It’s from Florence Foster King (actually, from her mother). Look it up.
Now, some might say that this TM applies to Linux distros in general. Why would you want a turd, even a free turd? And if you wanted it, why would you wait? And why are there a bunch of lunatics at the Saturday market stalls trying to sell you something that they just excreted yesterday?
Not me. I have full confidence in the probity and integrity of each and every Linux distributor.
——————————————-
In fact, and rather more amusingly, this TM is all about Loon critiques of Windows faults. Here’s a short list:
(1) Massive disk footprint. Who cares?
(2) Registry bottleneck. Not since Win98, if even then.
(3) Difficult to find hardware drivers. Ya kiddin’? Maybe around Win95.
(4) Eats RAM! What, all 4GB? Horrors! Save teh planzits!
(5) Oh heck who cares.
The point being that no Loon will ever compare apples to apples. Or even to oranges. Stuck as they are in a 1990s basemenet, they have probably not seen either for a distressingly large number of years.
———————————————-
Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft, albeit on contract. I don’t think I’m biased; maybe I am. But if I am biased, I am biased in favour of Windows Vista SP2.
Not in favour of Windows 95.
Please stop throwing that Friday Night Turd in my face.
Also, read Florence Foster King. She is amusing. You are not.
Give us a Saturday market argument, please. Not a Friday night turd.
Comments
(1) Massive disk footprint.
Only if 5 GB on a 2000 GB disk is massive, otherwise, no.
(2) Registry bottleneck. Not since Win98, if even then.
Not really, not even back then.
(3) Difficult to find hardware drivers. Ya kiddin’? Maybe around Win95.
All my hardware (on multiple machines over the years) worked under Win95; on linux however, even virtual machine hardware lacks drivers.
(4) Eats RAM! What, all 4GB? Horrors! Save teh planzits!
Win7 will actually consume less than 0.5 GB if Aero is turned off, you can get by with 1.5 GB – comfortably.
(5) Oh heck who cares.
They’ll find something to care and complain, just you wait…
OK, so sometimes underscores will and sometimes they will not italicize.
> (4) Eats RAM! What, all 4GB? Horrors! Save teh planzits!
> Win7 will actually consume less than 0.5 GB if Aero is turned off, you can get by with 1.5 GB – comfortably.
Nobody seems to understand how memory management works in modern OSes (yes, even in Linux to some extent, but that’s whole different story).
Here is a small script http://poshcode.org/2413
(Adam, I know you are reading this, could you, please, rewrite this in TuringComplete™ bash?)
Open elevated powershell, paste that code into it, then execute “ps | trim” (without quotes) and look how your “memory consumptions” goes down with the same set of applications (same applies to people complaining about IE/Chrome/Firefox memory consumption). And it doesn’t eve trim system working set (not equals to working set of System process) – one can use \\live.sysinternals.com\tools\rammap.exe to have even more “saved” memory.
One simple thing: less consumed memory doesn’t mean your system will run faster. Even more, there is one thing every developer should be familiar with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-time_tradeoff
Basically, if you don’t use your memory somehow – you’re wasting it. At the expense of execution time.
As for repeated nonsense. I still think it’s based on that “Five monkeys in a cage” thing. They’ve started most of this 30 years ago and some of that MADE SENSE back then. They’re repeating same old crap over and over even though it’s irrelevant for at least 15 years
“Basically, if you don’t use your memory somehow – you’re wasting it.”
True.
My point was merely to show that Win7’s basic footprint was quite small compared to typical PC’s (from early 2008) installed memory.
“But if I am biased, I am biased in favour of Windows Vista SP2.”
That is so damn ironic, given that Windows 7 (SP1) is the only version that is usable. All those problems you winbreds face with Ubuntu (wireless, kernel panics, BSOD (oh wai-)) I had them in Vista.
Oh btw, I only use Windows to occasionally play games and for my work where I have no choice.
(1) Massive disk footprint. Who cares?
Pfft… I have a 1 terabyte HD… Nothing is a massive footprint on this thing, and even if it is, i have room and cable to install 2 more hard drives.
(2) Registry bottleneck. Not since Win98, if even then.
While I did get a bit of relief deleting old registry entries in Win98, since then, nada… and yes I DO install and unistall a lot of programs.
(3) Difficult to find hardware drivers. Ya kiddin’? Maybe around Win95.
Since sometime in XP, I have seldom ever had to manually isntall a driver for anything. In Vista, and 7, drivers have always installed themselves as soon as I plugged something in.
(4) Eats RAM! What, all 4GB? Horrors! Save teh planzits!
4GB? Pfft… noob. I have 8GB installed (with the possibility of making it 16GB), and Win& is barely a blip. even with a crap-ton of programs open I barely ever get above 2GB, if even that high.
(5) Oh heck who cares.
No one… except for freetards. (besides no list would be complete unless it has 5 items… right?
http://i.imgur.com/wieTc.jpg
What a memory hog. ~170Mb all with Aero, Antivirus, Tablet input services, etc
As for disk footprint, last time I’ve checked (http://www.newegg.com/Store/Category.aspx?Category=15&name=Hard-Drives) 1Gb of disk space has been sold for whopping 3-6 cents.
Also, Adam, did’t your teacher give you some summer break readings? Why are you spending your precious time here?
“That is so damn ironic, given that Windows 7 (SP1) is the only version that is usable. All those problems you winbreds face with Ubuntu (wireless, kernel panics, BSOD (oh wai-)) I had them in Vista.”
Why yes, Vista had problems on running on some hardware, but Vista is now history, most people who had problems with Vista on their machine upgraded to Win7 or downgraded to XP.
Ubuntu on the other hand, the only thing I can do with a computer that is running Ubuntu poorly is use Win7.
“Oh btw, I only use Windows to occasionally play games and for my work where I have no choice.”
Ahhh so you have to make a defense by saying you use Windows, but only for a few things where you have no choice.
Maybe when I complain about Linux I should say that I only use it when I’m forced too set up a Linux Web Server at work.
>All those problems you winbreds face with Ubuntu (wireless, kernel panics, BSOD (oh wai-)) I had them in Vista.
Really?
Vista’s problems were fixed by the end of summer of 2007; some by better drivers and some by MS’ compatibility fixes deployed via Windows Update.
Of course pirates keep turning WU off for fear of MS detecting they are pirating, so they never received those updates.
Poor pirates.
Look into a mirror BassBoy… Who do you see?
——
And a minor nitpick:
Kernel panic on Unix is BSOD on Windows, the difference is that on Windows you get a clear error message (not merely in the BSOD, but also in a report you see after you reboot), that you can use to troubleshoot the problem, with a name of the driver that caused the issue, so the issue is immediately understood.
On Linux? Well, f*ck you, nobody ever has a kernel panic, but if you do then ItsYourOwnFault™!
>Oh btw, I only use Windows to occasionally play games and for my work where I have no choice.
Work and play, you do all your important things in Windows, eh?
“Work and play, you do all your important things in Windows, eh?”
Seriously… If he’s doing both on windows… what is Linux for?
And of course tear-free porn. (Not aimed at Bassboy, but there’s a number of linux types out there who need this stuff.)
>Seriously… If he’s doing both on windows… what is Linux for?
Screwing around for the sake of it; if he uses it at all, that is.
Tear free porn, eh?
So Linux makes Porn starlets cry?
Well, I can’t say I’m surprised.
“besides no list would be complete unless it has 5 items… right?”
Remember this?
“what is with Loonix and 5!?”
“what is Linux for?”
In the XP days, visiting keygen[dot]us without having to worry about viruses. Nowadays, nothing.
You must be signed in to leave comments.