Re: Founder of Gentoo Daniel Robbins: "I actually try to avoid using Linux on the desktop"

On 2024-12-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

Le 2024-12-19 à 02:45, RonB a écrit :
>

Maybe my computers don't have this "Dolby Atmos" because I can't tell any
difference between Windows and Linux when I play music on the same computer.
I know I don't have any crackling (as it would drive me nuts).

>
You would have to have this exact machine to see the difference in sound
quality between Windows and Linux. Windows is louder and demonstrates
the full potential of the speakers; Linux sounds good but it quieter.

 
I do have the exact machine as I've tested when dual-booting on the same
computer.

Okay, that makes more sense.

I meant you'd have to use my laptop to see how different it is in Linux
and Windows as it relates to sound.
>

I realize that a lot of people like the fingerprint reader, but I saw how
these could be used to steal your identity (right when they first came out)
and I decided I never wanted to use them.

>
I agree that it would be trivial to get into the machine of a user if
logging in requires nothing more than a fingerprint. I mean, you can
just force his finger onto the reader and away you go. It is, however,
very convenient if there are protections on every component you use. For
example, I have a password to log in but I also have one to open the
BitWarden vault, I then require a password/one-time password/key/key
password to enter my e-mail, and that's without mentioning that the
whole drive is protected by hardware encryption. If you can simplify
some of it through the use of a fingerprint, you will.

 
I'm thinking more of stealing your fingerprint for other uses.

>
Where Windows stores the fingerprints is fairly well known. However, the
fingerprint itself is encrypted within those files. I imagine that such
things don't matter and that anyone who has those files would be able to
use them to log in anyway, but reports of that happening haven't emerged.

All I know is that it was an issue at the beginning and, anything stored in
Windows can be found via back doors.

I've updated Windows 11 a couple times and do think, generally, it's better
than Windows 10. So I'll give you that. Still take way too long, though.

>
For me, Windows 10 was worse than 8 or 8.1. I truly do feel that while
the 8.x line was a mess, it performed well since the code was no worse
than 7 which was stellar. 10, however, is the result of Microsoft
deciding to make more use of the things people hated about 8.x and
presenting them differently. Obviously, there were going to be a lot of
issues. Had 11 never come to be or if my hardware were such that I would
have to make the decision between using Linux or sticking to 10, I would
gladly just use Linux. I hated 10 that much.
>
< snip >

 
I don't know much about any of these versions of Windows as I basically quit
using Windows when XP was going to be updated to Vista. I really don't like
any of them.

>
It's a good thing you never used the beta versions of Vista. Those were
absolutely horrendous. When I got the e-mail telling me that the
operating system was being released to manufacturers, I was shocked
because I felt that it was nowhere near ready.

I heard a lot of bad things about Vista and Windows 8. Fortunately I didn't
experience them as a regular user. I did get Vista working on my old
Latitude E6400 (just to see if I could do it) but this was the last version
and was not a whole lot different than Windows 7 by then (that I could see).

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.”  —J.R.R. Tolkien