On 11/27/21 12:20 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> Il 27/11/21 05:41, 166p1 ha scritto:
>> On 11/26/21 12:03 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>> Il 25/11/21 19:00, 166p1 ha scritto:
>>>> On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>>>
>
> CUT ALL
>>
>>    I am not entirely happy with XFCE and added LXDE.
>
> me too I usually add LxDE (or if avail LxQT), to save some ram on such
> poor machines
>
>>
>>    Mint is pretty good - my main box is Mint now. I did
>>    undo some annoying "Ubuntisms" ... /etc/network/interfaces
>
> since you need to de-ubuntize mint, why not give a try to LMDE ? It is
> Linux Mint purely debianized.

It's going to be many months before a LMDE based
on BullsEye will be available. LMDE is always
behind the curve alas.

> The exact difference I dunno which could be, maybe slower updating cycle
> (Debian is less frantic than Ubuntu), and some lagging, but It no longer
> share ubuntu's repos, and less emphasis on SNAP apps.
>
> I tried the 3 release, in a VM, so I don't think I'll upgrade it.
>
>>    works again (zero reason to change that old convention).
>>    Gotta pull off some other garbage too. I don't use, or
>>    even like, 'cloud' crap.
>>
>>    There may be some utility in installing KVM and putting
>>    a basic copy of your current system in there as a VM.
>>    THEN practice the update process on THAT and see if it
>>    works or where/why it goes wrong. If you nuke it, just
>>    replace it with a copy and try again.
>>
>>    Anyway, MX is my "go to" system most of the time. I just
>>    plain like it. Apparently a lot of people do, it's still
>>    number one on DistroWatch.
>
> it's sleek !
> now it seems to also work with WiFi networking, deep misteries ... I
> have done no further maintenance. It simply awakened on the right foot :)

Do they still make Mephis anymore ??? You can get Antix, a
pretty bare (but OK) distro, but has MX totally displaced
Mephis ? Antix makes a pretty good base for expansion, it's
like a really minimalized Debian with the crudest display
manager.

>>
>>    The closer 'buntu copies DO have one advantage - a much
>>    smoother (though not infallible) distribution upgrade.
>>    I put just WAY too many apps on a box to have to start
>>    from scratch every time Deb goes up a version.
>>
>>    And the RPMs ... um, no, not really.

Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
does much better.

Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.

> I had problems with Dragora updater, but likely due to my zero-skill,
> and at last I resigned.
> As long as it had worked, my impressions on Fedora 28-29 had been good.
> Just a bit unfamiliar despite using XFCE.

Sorry, no Fedora for me. That's a distro that has
gone to hell IMHO. I do remember Red Hat Linux ...
USED to be top notch.

I did make a Oracle Linux (uek) VM the other day
and am exploring it. MOSTLY like Centos - but
perhaps not as affected by the IBM deal. Perhaps.
FIRST order - dump el-crapo Gnome and install
XFCE. Working pretty well :-)

There's also "Scientific Linux", worth looking
into.

But, RPM universe, pick OpenSUSE/OS-TumbleWeed
every time.

EXCEPT they screwed me recently, put a substandard
version of FFMPEG in there that couldn't do what I
needed it to do. TRIED to install the alt version
but the dependencies just went deeper and deeper
and deeper until ... well ... screw it. Now the
box is Ubuntu Server.

Anyway, for most people, I'd advise to stick to
the Debian multiverse. It's a solid base with
a history going back to about The Beginning.

>> Fedora is quite
>>    poor. Centos has been murdered by IBM. I installed
>>    an Oracle Linux VM the other day, but I don't know if
>>    it's gotten the same downgrades as Centos yet. The
>>    only good RPM distro is OpenSUSE - and it's very good,
>>    very helpful, an all-around nice distro. Always has been.
>>    A bit too bulky for a PI alas - but I *did* make it run
>>    on one.
>>
>>    Arch, Gentoo ... just too much work. The BSD's have
>>    their place however, esp for outward-facing servers.
>>    Trying out GhostBSD and Dragonfly currently, but
>>    Free/OpenBSD are still the rock solid standards.
>
>

Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
> Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
> kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
> does much better.
>
> Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
> the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
> just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.

For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.

For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 11/28/21 02:14, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>> Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>> kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>> does much better.
>>
>> Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>> the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>> just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>
> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>
> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

Windows poses a problems because so many have to use it at work,
The solution would seem to be a dual-boot Windows Linux machine is
messed up every time MS decides to repair its broken kernel which messes
up the boot-loader which then has to be reinstalled.

Actually PCLinuxOS has few problems with updates, using Synaptic
and permits the use of several kernels on one machine, right now I have
two Long Term Support versions installed and the latest from the
packager, Texstar, who if he finds an error has been perpetrated will
work on setting it right. On the Forum we have coders and testers as
well as idiots like me. Now maybe I am lucky having decided after a
couple of HP products fail on me in record time to use Used Dell
Latitudes, have an E6520, E6540 and E7450. No problems on these models
and I have little fear of a problem when i get around to updating my
two older machines.

Forum is at <https://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php> . Registration
is free and if you cannot find the current iso files hit the Main button
on this initial forum screen and you will find yourself at the main
site. Current iso are 2011, three version of KDE, Mate, XFCE from
the packager and several others from the Community. The PCLinuxOS
Magazine is published every month AFAIK and is at volume #178, aimed
at the User base. PCLinux does not use or even plan to use systemd.
Sure you can get an older package list at Distrowatch.com. It is best
to have some experience before using PCLinux but like nearly every
current distribution it starts from a Windows XP version of KDE or
whichever Desktop Environment you think you want to use.

Some people like Aragorn move to Manjaro from PCLinuxOS but he is
very knowledgeable and experienced.

bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS
and a minor case of hypergraphia

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>> Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>> kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>> does much better.
>>
>> Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>> the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>> just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>
> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.

I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.

> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
kept the system calls the same and the software would work.

The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.

When people write libraries they seem to have a bad habit
of changing how they work rather than making sure all the
OLD stuff works just like always and then adding some
new stuff. So, a program writ expecting abcxyz,0.12.03.so
may not work with abcxyz.0.12.04. This shouldn't be.

Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
them with the newer versions. Now your older software
won't work.

Part of the "scattered" aspect is the "crowd-source" approach
which let Linux grow so fast and well. Winders, well, that's
centrally coordinated. Old system calls will always work, new
libraries will always work with old software. The libraries
are not so much "new" as they are "added-onto".

Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
"image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.

There is (was?) a Linux mag with "Zack" the kernel guy.
There were always battles with Linus - developers kept
wanting to make fundamental changes that would break all
kinds of other kernel stuff and/or major software. Linus
keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't
as young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ?
No more anchor, it all spins off wildly, developers can't
keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately have to
decide on ONE to support. Instead of being largely
interoperable with very similar apps, each post-Linux
becomes a world unto itself down to the binary level.

I'd predict a RHEL "Linux" and Ubuntu "Linux" and nothing
else, not even any spin-offs. Soon they'd become proprietary
one way or another ... some horrible users/month program
like so much software has become these days. I idly looked
into Claris FileMaker-Pro the other day. Used to be a good
little Database program and the price was OK. NOW it's like
$39 per user per month. No thanks. They're greeding themselves
out of the market, everybody may as well just use Office 365
crap instead for about the same rip-off price.

On 11/28/21 11:07 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 11/28/21 02:14, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>>    Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>>    kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>>    does much better.
>>>
>>>    Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>>    the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>>    just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>>
>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>>
>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
>
>     Windows poses a problems because so many have to use it at work,
> The solution would seem to be a dual-boot Windows Linux machine is
> messed up every time MS decides to repair its broken kernel which messes
> up the boot-loader which then has to be reinstalled.

Winders updates tend to nuke multi-boot. There ARE ways
around it, but they're weird and seem to require UEFI
booting. Winders has the ultimate ego - nothing else
exists/matters.

Use a Linux VM inside Winders, or vice versa. Then it's
at your fingertips and you can even share folders, run
them at the same time.

>     Actually PCLinuxOS has few problems with updates, using Synaptic
> and permits the use of several kernels on one machine, right now I have
> two Long Term Support versions installed and the latest from the
> packager, Texstar, who if he finds an error has been perpetrated will
> work on setting it right. On the Forum we have coders and testers as
> well as idiots like me.  Now maybe I am lucky having decided after a
> couple of HP products fail on me in record time to use Used Dell
> Latitudes, have an E6520, E6540 and E7450. No problems on these models
> and I have little fear of a problem when i get around to updating my
> two older machines.
>
> Forum is at <https://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php> . Registration
> is free and if you cannot find the current iso files hit the Main button
> on this initial forum screen and you will find yourself at the main
> site.   Current iso are 2011, three version of KDE, Mate, XFCE from
> the packager and several others from the Community.   The PCLinuxOS
> Magazine is published every month AFAIK and is at volume #178, aimed
> at the User base.  PCLinux does not use or even plan to use systemd.
> Sure you can get an older package list at Distrowatch.com.  It is best
> to have some experience before using PCLinux but like nearly every
> current distribution it starts from a Windows XP version of KDE or
> whichever Desktop Environment you think you want to use.
>
> Some people like Aragorn move to Manjaro from PCLinuxOS but he is
> very knowledgeable and experienced.

PCLinuxOS is ok ... though very focused on KDE, which is even
more bloated than Gnome (but a lot more usable - hey, look at
the default Gnome for Centos or OracleLinux - it MUST DIE
IMMEDIATELY or you just can't STAND it, blend in XFCE). Never
liked Gnome, but now it's just HORRIBLE.

But if you're gonna use Linux then Deb, Mint or Ubuntu(s)
are probably the best way to go these days. Lots of us like
MX ... which while Deb/Ubuntu is some aspects has some
nice enhancements.

Le 29-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
> On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>> Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>> kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>> does much better.
>>>
>>> Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>> the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>> just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>>
>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>
> I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
> reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.
>
>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
>
> Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
> basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
> NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
> kept the system calls the same and the software would work.

In your dreams. When you upgrade Windows, the old stuff can still work,
but it's far from everything keep going on fine. And if you want a system
up to date (ie: not only Windows), you have to take care yourself of
upgrading every single software you installed.

> The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
> to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
> a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
> you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
> install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
> will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
> a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
> that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.

The dependencies on the libraries are not related with the OS but with
the software. Every software is using libraries and needs some version
of it to work. The difference between the Linux way and the Windows way
is the way the libraries are managed.

With Windows, every software comes with its own dependencies. So if five
softwares are using the same library, it's installed five times and
launched five times in memory when needed. So, it's easier to manage,
but it's a waste of ressources.

With Linux, the libraries are mutualise, so it can be tricky when one
library needs to be upgraded and not the other one. It's not the Linux
issue, it's the distro maintainer issue.

> Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
> for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
> these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
> don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
> them with the newer versions. Now your older software
> won't work.

Once again, it's more complicated, but it's better. Having a lot of
unused old unmaintained libraries can be easier, but it can be used by
an attacker.

> Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
> keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
> different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
> "image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
> the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.

It's not related to Linux or to Windows. Look at python which changed
completely from python2 to python3. Whatever your OS, you have to take
care of it.

> There were always battles with Linus

Once again, it's not related with Linux. Take anything, if a threshold
in the number of people is attain, there are battle. Look at the morons
on cola fighting for Trump/Biden. There are the battles on the OS, on
the tools, on the religions, on the sport, on anything you want.

> Linus keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't as
> young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ? No more
> anchor, it all spins off wildly,

No. Either they will keep that way or there will be a fork or two but
nothing to worry about. Look at openoffice/libroffice when Oracle took
control of it. There was a fork, and everything is fine in both parts.

> developers can't keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately
> have to decide on ONE to support.

Yes, of course, so what? Look at systemd, The distro switched from a
sysinit to another one until all recognized the best one was systemed.
If one day there is another one which is better they'll switch again.
With the kernel it would be the same.

> Soon they'd become proprietary one way or another ... some horrible
> users/month program like so much software has become these days.

I'm not sharing your fears.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 12/3/21 5:54 PM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 29-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>> On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>>> Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>>> kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>>> does much better.
>>>>
>>>> Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>>> the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>>> just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>>>
>>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>>
>> I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
>> reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.
>>
>>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
>>
>> Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
>> basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
>> NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
>> kept the system calls the same and the software would work.
>
> In your dreams. When you upgrade Windows, the old stuff can still work,
> but it's far from everything keep going on fine. And if you want a system
> up to date (ie: not only Windows), you have to take care yourself of
> upgrading every single software you installed.

NOT what I've generally experienced over the years. The
biggest problem of late didn't even have to do with MS,
but the chip-makers, when they stopped supporting native
8/16-bit code. Gotta use DOSBOX or something like it.
I have a CP/M-86 running on VirtualBox ... and a nice
'C' compiler for it. DOS 2.x as well with IBM 'C' and
Pascal compilers. But the executables won't run native
on any i-series Intel processor anymore.

>> The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
>> to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
>> a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
>> you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
>> install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
>> will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
>> a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
>> that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.
>
> The dependencies on the libraries are not related with the OS but with
> the software. Every software is using libraries and needs some version
> of it to work. The difference between the Linux way and the Windows way
> is the way the libraries are managed.

AND The Problem ...

> With Windows, every software comes with its own dependencies. So if five
> softwares are using the same library, it's installed five times and
> launched five times in memory when needed. So, it's easier to manage,
> but it's a waste of ressources.
>
> With Linux, the libraries are mutualise, so it can be tricky when one
> library needs to be upgraded and not the other one. It's not the Linux
> issue, it's the distro maintainer issue.

I won't put it all on them. The multiplicity of library
versions is enough to overwhelm anybody.

>> Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
>> for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
>> these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
>> don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
>> them with the newer versions. Now your older software
>> won't work.
>
> Once again, it's more complicated, but it's better. Having a lot of
> unused old unmaintained libraries can be easier, but it can be used by
> an attacker.

But your existing - often Not Very Old At All - software
won't work. Security is an issue, but not an excuse for
breaking everything as bad as the hackers would.

Somewhere I offered a fix - repair any issues in the libraries,
BUT KEEP THE INTERFACE THE SAME. You can add new functions, but
make sure the old ones always work as expected.

>> Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
>> keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
>> different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
>> "image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
>> the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.
>
> It's not related to Linux or to Windows. Look at python which changed
> completely from python2 to python3. Whatever your OS, you have to take
> care of it.

Oddly, I never programmed in Python before P3 came out.
So, to me, Python IS P3.

Although you can fix 99% of old P2 programs just by adding
parens around print statements :-)

>> There were always battles with Linus
>
> Once again, it's not related with Linux. Take anything, if a threshold
> in the number of people is attain, there are battle. Look at the morons
> on cola fighting for Trump/Biden. There are the battles on the OS, on
> the tools, on the religions, on the sport, on anything you want.

"the morons on cola fighting for Trump/Biden" ?????

Ok, that's kind of a, well, odd thing to say.

Linus seems a very PRACTICAL person. He wants his creation
to WORK and work CONSISTENTLY. Hardly a bad thing. He is not
going to go along with weird kernel changes that trash vast
swaths of what's out there. Yet, Linux remains Very Good -
so those changes weren't REALLY "necessary" at all ... just
"creative" brain-farts by young upstarts looking for something
"significant" to do.

>> Linus keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't as
>> young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ? No more
>> anchor, it all spins off wildly,
>
> No. Either they will keep that way or there will be a fork or two but
> nothing to worry about. Look at openoffice/libroffice when Oracle took
> control of it. There was a fork, and everything is fine in both parts.

Well, I don't use "Open" anymore ... it's fallen way
behind the curve. I do wish Libre had done more to keep
up an Access-compatible app though. Access is a very
handy WYSIWYG DB system. Nearest thing WAS FileMaker,
before they went to the per-user-per-month rip-off plan
like MS. I'll never use IT again ... never reward malice.

>> developers can't keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately
>> have to decide on ONE to support.
>
> Yes, of course, so what?

"So what" ??????????????????

LOTS of "what".

> Look at systemd, The distro switched from a
> sysinit to another one until all recognized the best one was systemed.
> If one day there is another one which is better they'll switch again.
> With the kernel it would be the same.

I disagree about systemd being "best". I'm quite happy with
distros that don't include it. Stinks of the Windows registry
a bit too much for my tastes - the big spinney Master Control
Program whose means and motives you can't quite discern ....

>> Soon they'd become proprietary one way or another ... some horrible
>> users/month program like so much software has become these days.
>
> I'm not sharing your fears.

But you SHOULD laddie ... you should ...... I've seen
Great System after Great System go to shit and take all
their Great Apps and Great Paradigms with them.

I remember when MS was considered "benificent" ... until
Gates got BIG $$$ signs in his eyes ......

Did find a cheap way to recover old systems of employees
No Longer With The Company - who made MS accounts with
passwords nobody knows, keyed to e-mail addreses nobody
knows. No more "You must log in to your MS account or
PowerPoint will not work" bullshit.

I really really HATE Winders ....