As I (I think I did) said in my original posting... This is just a simple ISP connection thing, information only needed. The "tech" only needed to provide the "end user" of their product or service, required connection information. Which, is not "platform" specific, or OS specific. Rather: Open your e-mail program (whatever that is), and enter this for SMTP and POP3 servers, check the box marked "Server requires Authentication" (or not) - fill in the login information (you should already know), and then click "Done" / "Apply" / "or whatever your program uses for confirming" - etc...

The problem wasn't that they didn't really know this information, but rather, they only provided that information for Windows users, and only by using their own Install CD, which only ran on Windows. As mentioned, a nice sheet of paper of this information would have been nice (for those of us who either, know not to run stuff that is going to install "way more" junk than we will ever use, like on Windows, or, the small share of us who prefer to run an Alternate OS that can't run that Install CD)

Having a tech tell me: I have to install Windows to run an ISP's Install CD, just to get my internet connection working (in Windows), is not the best practice. Nor is a "tech" saying that, as an ISP, they don't want Linux Users using their service, and thus, not provide me with the connection information to getting online with their service, without having some OS that is only Windows. (Both of these are what I was getting from the "front line" technicians)

This whole "feeling" is what I was getting, just from my ISP... we never, and never really had to, get into hardware, or even the internal workings of the software involved... Web Browsers are pretty much the same, in either OS platform, same goes for e-mail programs... I guess what I was really trying to get across, was, that being or using, Linux, you tend to be considered a "Hacker", you become more concerned with "information" or "settings", than the actual names of programs... I.E. KMail instead of Outlook, or Outlook Express... and FireFox, or IceWeasel, or Mozilla, instead of Internet Explorer... the programs are different in names only, basically, but what "they do" is generally, identical - given you have the information for the settings in either, or all, of them. Right?

So? What's my beef? Simply, not providing the needed information required to use the product you "bought", and giving a reason for it because you don't run what they want you too. In other words, because I don't run Windows, we aren't going to give you the required information to get our service running on your system, to you. This is precisely what I was commenting about, in the original context of this post, and what my ISP was doing.

Using the "General" response to getting an answer from their customer that they don't run Windows, with a flat out, sorry! We don't "support" that! Is not valid, they are an Internet Service "provider", not Microsoft - or a program manufacturing company bent on only providing their software to "Windows" customers. They provide internet service, to who-knows-what types of computers that are being manufactured, past, current, or future. This includes, but not limited to, Mac's, PC's, and since ISP's also do service for "Companies" - my guess is, they need to deal with some mini, and mainframe computers as well.

Again, this isn't like AutoCad, or PhotoShop, it's internet service... I need to get my e-mail, and surf the web, kind of stuff. Just tell me my homepage to point to, and the server connection information for my e-mail stuff. I'm not even asking them to do it for me, like having to even know what I have to run to get that information put in, just the bloody info itself, that's all.

You'd think I was asking for the password to cracking into the I.R.S. database or something, considering the attitude I was getting for the tech. I am a paying customer, of their service, I should be able to "use" that service. Apparently, not, if I don't run the OS they want me to (?)

Oh well, my posts tend to be long, and I guess my point doesn't really come across in them. My point, basically, was, that in many cases, what OS you run is completely unimportant, but, tends to become, apparently, dire consequential when it really isn't. (when it comes to certain things. like; internet access)

My biggest beef is that, this whole attitude is, or more likely, only going to get, worse over time. It won't stop with what OS you run, but, will propagate into what Program you run, what Options you set, and if you are "current" on your Windows Registration Contract or not. In most cases, Linux people can stand by, and watch everyone else deal with it, but, as in the case of that whole fiasco with Microsoft wanted to dictate who "accesses" the network as "trusted" or not, some things may not come to pass.