Replies

GE, You are a freaking idiot. Attempting to take words out of context and twist them to mean what you want them to mean is an old and very lame troll tactic.

So, one more time for those who still might be reading this thread (which has devolved far off topic due to GE's trolling).

Here's exactly what I said...

OTOH, running dual head with either separate desktops (my personal preference) or with one desktop spanning both monitors rocks. Windows will do dual heads, but I don't think you can get dual desktops without third party tools.

NOTE the term "separate deskstops". I'll spell it for you slowly so perhaps you can understand it. "s-e-p-a-r-a-t-e d-e-s-k-t-o-p-s". This is an entirely different concept from having a single desktop that spans two monitors. it also doesn't specifically make any statement about multiple virtual desktops, though I elaborated later to clarify for others on the thread, that with Linux you can run BOTH multiple desktops AND multiple virtual desktops AT THE SAME TIME.

antirepublicrat, I do not believe I was factually incorrect in my statement. I don't have a place to install that particular MS tool, but from what I've read, it will support multiple virts, not multiple desktops, and certainly not multiple desktops with multiple virts on each. If you have seen any information to the contrary, I'd be interested in knowing about it, as there are a couple of folks where I work that might be able to make use of it.

I do not believe I was factually incorrect in my statement.

Only incorrect in that statement in a vacuum without the context of the thread GE linked to. GE knew the context, yet he still claimed you lied -- standard tactics. Stating without context that you can't get "dual desktops" without 3rd party tools on Windows is an incorrect statement, since it doesn't have the clarification omitting dual virtual desktops.