Speeding teen kills self and friend - Described as an " incredibly outgoing, beautiful person"

In article .com>, Dave wrote:

> The much larger problem, and likely cause of Scott's problems, is the
> bloat of software that HP requires to make their printer, and all it's
> advertised features, work properly.

The 'brainless' NeXT printer connected (all the printer's abilities
are in the OS) to my NeXTstation works fine from a 30MHz machine. I
dunno.... Of course it's a unix OS.

> Not to mention my home XP computer hasn't actually crashed since the
> hard drive ate **** in 2002. (Programs have crashed, but the OS has
> always recovered and other tasks stayed open.)

I've successfully blue screened XP many times. Had failures where it
'stayed up' but I had to reboot to fix them as well.

, > was motivated to say this in
rec.autos.driving on 30 Dec 2005 16:03:27 -0800:
>


> Fantastic. This group is just filled with lovely people, isn't it? :-D

Now you see what troll ****heads like "laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE," or what ever it is calling itself do to newsgroups.

DTJ, > was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving
on Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:55:24 -0600:
> You know that used to be funny back when Windows crashed all the time.
> I've got servers that haven't been rebooted in years with no ill
> effects.

I was referring to the crappy consumer version that inevitablly would
find its way into our vehicles.

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> There is a lot more poorly-written software for Windows than there is
> for Linux. Thus, my Linux systems are much more stable than my Windows
> systems.

The fundamental difference that windows is, in essence, a one user toy
OS and unix a multiuser OS will forever make windows more vunerable to
bad software, bad drivers, viruses, and everything else. The way unix
compartmentalizes users will give it the advantage in this regard until
windows makes a fundamental change which will probably require a clean
sheet re-do.

necromancer wrote:
> , > was motivated to say this in
> rec.autos.driving on 30 Dec 2005 16:03:27 -0800:
> >
>
>
> > Fantastic. This group is just filled with lovely people, isn't it? :-D
>
> Now you see what troll ****heads like "laura bush - VEHICULAR
> HOMICIDE," or what ever it is calling itself do to newsgroups.

Indeed. Quite a shame.

On 30 Dec 2005 17:53:49 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:

>They also refuse to address simple problems because an OS is outdated
>(not XP, in their book.) As the good news, MS seems to have improved
>XP so that it doesn't get taken down even when the HP software fails
>completely. Yeah, I can't use my printer occasionally until I decide
>to reboot as a result, but everything else works fine.

Try rebooting your print spooler service instead.

Brent P wrote:

> In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
>> There is a lot more poorly-written software for Windows than there is
>> for Linux. Thus, my Linux systems are much more stable than my Windows
>> systems.
>
> The fundamental difference that windows is, in essence, a one user toy
> OS and unix a multiuser OS will forever make windows more vunerable to
> bad software, bad drivers, viruses, and everything else. The way unix
> compartmentalizes users will give it the advantage in this regard until
> windows makes a fundamental change which will probably require a clean
> sheet re-do.

Lots/most of *n*x software is open source. That means that real
programmers can look at the code when something burps and either fix it
themselves or ask the writer to fix it. The next step is public derision
of the inept writer, and I'm willing to bet that that's the unkindest cut
of all.

--
Cheers,
Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are going
to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off." -Elric of Imrryr

DTJ wrote:
> On 30 Dec 2005 17:53:49 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>
> >They also refuse to address simple problems because an OS is outdated
> >(not XP, in their book.) As the good news, MS seems to have improved
> >XP so that it doesn't get taken down even when the HP software fails
> >completely. Yeah, I can't use my printer occasionally until I decide
> >to reboot as a result, but everything else works fine.
>
> Try rebooting your print spooler service instead.

I've tried it, the HP is just so screwy that it refuses to work at all.
Usually it shows up as an unrecognized USB device until the next
reboot.

I rarely print though, so I've barely tried to fix the problem. I use
it for maybe 10 pages/mo, if that even. It just was so cheap and such
a pain in the ass not to have a printer that I got it.

If I used it more I'd have replaced it by now.

Dave

In article >,
Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>
>Having looked at quite a bit of Open Source source code, it's pretty
>obvious that public derision is not a major deterrent. There is a lot
>of really nasty-looking, poorly-written, difficult-to-maintain code
>out there - stuff that, had I written it, I would be embarrassed to
>release to the public.

You think that's bad, look at some proprietary stuff sometime. In
some cases, you can see how bad and nasty it is just from the _object_
code.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 07:03:38 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
> wrote:

>On 1 Jan 2006 21:46:16 +0100, The Real Bev >
>wrote:
>
>>Lots/most of *n*x software is open source. That means that real
>>programmers can look at the code when something burps and either fix it
>>themselves or ask the writer to fix it. The next step is public derision
>>of the inept writer, and I'm willing to bet that that's the unkindest cut
>>of all.
>
>Having looked at quite a bit of Open Source source code, it's pretty
>obvious that public derision is not a major deterrent. There is a lot
>of really nasty-looking, poorly-written, difficult-to-maintain code
>out there - stuff that, had I written it, I would be embarrassed to
>release to the public.

Oh but it is SO SUPERIOR to commercial code.

Linux has just as many issues as Windows. The main difference is in
user base, which makes it less likely someone is going to attack it.