Mandrake disappointment 1762

From what I have experienced, though, when someone asks a question they are ridiculed and flamed. People who do not know something do not do not know enough to know what they do not know. For example, I did not know about LiveCD's when I first started posting. Even once I found out about them and started using them, I was ridiculed for not using HD installed versions - even though I had explained - repeatedly - that this was not currently an option for me. I was also ridiculed when I did not know that some distros had LiveCD's.

Keep in mind, though, that Linux will not serve all needs - no OS does. Or, if it does serve a need, it may take time to find a distro that does so. For people who are new to Linux, do dig through the many, many distros to try to find one to suite their needs is a lot.... a lot more than many people, I am sure, are willing to do.

I know I have spent quite a bit of time evaluating several distros... and asking folks for advice and to post screen shots of other distros to see if they meet my needs.

It is important not just that an OS have a feature, but that it is easy to use and find... this is esp. true for me and my needs. For example, while I now know how to get to external drives, for my intended users that would likely not be acceptable - so even though *I* can access the feature, I want to know more about how it works on other distros.

Your statement shows a poor understanding of my needs - in that you believe if a feature exists it meets my needs. That is simply not the case. I am finding that many in COLA are, as you say, unteachable - they simply can not understand the concept that even if a feature exists it may not meet a need.

The problem with this is not in the expectations, as the expectations are fine. Some keep waving their arms around about how the feature exists instead of recognize, often if not always, that the problem exists not in the expectation, but in the meeting of the expectation by the software in question.

A clear example of this is the requirement to have easy to use and consistent dialogs. From what I have seen, few distros of Linux have this - not even the big names like SuSE. I have, however, been shown screen shots of the new Ubuntu that *do* meet that requirement. In an effort to help people understand the requirement I have even pointed to my screen shots of others OS's where there are "good" and "bad" examples - OS X being doing it mostly right and XP doing it mostly wrong. Still, there are some that seem "unteachable" and do not understand the requirement.

Newtard. Newtard? Do you see how that is an offensive term for a new user? Wow... that has nothing to do with Linux or user requirements or anything else - it is simply you calling folks names... hardly a reasonable way to advocate.

Since I am asking to see how Linux fits specific needs, then it is entirely appropriate to comment on how it does, or does not, fit those needs.

If I were to jump into a thread on how it was meeting other needs, such as server needs, and complain that the command line was not fitting my needs, then that would be silly. I am not, of course, doing that.

And below you go off into simple insults. I have no desire to play that game ... I have been playing it plenty in COLA, and does nobody any good.

-- Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with walnut paneling and an all leather interior.