John B. Slocomb wrote:
> On Sat, 01 May 2010 15:10:01 +0200, Alias
> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>
>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>> On Sat, 01 May 2010 13:53:40 +0200, Alias
>>> <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/01/2010 01:51 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>> I've posted this before, but without much luck.
>>>>>
>>>>> To reiterate: Sometimes my desktop icons will stop working. They don't
>>>>> disappear, they don't move around, they just don't respond to the
>>>>> mouse in any way. I can't select them, double click them, or anything.
>>>>> Usually (in 64-bit Windows 7) just hovering the mouse over the icons
>>>>> will highlight them. Doesn't work.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Quick Launch, Taskbar, Start Button, etc, all work fine. So do
>>>>> desktop Gadgets like the Clock.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've noticed that this seems to happen after I use Internet Explorer,
>>>>> there's no other pattern to it that I can see.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't bother telling me to scan for viruses, malmare, adware, etcware;
>>>>> I've done that again and again with multiple products. It doesn't
>>>>> help.
>>>>>
>>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>> Time to back up your data (if you can) and reinstall Windows 7. Have
>>>> fun. Course, installing Ubuntu would be faster but you probably believe
>>>> all the Win Trolls who lie about Ubuntu each and every day.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ah yes. the much advertised new purple Ubuntu that solves all
>>> problems.
>>
>> And YOUR solution for the OP is what, diss Ubuntu?
>
> It is not disrespectful to tell the truth, and the truth about Ubuntu
> is that it has as many problems as any other distro and is not the end
> all, be all, of operating systems as you and other newbees advertise
> it to be.
I have *never* posted that it is the "he end all, be all, of operating
system." This makes you a LIAR.
>
> As shown below in posts made to a Ubuntu discussion group it has some
> fairly significant failings - which you seem to ignore, or deny.
Another lie.
>
> Or perhaps you do not consider Not having a display as significant?
No problem here.
>
> In short, you are very nearly guilt of fraud and certainly guilty of
> lying when you extol Ubuntu as the "perfect system".
Considering I don't ... you're lying again. Are you related to the
Nymshifter?
>
>
>>
>>> And here is a number of posts from Ubuntu users who have tried to
>>> install the much vaunted new version
>>>
>>> The first on is a real winner - note the amount of tie it took to
>>> install Ubuntu.
>>>
>>> No help here - just upgraded online to 10 (total six hours!) and boots
>>> in
>>> text mode, startx gives me a softly backlit but otherwise featureless
>>> screen. Worked ok on 9.0 and 9.1. Radeon 9200 video with athlon XP-A
>>> 1920MHz
>>> CPU.
>>> It managed the upgrade process in GUI mode, changing the desktop
>>> background
>>> in the process, but on reboot no GUI.
>>> Just burned the ISO and getting the same result.
>>> Plan A is to get the 9.10 ISO and use that
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the helpful reply.
>>>
>>> I tried it because it "just worked" on the live CD of 9.10. Didn't
>>> have
>>> to do anything, so why waste my time figuring out stuff that I don't
>>> have to?
>>>
>>> As of now, though, I can't even *find* a xorg.conf so that might be
>>> part
>>> of the problem... not that I'd really be comfortable manually editing
>>> it
>>> if I *could* find it...
>>>
>>> nate
>>>
>>>> I haven't installed it.
>>>
>>> Thank you for sharing that piece of information with the world.
>>>
>>> We shall await your announcement that it is safe to install
>>> when you report back with a successful installation.
>>>
>>>
>>> John B. Slocomb
>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>
>
> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
--
Alias