microsofts'. Google is trying to muscle in with Android and Chrome OS. Both Linux based OSs. And of course we can't forget Linux it's self. Ubuntu is making good ground. Canonical, the parent developers of Ubuntu, are gaining support from the likes of IBM, Intel, Dell, HP and Sun Microsystems. All big names with interests in making Linux success.
So in the time it takes your PC to boot. Try and see if you can figure out with OS you're running!
Sunday, 27 September 2009
Ubuntu Tip: Simple Backup Command Using CP
Backing up your computers hard drive is extremely important. Should the worst happen and you lose all of your important data, you need a way back. While there are many excellent utilities in the Ubuntu repositories that handle partial and full system backups. Sometimes a simpler solution is all that is needed.
Fortunately Ubuntu and Linux in general in fact comes with everything you need in the for of the very simple but also extremely powerful cp command. In case you haven't figured it out yet, cp is Linux command line speak for copy. The examples below will show you how to use cp to back up your entire system.
sudo cp -r -u -x -v [source directory] [destination directory]
Example 1:
sudo cp -r -u -x -v /home/ /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
sudo: Gives temporary root privileges.
cp: Linux command line copy command.
-r: Used with cp this switch causes cp to copy directory content recursively. Meaning it will copy all files and subdirectories in the directory being copied.
-u: Used with cp this switch causes cp to only copy files that have changed or don't already exist at the destination.
-x: Used with cp this switch stops cp jumping to other file systems which it will do if it encounters hard links or symbolic links.
This switch also stops cp eating it's tail if you choose to back up your entire system. See examples 2 and 3 below.
-v: Used with cp this switch cause cp to give feed back on what's happening.
Full System Backup With CP
If we wish to perform a full system backup then we might feel inclined to use a command similar to that in Example 2 below. The trouble is without the -x switch cp will also attempt to backup the backup to the backup. Basically eating it's own tail in a never ending loop until all disk space is used up.
This happens because all other file systems are mounted to a location branching from the root file system. So if root is / then home is mounted to /home. Within Ubuntu all USB drives tend to be mounted to /media/a_USB_drive, etc.
However with the -x switch the command in example 2 will not be enough to back up the entire system if there are several storage devices or file systems mounted to different mount points. To get around this problem we must write a small script that will backup each file system separately. Example 3 shows a small example where the root files system / and /home are backed up separately.
Example 2:
sudo cp -r -u -v / /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
Example 3:
#!/bin/sh
#
# cp based backup script.
#
sudo cp -r -u -x -v / /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
sudo cp -r -u -x -v /home/ /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
This script can be created in any text editor like gedit or nano. After the script has been saved it must be given permission to be run as a program. Example 4 shows the command needed to change to the directory/folder where the script is stored. How to apply execute permissions and how to run the script.
Example 4:
First open a terminal window if you haven't already done so and enter the following commands. The actual location of your script is where you chose to save it.
cd /home/aikiwolfie/scripts/ (press enter)
chmod a+x my_backup_script (press enter)
./my_backup_script (press enter)
And that's it. Sit back and watch the backup script do it's job.
Fortunately Ubuntu and Linux in general in fact comes with everything you need in the for of the very simple but also extremely powerful cp command. In case you haven't figured it out yet, cp is Linux command line speak for copy. The examples below will show you how to use cp to back up your entire system.
sudo cp -r -u -x -v [source directory] [destination directory]
Example 1:
sudo cp -r -u -x -v /home/ /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
sudo: Gives temporary root privileges.
cp: Linux command line copy command.
-r: Used with cp this switch causes cp to copy directory content recursively. Meaning it will copy all files and subdirectories in the directory being copied.
-u: Used with cp this switch causes cp to only copy files that have changed or don't already exist at the destination.
-x: Used with cp this switch stops cp jumping to other file systems which it will do if it encounters hard links or symbolic links.
This switch also stops cp eating it's tail if you choose to back up your entire system. See examples 2 and 3 below.
-v: Used with cp this switch cause cp to give feed back on what's happening.
Full System Backup With CP
If we wish to perform a full system backup then we might feel inclined to use a command similar to that in Example 2 below. The trouble is without the -x switch cp will also attempt to backup the backup to the backup. Basically eating it's own tail in a never ending loop until all disk space is used up.
This happens because all other file systems are mounted to a location branching from the root file system. So if root is / then home is mounted to /home. Within Ubuntu all USB drives tend to be mounted to /media/a_USB_drive, etc.
However with the -x switch the command in example 2 will not be enough to back up the entire system if there are several storage devices or file systems mounted to different mount points. To get around this problem we must write a small script that will backup each file system separately. Example 3 shows a small example where the root files system / and /home are backed up separately.
Example 2:
sudo cp -r -u -v / /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
Example 3:
#!/bin/sh
#
# cp based backup script.
#
sudo cp -r -u -x -v / /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
sudo cp -r -u -x -v /home/ /media/MY_USB_DRIVE
This script can be created in any text editor like gedit or nano. After the script has been saved it must be given permission to be run as a program. Example 4 shows the command needed to change to the directory/folder where the script is stored. How to apply execute permissions and how to run the script.
Example 4:
First open a terminal window if you haven't already done so and enter the following commands. The actual location of your script is where you chose to save it.
cd /home/aikiwolfie/scripts/ (press enter)
chmod a+x my_backup_script (press enter)
./my_backup_script (press enter)
And that's it. Sit back and watch the backup script do it's job.
Sunday, 20 September 2009
OpenOffice: Why Do OEMs Ignore it?
I was just wondering exactly how much adoption OpenOffice had achieved.
13% of the market sounds good. But what does it mean? And how just what
exactly will the threshold be before the likes of HP, Asus, Acer and Dell decide they can't ignore
OpenOffice any longer?
"The total TCO for implementing OpenOffice.org LandsNet (the entire
public sector) ... OpenOffice.org results in a cost reduction of 91%".
The numbers speak for themselves!
13% of the market sounds good. But what does it mean? And how just what
exactly will the threshold be before the likes of HP, Asus, Acer and Dell decide they can't ignore
OpenOffice any longer?
- http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=138
- http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/more_momentum_behind_openoffice
- http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Major_OpenOffice.org_Deployments
- http://knowledge.oscc.org.my/solution-areas/desktop/OpenOffice.org/openoffice-adoption
- http://moodle.centerville.k12.oh.us/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=32064
- http://ooomarketing.blogspot.com/2009/05/openofficeorg-in-education-adoption-is.html
- http://www.gabrielgurley.com/files/817a9ebbe54677f3e629f23b9698361e-10.html
- http://linuxbsdos.com/2008/11/17/norwegian-ministry-to-sponsor-adoption-of-openofficeorg/
- http://www.chrisbray.co.uk/danish-openoffice-adoption-case-study-reports-91-lower-tco
"The total TCO for implementing OpenOffice.org LandsNet (the entire
public sector) ... OpenOffice.org results in a cost reduction of 91%".
The numbers speak for themselves!
Friday, 18 September 2009
Microsoft Thinks Your Stupid!
Does anybody seriously believe this child just happened to perfectly copy and paste all the key promotional slogans for Windows 7 into a slide show? My nieces and nephews don't even play with Power Point. They jump right onto cbbc and play games!
Boycott Windows 7
Digg doesn't like the direct IdeaStorm link. It does go through a lot of redirections. So here it is.
Redmond Running Scared!
Microsoft are seriously pushing the boat out here. But still manage to put the boot into their UK customers. Why is Windows 7 cheaper in the US for students than it is in the UK? If memory serves me correctly Microsoft pulled a similar pricing stunt with Windows Vista. How much longer are people going to tolerate such shoddy treatment?
The price gap can't be explained purely by exchange rates alone. So what gives? Does Microsoft think students in UK colleges and universities are stupid? Are they just sheep to be pumped dry and ripped off? Why is it Microsoft has decided to climb aboard the "rip-off Britain" band wagon? Any company treating you like this does not deserve your money. Vote with your feet and your wallets and buy something else.
You could also head on over to Dell IdeaStorm and show one of Microsofts largest OEM partners exactly how you feel about Microsoft ripping you off. Register an account and vote to Boycott Windows 7. Better yet, if you're looking for a new netbook to take to college. Order one of Dells Ubuntu Linux based models. Which contrary to Microsofts BestBuy indoctrination FUD are fully supported by Dell.
Of course it's only fair we ask the question. Why are Microsoft being so agressive with their pricing of Windows 7? It can't be because of Linux. Linux is free to download, install and use. You can even get your hands on the raw source code if that's what floats your boat. Linux in short is a fully functional and fully customisable all purpose OS. Ubuntu, which is pre-installed on some Dell netbooks is a fully featured OS with no artificial limts imposed on it. In contrast netbooks with Windows 7 will be running the "Starter Edition".
What is the "Starter Edition"? Basically it's cripple ware. Microsoft in one way or another artificially limit the capabilities of Windows to force you the consumer who has already "paid money" for a legal copy of pre-installed Windows to cough up more cash. Hardly seems fair. But Microsoft have been getting away with it for years.
Note: Windows 7 Starter Edition no longer has the infamouse "3 applications" artificial limitation. Microsoft buckled under preasure of scathing critisim by almost the entire technology press and on-line publications, blogs, twitters and whatever else. If it was talking about Windows 7 Starter Edition (other than the Microsoft Windows 7 blog), the artificial 3 applications limitation was torn apart.
The price gap can't be explained purely by exchange rates alone. So what gives? Does Microsoft think students in UK colleges and universities are stupid? Are they just sheep to be pumped dry and ripped off? Why is it Microsoft has decided to climb aboard the "rip-off Britain" band wagon? Any company treating you like this does not deserve your money. Vote with your feet and your wallets and buy something else.
You could also head on over to Dell IdeaStorm and show one of Microsofts largest OEM partners exactly how you feel about Microsoft ripping you off. Register an account and vote to Boycott Windows 7. Better yet, if you're looking for a new netbook to take to college. Order one of Dells Ubuntu Linux based models. Which contrary to Microsofts BestBuy indoctrination FUD are fully supported by Dell.
Of course it's only fair we ask the question. Why are Microsoft being so agressive with their pricing of Windows 7? It can't be because of Linux. Linux is free to download, install and use. You can even get your hands on the raw source code if that's what floats your boat. Linux in short is a fully functional and fully customisable all purpose OS. Ubuntu, which is pre-installed on some Dell netbooks is a fully featured OS with no artificial limts imposed on it. In contrast netbooks with Windows 7 will be running the "Starter Edition".
What is the "Starter Edition"? Basically it's cripple ware. Microsoft in one way or another artificially limit the capabilities of Windows to force you the consumer who has already "paid money" for a legal copy of pre-installed Windows to cough up more cash. Hardly seems fair. But Microsoft have been getting away with it for years.
Note: Windows 7 Starter Edition no longer has the infamouse "3 applications" artificial limitation. Microsoft buckled under preasure of scathing critisim by almost the entire technology press and on-line publications, blogs, twitters and whatever else. If it was talking about Windows 7 Starter Edition (other than the Microsoft Windows 7 blog), the artificial 3 applications limitation was torn apart.
Saturday, 5 September 2009
I Want To Be Blissfully Ignorant
Okay I demand to be told what is in the water these people are drinking. I personally feel it is my God given right to be this blissfully ignorant of the world.
Friday, 4 September 2009
Ubuntu Tip: How To Mount ISO Disk Images
If you use .iso CD/DVD images here's how to mount them from the command line or in a terminal window.
Open a terminal window and type the following commands;
Open a terminal window and type the following commands;
- sudo mkdir /media/iso
- sudo modprobe loop
- sudo mount filename.iso /media/iso -t iso9660 -o loop
- mkdir creates a new directory. This directory will be used as a "mount point" by Ubuntu to allow you access to the .iso file. In reality any directory can be used. It's good practice however to use a clearly defined location. You avoid problems and keep your file system clean and tidy.
- filename.iso is the name of the iso file you wish to mount. Substitute "filename.iso" for the name of your .iso file.
- To unmount the file use the following command: sudo umount /media/iso or whatever you called your new mount point.
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
Five Best Disk Defragmenters
This article Five Best Disk Defragmenters from Lifehacker which I came across while browsing through digg.com took me back some. All the while Randall C. Kennedy is bitching about GUIs that don't meet his high journalistic standards and Linux design concepts "contaminating" Windows, Windows users are still defragmenting their hard drives? I mean seriously!
I can remember having to defrag my hard drive when I was using MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 SE and Windows XP Professional. I can remember setting the PC upat night to run it's course and it still wouldn't be done by morning. In the days of MS-DOS to Windows 3.11 I only had a tiny hard drive. A few hundred megabytes of capacity. When I got Windows 95 I moved up to a Quantum Bigfoot 1 GB drive. Which back then was huge! With Windows 98 and 98 SE I leapt up to 8GB and 10GB drives.
Defragging my PCs hard drives back then seemed to take forever. It was something you planned in advance. You'd have to clear your schedule for the week and mark it in the diary before hand. And after all the effort to get your files sorted out into easily accessible contiguous blocks of data, they were all messed up again as soon as you used your PC. Defragging was and still is a truly pointless endeavour. And Windows users are still doing this?
I was of the impression Windows Vista was supposed to have ushered in a new era? Windows 7 was to build on that and make it better? Why then are Windows users still behaving as though they're using MS-DOS? With my current Dell XPS 720 I have 1.5TB of internal storage on the hard drives and an addition 1TB extrenal drive. That's 2.5 terrabytes in total I'd have to defragment if I were still using Windows. The very thought alone gives me hives.
In my opinion defragmenting a hard drive on a PC is not only pointless. It's archaic. It's pre-stone age technology. Nobody should have to do this any longer. There are file systems out there in the real world being used everyday that essentially avoid this problem altogether. I've never defragmented a Linux hard drive. Not when I was using Red Hat Linux years ago. Not While using openSuSE and never while using Ubuntu. It's something I have simply never needed to do. It didn't even enter my mind until i read the Lifehacker article.
Microsofties really need to wake up and demand better from their masters.
I can remember having to defrag my hard drive when I was using MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 SE and Windows XP Professional. I can remember setting the PC upat night to run it's course and it still wouldn't be done by morning. In the days of MS-DOS to Windows 3.11 I only had a tiny hard drive. A few hundred megabytes of capacity. When I got Windows 95 I moved up to a Quantum Bigfoot 1 GB drive. Which back then was huge! With Windows 98 and 98 SE I leapt up to 8GB and 10GB drives.
Defragging my PCs hard drives back then seemed to take forever. It was something you planned in advance. You'd have to clear your schedule for the week and mark it in the diary before hand. And after all the effort to get your files sorted out into easily accessible contiguous blocks of data, they were all messed up again as soon as you used your PC. Defragging was and still is a truly pointless endeavour. And Windows users are still doing this?
I was of the impression Windows Vista was supposed to have ushered in a new era? Windows 7 was to build on that and make it better? Why then are Windows users still behaving as though they're using MS-DOS? With my current Dell XPS 720 I have 1.5TB of internal storage on the hard drives and an addition 1TB extrenal drive. That's 2.5 terrabytes in total I'd have to defragment if I were still using Windows. The very thought alone gives me hives.
In my opinion defragmenting a hard drive on a PC is not only pointless. It's archaic. It's pre-stone age technology. Nobody should have to do this any longer. There are file systems out there in the real world being used everyday that essentially avoid this problem altogether. I've never defragmented a Linux hard drive. Not when I was using Red Hat Linux years ago. Not While using openSuSE and never while using Ubuntu. It's something I have simply never needed to do. It didn't even enter my mind until i read the Lifehacker article.
Microsofties really need to wake up and demand better from their masters.
Ubuntu Tip: How To Install 32-bit .debs In A 64-bit Ubuntu
This is a very simple tip for Linux users and in particular Ubuntu users. If you're running a 64-bit version of Ubuntu you will occasionally need to install a 32-bit application. The very awesome World of Goo for example only comes in a 32-bit package. It does however run just fine on 64-bit Ubuntu 9.04.
Simple double clicking on the 32-bit .deb package will throw up a "wrong architecture" error. The way around this is to use the "--force-architecture" switch from a terminal window. See the example below.
Before we can do that however there are a few preparations to make. We must make sure all the supporting 32-bit libraries are also installed. To do this open a terminal window and enter the following command.
And that is really all there is to it.
Simple double clicking on the 32-bit .deb package will throw up a "wrong architecture" error. The way around this is to use the "--force-architecture" switch from a terminal window. See the example below.
- sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture Desktop/WorldOfGooSetup.1.40.deb
Before we can do that however there are a few preparations to make. We must make sure all the supporting 32-bit libraries are also installed. To do this open a terminal window and enter the following command.
- sudo apt-get install ia32-libs
And that is really all there is to it.
News Just In! Randall C. Kennedy Becomes Even More Pointless!
Lacking any real news to report and desperately needing to fill a void left by Steve Ballmer after excavating Randalls' sphincter, Randall C. Kennedy has resorted random attacks on everything and anything not of Redmond.
Apple takes the first hit in a childish tantrum regarding Apples' advertising antics. Before they'd even started. It seems Randall has a case of the iGitters. Moving on however, next up for the chopping block was Googles' own Linux based OS. Chrome OS.
The short,snappy and memorable title of this particular blog entry "Will Chrome OS collapse under the weight of it's own Web browser?" would seem to imply Chrome OS is overweight. Morbidly obese one might say. Which is somewhat odd considering Windows not only seems to require a new PC with every iteration. But some how manages to devour the storage space on the hard drive like a fat chick let lose in a cake shop. Windows appetite for devouring system resources is so unseemly Microsoft considered it to be a huge achievement to get a tweaked version of Windows 7 running on a netbook.
Speaking of which. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's noticed netbook specs have been on the up and up. In fact if it weren't for the 32-bit x86 based Atom CPU at their heart they'd be fully fledged notebooks with smaller screens.
Randall can't stop at bitching about Apple or Chrome OS though. Next target is the Linux desktop. The rather ironic title "Will desktop Linux ever grow up?", implies desktop Linux isn't ready to be the headline act. I'm pretty sure Canonical and others would disagree. Sharp in particular has just released a new Ubuntu based MID in Japan. One of the largest economies in the world no less. Brazillian education (52 MILLION NEW USERS) has all but abandoned Windows and Microsoft products entirely and Microsoft for the first time have included HP and Intels' Linux efforts as a threat to their business on their recently filed 10-K report.
Lacking any real complaints about the Linux desktop Randall unwisely decides to pick on X.org. X.org maintain the X server. Randalls gripe with this? The code has a 30 year history! Oh gosh quick we better not use it. Software does after all corrode with time doesn't it? Actually no it doesn't. Planned obsolescence, crap design and a total lack of foresight is what makessoftware bog down over time.
If the code is well maintained and properly looked after 30 years of service is a good sign of maturity and not decrepitude. X has served Linux and other NIXs well over the years. Better still it's going through a major overhaul right now as you read this to meet modern demands. Yes these changes break drivers. All major changes to an OS breaks something somewhere. For example when Microsoft implemented their new driver model they broke driver compatibility with XP. Then broke it again and again and again until their partners got fed up and did things on their own schedule leaving many Vista users with crap driver support for weeks if not months after the official release. ATI and Nvidia were amongst the companies that failed to deliver decent drivers on time. OUCH!
Next up it was Snow Leopard. Randall completely and I suspect deliberately misses the point of Snow Leopard. Unlike Windows 7, Snow Leopard isn't just a cosmetic make over. It's a re-plumbing of all the tubing and technical bits underneath the shiny Apply GUI that Windows and Linux users can't stop trying to emulate with theme packs. While the enhancements to Snow Leopard don't really help existing third party software. All Apple software has been rewritten to take advantage of them and third party offerings won't be far behind.
As a result of Apples tinkering with Snow Leopard, OS X has a smaller installed foot print and runs considerably faster. The net result of Windows 7 is a version of Vista that looks decent, is less secure and doesn't crash as much. BSODs are also still a coveted feature.
Finally we get to Randalls latest Cephalopoda like spaz attack with tentacles flailing every where desperately grasping for a target. "The 'Linuxification' of Windows has begun". Okay then. This "blog entry" has me seriously bewildered. FileZilla, VirtualBox and the Gimp all come under fire. For one reason or another their GUIs just aren't good enough. Apparently all GTK+ GUIs are a complicated ill designed blasphemous disaster. They should carry a public health warning. VirtualBoxs' error dialogues are clearly hazardous to ones health. Of course Windows BSODs are so intuitive. I speak in HEX daily. In fact I refuse to speak anything but HEX codes unless absolutely necessary.
Seriously, does InfoWorld actually pay this man-child to write this tripe? It's not helpful, it's not informative, it's not even a fully formed and thought out opinion. It's just random crap drugged up to draw attention away from the competition and back to Microsoft? Microsoft PR must be cringing right about now. At least they tried to spice up their tripe with some Photoshopping.
Well I have more bad news for Randall. Maybe this will send him completely over the edge. Dell are releasing an Android based smart phone in China. Remember Android is Linux based Randall. Now when will Linux grow up? I wonder? Who Runs Ubuntu Linux?
It really is time to wake up Randall. The Linux kernel is in one form or another embeded in every facet of your life. Remember when you use the Internet or a DVD player or a satnav, you're using Linux.
Saturday, 22 August 2009
Windows Vista: Black Screen of Death Fix
The following are suggested fixes from various sources for the Windows Vista/7 Black Screen of Death (KSOD) problem.
Symptoms:
Solution 2: Edit The Windows Registry.
There apparently this a problem related to the Remote Procedure Call service (RPC) running under LocalSystem account instead of NT Authority\NetworkService account.
Symptoms:
- Windows boots to a black screen with a white cursor/mouse pointer.
- Windows "Safe Mode" exhibits the same behaviour.
- Nothing else ever loads. Not even a log-in screen.
- Use the vista DVD to go to the repair mode.
- From the same screen where you do the system restore, there's an option to open an administrative command prompt.
- That should open in X:\Sources or something like that
- Go to the windows drive by entering C:
- Now go to the windows event log folder on your machine (C:\Windows\System32\winevt):
cd c:\windows\system32\winevt - ren Logs Logs_bad
- mkdir Logs
Solution 2: Edit The Windows Registry.
There apparently this a problem related to the Remote Procedure Call service (RPC) running under LocalSystem account instead of NT Authority\NetworkService account.
- On the affected machine, boot using the Vista Media and Select “Next” and then in the bottom left you will see “Repair your Computer”; select Next and then Select Command Prompt.
- At the command prompt, launch regedit.exe and load the SYSTEM hive, follow the below steps.
- Select HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
- On the File menu, select Load Hive.
- Browse to %WINDIR%\System32\Config Folder and select “SYSTEM”
- Select Open.
- In the Load Hive dialog box, type in “MySYSTEM” box for the registry hive that you want to edit.
- After the hive is loaded, modify the following key value per the instructions below: You will need to know what ControlSet the machine is currently running on, this can be determined by going to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\MySYSTEM\Select and find the “Current” value in the Right hand side. (Example: Current value is 1 then the ControlSet will be ControlSet001)
- Key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\MySYSTEM\ControlSet00X\Services\RpcSs (X is the Number from the Current Key from above)
- Value Name: ObjectNameOld
- Value: LocalSystemNew
- Value: NT AUTHORITY\NetworkService
- Unload the SYSTEM hive by selecting the key “MySYSTEM” and then select File -> Unload Hive… menu item.
- Exit regedit.exe
- Reboot the system normally
- Boot to the Vista media.
- Restore the PC to a restore point 1 month before the problem occured.
- Reboot as normal.
- Get hold of a copy of Ubuntu. Most Linux PC magazines will carry a copy on their cover disc or you can ask a friend to download it for you and burn it to a disc. You will find the Ubuntu download page at www.ubuntu.com Don't worry about payment. Ubuntu is completely free of charge to download and use.
- Boot the PC using your new Ubuntu installation disc. Select the option to try Ubuntu without changing anything on the PC. Once the desktop has loaded, navigate to your Windows hard drive.
- Copy anything from your Windows hard drive you want to keep on the a USB stick or similar backup device.
- Click the install icon and follow the instructions. You'll want to use the entire disc to rid yourself of Windows Vista entirely.
Thursday, 20 August 2009
Will Randall C. Kennedy Ever Grow Up?
Yet another bullshit article promoting Windows 7 by attempting to run down Linux. It's all well and good for bloggers to cry wolf about this or that not working in Linux. But the fact of the matter is it's pointless without detail.
The crucial details left out here are the faulty systems specifications. What hardware was being used? Which version of which Linux distribution was being used?
Details Randall. The devil is in the detail and you've provided none. All you've done is written a generic blog entry ragging on Linux and praising Windows. Is it really so hard to promote Windows 7 based on it's merits? You've joined the pointless masses. Well done!
Now bend over. Mr. Ballmer wants you to pick up the soap.
The crucial details left out here are the faulty systems specifications. What hardware was being used? Which version of which Linux distribution was being used?
Details Randall. The devil is in the detail and you've provided none. All you've done is written a generic blog entry ragging on Linux and praising Windows. Is it really so hard to promote Windows 7 based on it's merits? You've joined the pointless masses. Well done!
Now bend over. Mr. Ballmer wants you to pick up the soap.
Sunday, 9 August 2009
Another Bull Shit Windows Vista 7 Article!
I am so getting tired of reading bull shit Windows Vista 7 hyping articles trying oh so desperately to make Windows Vista 7 sound so fantastic when it's just not. I'm tired of the Mac OS X comparison by people who've never actually booted the damn thing up under the conditions they are bitching about!
To these people I say go out and try it. All these "professional" bloggers earn more than enough to be able to afford a Mac. Microsoft made Windows Vista 7 Beta and RC available to everybody that wanted it. So what's stopping them?
Maybe outfits like InfoWorld are scared if they do actual tests they'll need to admit Windows 7 is really just Vista with a new coat of paint. I mean seriously is it blog worthy to ask why battery life is so crap on a Mac when running Windows? What's more what's the point in asking if you're not even going to try it out?
We could do a really simple and cheap test here to find out where to lay the blame. Install Linux. See how long the battery lasts then. If both Mac OS X and Linux hold up and Windows doesn't. Well we know who's building the shit OS then don't we?
Oh right I forgot. Redmond is releasing a new OS. I guess we should all pay attention, lubricate our sphincters and bed over.
And just what is the deal with all the "YOU MUST REGISTER TO MAKE A COMMENT" nonsense? Do I look like I want another password and user name to remember?!?
http://www.dailytech.com/Windows+7+RTM+Gets+Benchmarked+Results+Are+Mixed/article15892.htm
To these people I say go out and try it. All these "professional" bloggers earn more than enough to be able to afford a Mac. Microsoft made Windows Vista 7 Beta and RC available to everybody that wanted it. So what's stopping them?
Maybe outfits like InfoWorld are scared if they do actual tests they'll need to admit Windows 7 is really just Vista with a new coat of paint. I mean seriously is it blog worthy to ask why battery life is so crap on a Mac when running Windows? What's more what's the point in asking if you're not even going to try it out?
We could do a really simple and cheap test here to find out where to lay the blame. Install Linux. See how long the battery lasts then. If both Mac OS X and Linux hold up and Windows doesn't. Well we know who's building the shit OS then don't we?
Oh right I forgot. Redmond is releasing a new OS. I guess we should all pay attention, lubricate our sphincters and bed over.
And just what is the deal with all the "YOU MUST REGISTER TO MAKE A COMMENT" nonsense? Do I look like I want another password and user name to remember?!?
http://www.dailytech.com/Windows+7+RTM+Gets+Benchmarked+Results+Are+Mixed/article15892.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)