Ubuntu 8.04 and Firefox 3 Beta 5
christoph.bier at web.de
Sun Apr 27 13:32:54 UTC 2008
Avi Greenbury schrieb am 26.04.2008 13:15:
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:18:34 +0200 Christoph Bier
> <christoph.bier at web.de> wrote:
>> Oh, yes, incorrectly. Sorry, but this is the Linux attidue[tm]
>> that's far from reality and for many years I was of your
>> opinion. But reality is quite different. Independent from
>> profession (except IT specialists) and education most of the
>> people I know never take any backup. Even when they upgrade
>> their $WHATEVER_OS machine they accept to loose most of their
>> data. Some things get burned to a CD. People laugh at me when
>> they hear that I take daily backups.
> I know this quite well (I support Windows users all day during
> the week). But Linux upgrades present no greater risk of breaking
> things than Windows updates do (I've little experience with OSX).
> So, if a user upgrades from IE6 to IE7, and loses everything,
> they're generally (IME) quite prepared for that. [...]
I wasn't prepared :-(. I guess because I'm spoiled by Linux
concerning data loss. That's the other side of the coin.
>> But my needs changed over the years. I don't need anymore a
>> fully configurable FOSS system even if I liked to have one!
>> First of all I need a system that works out of the box with all
>> of my peripheral equipment and most of the utilities I know
>> from the FOSS world (bash and many CLI tools, Emacs, TeX, GNU
>> R, gnuplot ...) and a professional PDF workflow (Acrobat Pro).
> Well, then I'd suggest OSX is a better option for you, as you've
> already said.
I'm not sure but I'll give it a try. My first trials with MacOS X
weren't successfull because I couldn't cope with the user interface
and bash was truncated. But I'll try again now.
>> Especially new hardware doesn't work well under Linux and other
>> free OS, my five year old laptop never suspended successfully
>> with Ubuntu. I'm willing to pay for a system that works out of
>> the box with nearly every hardware. If it was a Linux/FOSS
>> system I'd be *very* happy!
> See, rather than find an OS that works with all hardware, I find
> hardware that works with my OS.
But it's soo time consuming! And you can not be sure that it really
works. I always did intense research on which hardware to buy. It
shouldn't only work with Linux but it also should meet my
expectations of quality. One year ago I bought a new Nvidia graphics
card that should work perfectly with Linux resp. Xorg. Obviously it
does for all other users but I can get only 500 FPS with the recent
proprietary Nvidia driver. I could continue the list of hardware
> I know compatible OSs aren't hard
> to find, but since I don't mind what the hardware is, just what
> it does, this seems to make more sense to me. Though I accept
> it's not feasible for you.
> It's the above approach that's always lead me to Thinkpads. I'm a
> little confused at your troubles, but maybe I've just been lucky,
> or you unlucky. Or it's just that the lower-end ones are more
> compatible (which is likely, since things'll be simpler).
I'm talking about a R60 with a Core 2 Duo, Intel chipset and ATI
>> On my five year old laptop and my wife's ThinkPad WLAN doesn't
>> work yet and I already spent days with the help of the Debian
>> and Ubuntu community (not to mention my Nvidia graphics card).
>> Getting basic things to work doesn't mean fine tuning.
> Ah yeah. I've just always made sure that when I buy a laptop
> everything's Intel.
The ThinkPad's chipset is Intel. But I really don't want to be
restricted to one manufacturer!
> The presence of an nvidia chipset
I don't have a nvidia chipset. I talked about my Nvidia graphics
card (6200 LE, 256 MB RAM) in my desktop PC which has an Intel
+++ Typografie-Regeln: http://zvisionwelt.de/downloads.html (1.6)
More information about the ubuntu-users