I was just mentioning it for those users who aren't techy and or don't
do anything but surf and email. Not saying it was for the pure Linux
folks. Like myself I started with Centos early and got discouraged
because I didn't know Linux and went to Ubuntu and stayed there for
simple reasons like people stay with Microsoft. I was always a Mac fan
just couldn't afford it in earlier day and now after being in the IT
business so long I have 8 fully functional Macs of various types going
from versions 10.3.9 to 10.11.x. I also have several dual boot pc's
(Windose xp-7/various linux). I use a MacBook Pro every day for my work
and have multiple VM's of various linux for testing purposes. I have yet
to find any OS that does everything you want. I don't think there ever
will be either. One OS for all is a farce in my opinion. Even if you
took the best of every OS they would be incompatible because they would
fight each other and most likely give you a blank screen. And so it
goes, another OS to test.
Cory :)
--
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they
do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. -- Putt's Law
The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into
the impossible. -- Arthur C. Clarke
On 2/4/16 3:29 PM, Chuck wrote:
On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 12:42 -0500, tech4u wrote:
I tried Mate also but found Peppermint much lighter and less to fuss with.
Cory
--
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they
do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. -- Putt's Law
The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into
the impossible. -- Arthur C. Clarke
On 2/4/16 12:18 PM, Chuck wrote:
On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 10:30 -0500, tech4u wrote:
Hey Chuck,Thanks Cory!
I have found that Peppermint OS works pretty good 'out of the box' for non-techy, generic users who just want to surf the web and do email.
Cory
--
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they
do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. -- Putt's Law
The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into
the impossible. -- Arthur C. Clarke
On 2/4/16 12:27 AM, Chuck wrote:
On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 18:45 -0500, Mike wrote:
On 02/02/2016 09:15 PM, Mike wrote:
Windows 10: Microsoft Sets Operating System to Download Automatically as 'Recommended' Update The software update was previously designated "optional." As a "recommended" update, Windows 10 will begin downloading on Windows 7, 8 and 8.1 computers set to update automatically. Mike
Most of the replies so far really were not what I was thinking when I
posted this.
I'm really initially was thinking why am I (or anyone) being forced to
download this? Much of the world still uses metered connections, or
simply don't have this big fat pipe that MS seems to think we all have.
Doing what I've been doing, reloading machines, getting them internet
ready. This means that if it's not already in my image(s) it will be
soon. More bloat, more time to image. This isn't huge in and of
itself. I'm more concerned about the next phase, shutdown one night,
find 10 installing the next morning. Paranoia? Maybe but we are nearly
now, they have *forced* the download, it's far for inconceivable that a
switch will be flipped and poof, there it is.
All the above is without even mentioning all the other ills that 10
bring with it. Someday perhaps people will realize that MS free isn't
OSS. In my view it's just another loss of freedom, being forced to the
will of others, and what they *think* we want.
Blah blah blah, I'll stop now.
Mike
To unsubscribe send toncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.
I agree. This whole "You want this" attitude is annoying. My wife's laptop is exactly how she wants it. It is not up to someone in Redmond to decide she has to change. That's not how a free society is supposed to work. If MS wants to offer 10 for free, then good for them. If some people do not want to use it, then good for them. Being forced to deal with this shit pisses me off, and that's not good for anyone. In the end I'm guessing Linux is going to be on her computer before the end of the year, which is good for me, as I won't have to support MS crap anymore.
I will look into it, for sure. My Dad was using the Mate edition of Linux Mint and we both liked it, as it was something I could easily support, and it was easy for him and his wife to use. I'm probably going to take Susie's laptop in that direction. I liked Mate so much that I have installed much of it on my Debian box, which is also a possible direction for Susie's laptop. Like
I've reviewed Peppermint's documentation and I WILL NOT be using it.
Here's why:
1. Debian (the source of the goodness behind Ubuntu, and therefore
Peppermint) had a design goal which stipulated only 1 fresh
install per computer was ever needed. You can go from one
"version" to another in Debian without ever having to do a fresh
install. Any "Debian-based" distro that does not conform to that
standard is broken. full stop. B R O K E N. (Note: This is not to
say there might not be times when a user wants a fresh install,
but it should NEVER be forced on someone.)
2. Also, Peppermint's website clearly states: "If you decide you DO
want to upgrade there are things you can do to ease a fresh
install such as creating a “data” partition and symlinking the
Documents/Pictures/Music/etc. folders from your home directory
(safer [th]an keeping a /home partition as that also contains
config files)," That behavior is completely against everything
Linux represents. NO USER SHOULD EVER HAVE TO HAVE FILES STORED
OUTSIDE OF THEIR $HOME DIRECTORY. What were they thinking!? And
what the hell are they thinking storing configuration information
in /home!? NO freakin' way!
3. Finally, Ubuntu sucks, as they completely broke the Debian
packaging system by making their .debs incompatible with the
upstream versions. Basing a product on Ubuntu is sad to me. If it
had been based on Debian and the maintainers had maintained the
high standards we developed for Debian decades ago I'd be much
more interested.
Thanks again for the suggestion, but I'll have to pass. And I would recommend others do the same.
