Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

proudlyserving.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#71

Post by WorldWideWayne »

mindcrime wrote: post #70
WorldWideWayne wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, "nobody said those words in the article or anywhere in the comments". So, if your purpose was indeed to highlight that , you obviously failed since nobody here seems to be discussing that. Here are some articles that say what you allegedly wanted to - https://www.google.com/search?q=risks%20building%20on%20some...

Dude, just drop it OK? I'm not sure what kind of fight you're trying to start here, or why, but I really don't give a fuck.

Drop what? Relevant facts and observations? You can just fuck right off with your weasely bullshit reasons and appeals to maturity.

And if you actually didn't give a shit, you wouldn't have replied but here I think now we see the real you getting upset that someone called you out on your bullshit reasons for posting this.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#72

Post by Shorel »

delonia wrote: post #3

The author of that article says "I know from personal experience that today [2005] Microsoft takes application compatibility very seriously". And if you want to install Windows on a computer that already has a Linux distribution installed (dual-boot), then Windows will replace the existing boot manager, making it really difficult to boot Linux. That thing used to happen then, and it still happens now (2015).

I think it just stopped happening with UEFI and Win10.

With the caveat that UEFI has its own can of worms...

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#73

Post by Shorel »

krylon wrote: post #38
code_sterling wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it should. Seriously, there are are less than 2% of users using Linux on the Desktop. Now a fraction of these users dual boot. Microsoft is a business, and it's bad business to spend money you could be using to make your product better to ensure that you play nice with every possible bootloader out there.

Most people that are capable of installing Linux (or some other Unixoid system) are probably capable of reinstalling GRUB (at least with a little help from a search engine of their choice). But if you try to get your parents to give Linux a try, because their laptop ends up infected with some virus every other month, this does not help. Which makes me think: What about dual-booting two Windows installations? This is…

I triple boot Windows XP, Windows 7 and Ubuntu 32bits in my gaming computer.

Grub shows a single Windows entry on its boot menu.

Then you see Windows 7 and 'Previous Windows version' in a text mode menu.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#74

Post by Shorel »

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #65
mindcrime wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the intent of this submission was to share a slice of relevant history with those in the community too young to have lived through it. Exactly.

I'm guessing that the millions of tech people who make their living off of Microsoft's back would probably disagree that building on a Microsoft platform is a bad idea.

Then I would say that building software that runs exclusively on MS is a bad idea.

That's the reason I don't use .NET and I have never poked inside a metro app.

And it is a reason for the explosion of the Appstores for mobile and webapps in general, startups want to bet on something that's not MS.

I guess not a single one of the YC companies writes exclusively windows software.

Multiplatform software for the win.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#75

Post by krylon »

Shorel wrote: post #73
krylon wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people that are capable of installing Linux (or some other Unixoid system) are probably capable of reinstalling GRUB (at least with a little help from a search engine of their choice). But if you try to get your parents to give Linux a try, because their laptop ends up infected with some virus every other month, this does not help. Which makes me think: What about dual-booting two Windows installations? This is…

I triple boot Windows XP, Windows 7 and Ubuntu 32bits in my gaming computer. Grub shows a single Windows entry on its boot menu. Then you see Windows 7 and 'Previous Windows version' in a text mode menu.

Thanks for the info!

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#76

Post by dang »

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #71
mindcrime wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, just drop it OK? I'm not sure what kind of fight you're trying to start here, or why, but I really don't give a fuck.

Drop what? Relevant facts and observations? You can just fuck right off with your weasely bullshit reasons and appeals to maturity. And if you actually didn't give a shit, you wouldn't have replied but here I think now we see the real you getting upset that someone called you out on your bullshit reasons for posting this.

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the HN guidelines.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#77

Post by anonbanker »

eropple wrote: post #43
krylon wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, Windows runs on 85 - 90 percent of desktop machines, whereas FreeBSD's market share on the desktop is probably below 1%. (This is not a judgement on FreeBSD's quality as a desktop system, I have used it myself for about two years and was very happy with it. But compared to Windows, its market share on the desktop is tiny.) For better or worse, there is a difference between a system used by a tiny m…

That other hand and its callbacks to anti-competitive behavior and whispers of monopolies don't have much bearing on anything unless you are prepared to substantiate exactly how this behavior impacts the market share of other competitors. (I wish you luck on that very, very long row to hoe.) Meanwhile, even that "good behaving" Linux distro will happily remove Windows's boot record in favor of GRUB's, rendering the s…

you, sir, are excellent at using propaganda to discount people's claims. when malice is assumed, you discount it with "mustachio twirling" strawmen.

Now, instead of talking about the parent's point of direct anticompetitive behavior, we're somehow discussing "whispers of monopolies" that somehow put the burden of proof back on the grandparent, even though anyone older than 24 knows why microsoft is still not to be trusted.

I'm bookmarking your profile, so I can study your future comments. you seem to be on the bleeding edge of these advances. thank you for the excellent study tools.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#78

Post by eropple »

anonbanker wrote: post #77
eropple wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That other hand and its callbacks to anti-competitive behavior and whispers of monopolies don't have much bearing on anything unless you are prepared to substantiate exactly how this behavior impacts the market share of other competitors. (I wish you luck on that very, very long row to hoe.) Meanwhile, even that "good behaving" Linux distro will happily remove Windows's boot record in favor of GRUB's, rendering the s…

you, sir, are excellent at using propaganda to discount people's claims. when malice is assumed, you discount it with "mustachio twirling" strawmen. Now, instead of talking about the parent's point of direct anticompetitive behavior, we're somehow discussing "whispers of monopolies" that somehow put the burden of proof back on the grandparent, even though anyone older than 24 knows why microsoft is still not to be tr…

Propaganda? You're confusing a love for the English language and a little command of rhetoric with something vastly different, chief.

Hell, I don't even use Windows as a primary platform; I'm typing this from a Mac while I'm (quite literally) waiting to meet a guy to sell my Surface Pro 3 that I never use. I'm just not impressed by rules-for-thee-but-not-for-me silliness and knee-jerk, irrational fear. I don't trust Microsoft any more than I trust any company. But I don't rely on the fears of fifteen years ago to evaluate the current state of the world, either.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#79

Post by dang »

anonbanker wrote: post #77
eropple wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That other hand and its callbacks to anti-competitive behavior and whispers of monopolies don't have much bearing on anything unless you are prepared to substantiate exactly how this behavior impacts the market share of other competitors. (I wish you luck on that very, very long row to hoe.) Meanwhile, even that "good behaving" Linux distro will happily remove Windows's boot record in favor of GRUB's, rendering the s…

you, sir, are excellent at using propaganda to discount people's claims. when malice is assumed, you discount it with "mustachio twirling" strawmen. Now, instead of talking about the parent's point of direct anticompetitive behavior, we're somehow discussing "whispers of monopolies" that somehow put the burden of proof back on the grandparent, even though anyone older than 24 knows why microsoft is still not to be tr…

Personal attacks, which this crosses the line into, are not allowed on HN.

Re: DOS Ain't Done Til Lotus Won't Run? (2005)

#80

Post by anonbanker »

dang wrote: post #79
anonbanker wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you, sir, are excellent at using propaganda to discount people's claims. when malice is assumed, you discount it with "mustachio twirling" strawmen. Now, instead of talking about the parent's point of direct anticompetitive behavior, we're somehow discussing "whispers of monopolies" that somehow put the burden of proof back on the grandparent, even though anyone older than 24 knows why microsoft is still not to be tr…

Personal attacks, which this crosses the line into, are not allowed on HN.

This might be an Appeal to Dehumanization (I just created a new fallacy), but I consider about 75% of the people on HN to be legitimate people. the remaining reek of sockpuppetry. I felt the grandparent was a sockpuppet, and am treating the account as a dataset for future encounters.

I should be more mindful of the fact that there's (potentially) a human being behind the account I'm treating like an astroturfer. I can see why you considered this a personal attack.

Post reply on HN