You mean you can't install Ubuntu on a machine with a SATA drive?

[Chris Sidener]

> My Netbook is only one year old. Needs third-party drivers to install XP

> on

> the SATA drive....(that's with Sata capability. You can of course turn off

> the SATA in the Bios in which case XP will install normally without

> third-party drivers but obviously you lose the SATA benefits...)



SATA is SATA. How do you "turn off the SATA in the Bios"

And what SATA benefits" do you lose?



Chris

 

[Alias]

Bill Yanaire wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hpnij6$9fb$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>> Gordon wrote:

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hpngal$kvp$4@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> Gordon wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> "ray" wrote in message

>>>>> news:828srlF2hkU54@mid.individual.net...

>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Rather peculiar. I have it currently running on a SATA drive.

>>>>>> Complete

>>>>>> install took about 20 minutes. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> My Toshiba Netbook has a SATA drive and that CAME with Linux

>>>>> installed.

>>>>> Installing new versions is a breeze, unlike XP where you need to

>>>>> provide

>>>>> third-party drivers to install on a SATA drive...

>>>>

>>>> Not true with the new motherboards. No floppy needed to install XP or

>>>> Ubuntu on a SATA drive.

>>>

>>> My Netbook is only one year old. Needs third-party drivers to install XP

>>> on the SATA drive....(that's with Sata capability. You can of course

>>> turn off the SATA in the Bios in which case XP will install normally

>>> without third-party drivers but obviously you lose the SATA benefits...)

>>

>> Which benefits?

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> Gordon doesn't know what he is talking about. He is delusional like

> yourself.

>

>



I researched it and he does know what he's talking about. You only know

lies.



--

Alias

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

"Chris Sidener" wrote in message

news:hpnkh2$3da$1@speranza.aioe.org...

>

>> My Netbook is only one year old. Needs third-party drivers to

>> install XP on

>> the SATA drive....(that's with Sata capability. You can of course

>> turn off the SATA in the Bios in which case XP will install

>> normally without third-party drivers but obviously you lose the

>> SATA benefits...)

>

> SATA is SATA. How do you "turn off the SATA in the Bios"

> And what SATA benefits" do you lose?

>



Presumably, Gordon meant setting the SATA mode in the BIOS to ATA

instead of AHCI. XP doesn't have native AHCI drivers, but does have

native ATA drivers.



--

Zaphod



Arthur Dent, speaking to Trillian about Zaphod:

"So, two heads is what does it for a girl?"

"...Anything else he's got two of?"

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

"Gordon" wrote in message

news:hpnfr5$ks6$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>

> "ray" wrote in message

> news:828srlF2hkU54@mid.individual.net...

>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>

>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>

>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>

>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>

>> Rather peculiar. I have it currently running on a SATA drive.

>> Complete

>> install took about 20 minutes. Oops.

>

> My Toshiba Netbook has a SATA drive and that CAME with Linux

> installed. Installing new versions is a breeze, unlike XP where you

> need to provide third-party drivers to install on a SATA drive...



Of course, if you compared a Windows version released at a similar

time as the version of Linux you are comparing, you wouldn't need

third-party SATA drivers for Windows either.



--

Zaphod



Arthur: All my life I've had this strange feeling that there's

something big and sinister going on in the world.

Slartibartfast: No, that's perfectly normal paranoia. Everyone in the

universe gets that.

 

[Gordon]

"Zaphod Beeblebrox" wrote in message

news:hpnp46$qgf$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>

> Presumably, Gordon meant setting the SATA mode in the BIOS to ATA instead

> of AHCI. XP doesn't have native AHCI drivers, but does have native ATA

> drivers.



It says "compatibility" in my BIOS....

 

[Gordon]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hpnij6$9fb$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>

> Which benefits?

>



The disk I/O is slower in "compatibility" rather than AHCI...

 

[Alias]

Gordon wrote:

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hpnij6$9fb$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>>

>> Which benefits?

>>

>

> The disk I/O is slower in "compatibility" rather than AHCI...



A lot slower?



--

Alias

 

[reagan]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, "Bill Yanaire"

wrote:



> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>

>Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed Windows, he

>would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>

>Should send him a sympathy card.

>

What a loser. He's so stupid he doesn't even know what his MB is. No

wonder he wants to use linfux. Maybe he's related to Aliass.



reagan

 

[Gordon]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hpqvej$f3s$2@news.eternal-september.org...

> Gordon wrote:

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hpnij6$9fb$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>

>>> Which benefits?

>>>

>>

>> The disk I/O is slower in "compatibility" rather than AHCI...

>

> A lot slower?

>



Not a LOT, but noticeable.

 

[Muad'Dib]

Bill Yanaire wrote:

> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>

> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>

> Should send him a sympathy card.

>

>

>



Don't know what his problem is, maybe he has a bad burnt disk or

something. I have installed on 4 different SATA drives with no issues at

all. Hmmm. Maybe if he did the MD5 check to make dang SURE he has a good

DL things would be going better? And totally up-and-running, (Apps etc),

in an hour with Winders is a pipe dream. (Depending on what yer smoking

in that there pipe)



G'day

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>

>

> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>

>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398



I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.



>>

>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>

>> Should send him a sympathy card.



Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.



That would probably be too productive.



--

This is a consumer product. |||

World domination simply isn't necessary. / | \

 

[Frank]

On 4/14/2010 2:03 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>>

>>

>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>

>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>

> I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.



It is. So why are you here?

>

>>>

>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>

>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>

> Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.

>

> That would probably be too productive.





> This is an alt.windows7.general ng, not a linux ng.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-04-14, Frank wrote:

>

>

> On 4/14/2010 2:03 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>> On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>

>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>

>> I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.

>

> It is. So why are you here?



I want to see what my Windows using friends and family will be in for

once they start getting Win7 shoved at them. I will be the one that ends up

bailing them out.



Also, I had a recent and non-consentual crash course in UAC.



>>

>>>>

>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>

>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>

>> Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.

>>

>> That would probably be too productive.

>

>

>> This is an alt.windows7.general ng, not a linux ng.



This is an issue of basic PC literacy. Windows runs on PCs.



--

Unfortunately, the universe will not conform itself to

your fantasies. You have to manage based on what really happens |||

rather than what you would like to happen. This is true of personal / | \

affairs, government and business.

 

[Frank]

On 4/15/2010 10:16 AM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2010-04-14, Frank wrote:

>>

>>

>> On 4/14/2010 2:03 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>> On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>

>>> I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.

>>

>> It is. So why are you here?

>

> I want to see what my Windows using friends and family will be in for

> once they start getting Win7 shoved at them. I will be the one that ends up

> bailing them out.

>

> Also, I had a recent and non-consentual crash course in UAC.

>

>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>

>>> Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.

>>>

>>> That would probably be too productive.

>>

>>

>>> This is an alt.windows7.general ng, not a linux ng.

>

> This is an issue of basic PC literacy. Windows runs on PCs.

>

What an arrogant, condescending linturd you are.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-04-15, Frank wrote:

>

>

> On 4/15/2010 10:16 AM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>> On 2010-04-14, Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> On 4/14/2010 2:03 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>>> On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>>

>>>> I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.

>>>

>>> It is. So why are you here?

>>

>> I want to see what my Windows using friends and family will be in for

>> once they start getting Win7 shoved at them. I will be the one that ends up

>> bailing them out.

>>

>> Also, I had a recent and non-consentual crash course in UAC.

>>

>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>>

>>>> Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.

>>>>

>>>> That would probably be too productive.

>>>

>>>

>>>> This is an alt.windows7.general ng, not a linux ng.

>>

>> This is an issue of basic PC literacy. Windows runs on PCs.

>>

> What an arrogant, condescending linturd you are.



You are a Troll with no interest in helping the novice. There is nothing

arrogant or condescending in pointing out that you are an asshole and your

ranting is unproductive.



It is not arrogant or condescending to point out the facts and expect

that the novice might be able to deal with those facts once presented with

them.



While the BIOS does cover some arcane territory, it's all menu driven.

So even mouth breathing morons such as yourself can at least poke around and

explore things without bricking the machine.



--

"Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don't evaluate whether

the idea will move the industry forward, they ask, |||

'how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?'" / | \



-- Bill Gates

 

[Frank]

On 5/4/2010 8:07 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2010-04-15, Frank wrote:

>>

>>

>> On 4/15/2010 10:16 AM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>> On 2010-04-14, Frank wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> On 4/14/2010 2:03 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>>>> On 2010-04-09, ray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>>>

>>>>> I thought this was alt.windows7.general, not alt.windows7.advocacy.

>>>>

>>>> It is. So why are you here?

>>>

>>> I want to see what my Windows using friends and family will be in for

>>> once they start getting Win7 shoved at them. I will be the one that ends up

>>> bailing them out.

>>>

>>> Also, I had a recent and non-consentual crash course in UAC.

>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>>>

>>>>> Or you could simply clue him in about BIOS options and such.

>>>>>

>>>>> That would probably be too productive.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>> This is an alt.windows7.general ng, not a linux ng.

>>>

>>> This is an issue of basic PC literacy. Windows runs on PCs.

>>>

>> What an arrogant, condescending linturd you are.

>

> You are a Troll with no interest in helping the novice. There is nothing

> arrogant or condescending in pointing out that you are an asshole and your

> ranting is unproductive.



Looks to me like you are the projecting asshole in here.

>

> It is not arrogant or condescending to point out the facts and expect

> that the novice might be able to deal with those facts once presented with

> them.

>

Says who? You? you're nothing but a condescending linturd asshole POS loser.



> While the BIOS does cover some arcane territory, it's all menu driven.

> So even mouth breathing morons such as yourself can at least poke around and

> explore things without bricking the machine.

>

I bet you wish you were half as smart as you want people to think you are.

But its an easy smoke screen to see through.

 

[Alias]

On 04/09/2010 05:32 PM, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hpnh2h$kvp$11@news.eternal-september.org...

>> Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hpng97$kvp$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> "ray" wrote in message

>>>>> news:828srlF2hkU54@mid.individual.net...

>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Rather peculiar. I have it currently running on a SATA drive.

>>>>>> Complete

>>>>>> install took about 20 minutes. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> Tell that to the poor guy who can't install. If he used Windows he

>>>>> would

>>>>> be working.

>>>>

>>>> Leap of logic.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> Simply not true.

>>

>> How do you know?

>>

>>> If he installed Windows he would have a good working

>>> machine, but he is stuck with that crappy Ubuntu that he will figure out

>>> very shortly is just junk. Maybe I should reply to his post and let him

>>> know!

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> Go ahead and see what happens.

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> I don't want to register on the Ubuntu forum and reply. I think he

> already knows that Windows is the right choice. Just give him a little

> more time.

>

>

>



If he couldn't install Ubuntu, he can't install Windows which is much

more complicated to install.



--

Alias

 

[Frank]

On 5/5/2010 9:23 AM, Alias wrote:

> On 04/09/2010 05:32 PM, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hpnh2h$kvp$11@news.eternal-september.org...

>>> Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>> news:hpng97$kvp$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>> Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "ray" wrote in message

>>>>>> news:828srlF2hkU54@mid.individual.net...

>>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:06:11 -0700, Bill Yanaire wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1448398

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Wow. What a piece of shit that Ubuntu is. If only he installed

>>>>>>>> Windows, he would be up and running within an hour. Oops.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Should send him a sympathy card.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Rather peculiar. I have it currently running on a SATA drive.

>>>>>>> Complete

>>>>>>> install took about 20 minutes. Oops.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Tell that to the poor guy who can't install. If he used Windows he

>>>>>> would

>>>>>> be working.

>>>>>

>>>>> Leap of logic.

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>> Simply not true.

>>>

>>> How do you know?

>>>

>>>> If he installed Windows he would have a good working

>>>> machine, but he is stuck with that crappy Ubuntu that he will figure

>>>> out

>>>> very shortly is just junk. Maybe I should reply to his post and let him

>>>> know!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> Go ahead and see what happens.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Alias

>>

>> I don't want to register on the Ubuntu forum and reply. I think he

>> already knows that Windows is the right choice. Just give him a little

>> more time.

>>

>>

>>

>

> If he couldn't install Ubuntu, he can't install Windows which is much

> more complicated to install.

>

Tell us just how you know W 76 is more difficult to install then

up-yr-fucking-butt-too?

 

[Andy]

Alias wrote:



> If he couldn't install Ubuntu, he can't install Windows which is much

> more complicated to install.

>

> --

> Alias





Isn't ubuttu an infant OS?

 

[cj@heaven.org]

You mean you can't install Ubuntu on a machine with a SATA drive?