on why someone on ZDnet is having problems running Linux:
The linux cannot reliably be employed on modern hardware Yes, well, I did receive quite a few pointed ‘pointers’ about linux not requiring windows, but I am yet to be convinced on that score.
I did witness first hand just the other day, a demonstration of a machine loading up the linux, and several points piqued my interest for sure.
Firstly, the machine loaded into the Microsoft boot sequence prior to loading the linux. This is the segment of the operating system which counts down the memory, and configures the A:, C: and D: drives priorto loading the Microsoft windows. Although the machine did not display the familiar windows animation, it was obvious that the linux was freeloading off the back of this prior installation/boot sequence. The aforementioned demonstrator, upon further questioning, even admitted that ‘Oh, That part is not the linux’, and then went on to confuse the issue with technical jargon. However, one cannot mask a simple act of piracy with excessive verbosity. A fool and his lamb are worth 2 inthe bush.
Now - I will admit after some further research, that the linux is not in fact a complete copy of Microsoft Windows. My research indicatesthat it is in fact a copy of Unix. I bet you didnt know that young man? Yes, its a straight copy of Unix, even down to copying verbatim code files straight from the source of Unix. I believe there is a courtcase in progress regarding this latest discovery. The magnitude of the theft is now becoming apparent.
However, this remarkable fact may well uncover the answer to Ed Bott’smystery linux installation failure. You see, the Unix was designed to run within the VHF to UHF spectra (much like a radio), which is all well and good until you consider that modern computers run in the microwave range, at which regular radio reception starts to have serious issues. If one were to use a UHF receiver to tune in to aquad-phased broadcast in the Microwave spectra, one would fail miserably.
I would wager a bet that Ed Bott’s computing apparatus was a more contemporary design utilizing a 3GHz central processor unit (or CPU).Under such frequencies, the linux would literally tear itself apart,its code lacking the internal cohesion to sustain this extreme environment. The Microsoft by comparison, is streamlined and engineered to withstand this Microwave environment, thanks no doubt to the forethought of its designers.
And of this there is ample evidence, which one can easily do an msn-search for and witness first hand. All of this evidence is on the public record, and cannot be denied.
January 21st, 2008 at 8:59 am
This deserve an oscar !
January 21st, 2008 at 10:28 am
Originally appeared here:
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12354-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31880&messageID=589536&start=-9352
January 21st, 2008 at 12:36 pm
The Microsoft boot sequence??? That’s a good one! So I guess now Microsoft has developed our bios firmware and screens too or so says JerryLeeCooper.
January 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Brilliant!
I’m trying to work out a machine design in which software really *did* need ruggedizing for higher frequency clocks
no luck yet. Something like the machine in Egan’s _Luminous_, perhaps… (but even there the danger would more be of malicious attackers turning the computer into a laser weapon attacking the machine itself: a rather nasty DoS attack…)
January 28th, 2008 at 12:07 am
Jerry, please. The first thing you see when you start your computer has nothing to do with Windows or Microsoft. Try buying a new computer that doesn’t have anything loaded on the hard drive, and boot it. You’ll see the exact same stuff come up, even though the hard drive has no operating system loaded on it at all. It’s called the BIOS. It has nothing to do with the operating system, rather it’s the software that gets the motherboard set up and running in order to be able to be used by an operating system in the first place (oversimplification). Linux doesn’t use Windows drivers to run. I hate to admit that I’m having a good laugh at your expense, reading all the stuff you’ve put out about “the linux” (hint, just call it linux, mkay?), but honestly, you need someone to tell you the truth so you stop making yourself look kind of silly.
Go get a copy of ubuntu, and totally wipe windows off your computer, and install ubuntu on it.
Okay, don’t I was kidding. But DO install ubuntu on a separate partition and check it out. Yes, it’s hard. No, it’s not windows, but I’m on a 3.3 gig computer running a gig of ram, and a pretty new Nvidia video card, and this is faster and more responsive than the Vista machines I see in stores around town.
Try to hold off on the Linux comments for a while until you’ve done a bit more research, okay?
Or keep me laughing, whichever.
January 28th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Oh. My bad. The more I read, the more sense you make. Where do I sign up for my tin hat? JL for president!