Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #171365
| From | William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates |
| Date | 2013-03-31 23:00 +0100 |
| Organization | Dumb Willie Boaster @ Llareggub Inc. |
| Message-ID | <h8om2a-ej4.ln1@wp.alpha-one.linuxorg> (permalink) |
| References | <kj7kgo$l9f$1@dont-email.me> <20130331084434.973@usenet.drumscum.be> <t9obe0exzm.fsf@news.eternal-september.org> <kj933m$46f$1@dont-email.me> <kj96sp$ja1$1@dont-email.me> |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> After swilling some grog, Peter Köhlmann belched this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2013-03-30, the following emerged from the brain of Chris Ahlstrom:
>>>>> http://www.linuxadvocates.com/2013/03/standardization-as-road-to-
>> more-choice.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Not that I agree with it, and not that it doesn't contain some of the
>>>>> usual Snit derisive innuendo and buzzwords ("unified system")..
>>>
>>> If you dont agree with consistency and standardization across a deskop's
>>> apps you have no place in QA.
>
> I guess that's why I'm not in QA, then, bucko.
>
>>> The article was spot on and is a parallel to things like coding
>>> standards (try putting C code into the kernel code base that doesnt
>>> conform to the coding standards), color schemes etc.
>>>
>>> None of this is rocket science.
>>>
>>> It is extremely annoying to be a keyboard user and find C-w or C-q hasnt
>>> been taken care of in, for example, gnome settings or possibly a pop up
>>> from app "X".
>
> *LMAO*
>
> Can't even read a menu entry, eh bwah?
Why am I not surprised.
>>> Anyone who doesnt understand this is , frankly, clueless.
>
> Who really cares what an insane disruptive arrogant and dimwitted
> troll thinks about cluefulness? He's a lying fuckwit, plain and simple.
+1
>> And now (anytime soon, I guess) you will bring some examples of applications
>> behaving like that.
>>
>> You are aware that you are (once again) full of shit,
>> Hadron Snit Msg-ID Larry?
>>
>> Applications like that exist, but they are rare. And to top it off, they
>> exist on all platforms, and especially on your beloved windows.
>>
>> About the situation on linux you simply havbe no clue, because you don't run
>> any linux, and never have
>
> There's been a lot of talk on G+ recently about standardization Linux on
> a single package manager, single directory layout, a single desktop
> environment.
>
> While this is desirable for certain types of users and developers, it's
> never going to happen.
From what I've seen, in other groups, it's ususally the windoze
users/developers, like Quack, who whine about it. More often than not,
after a few replies from GNU/Linux users, they tend to be ignored.
> At best, some company will come to the fore and
> eventually the way it does things will become a standard of sorts. Red Hat
> used to be such a company on the desktop, but it withdrew to the
> enterprise market, where it is a pretty standard platform. Ubuntu has
> been trying, but getting almost nowhere in the face of Microsoft's
> dominance. Google's been stepping up with Android, and, to a lesser
> extent, ChromeOS, but again, you'll find a lot of people who don't like
> where they're going.
>
> As for the insane Quark troll whining about desktop variation,
> apparently he's never had the experience of going up to someone else's
> Windows workstation and finding that they set up things differently from
> what he likes.
>
> At all levels, customization and specialization is *unavoidable*,
> especially in open-source land.
>
> All this talk about standardizing every aspect of Linux is wishful
> thinking.
Indeed. IMO the vast majority of GNU/Linux users couldn't give a toss.
--
Microsoft: "You've got questions. We've got dancing paperclips.
Micro$oft, the company that makes spreading malware easy.
Microsoft exec Ron Markezich was quoted saying that for every $1
companies spend on Microsoft software, they need to spend $6 getting
it to work right. -- April 2011 SanFrancisco Chronical --
"We have no intention of shipping another bloated OS and shoving
it down the throats of our users."
-- Paul Maritz, Microsoft group vice president --
What's bad about Micro$oft:
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-30 17:15 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 06:42 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 10:10 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-03-31 12:30 +0200
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 07:34 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-03-31 23:00 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:16 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:33 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:55 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-04-01 01:07 +0200
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 16:10 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 18:14 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:27 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 20:04 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 17:20 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-03-31 22:50 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 03:54 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 20:12 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 19:54 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-01 10:58 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 07:44 -0500
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:54 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 07:59 -0500
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:01 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-03 08:53 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 06:58 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:12 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2013-04-01 17:56 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2013-04-01 16:29 -0600
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:14 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:07 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:05 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:03 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 15:41 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 13:11 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 22:26 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-03 16:48 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Sinister Midget <fardblossom@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 20:27 -0500
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 19:46 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-02 10:27 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Sinister Midget <fardblossom@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 05:46 -0500
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:53 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Gregory Shearman <ZekeGregory@netscape.net> - 2013-04-02 13:22 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:01 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:53 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:02 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2013-03-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-03-31 18:49 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 16:02 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:54 -0700
Onion Knight posts decent article on Linux Advocates 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2013-04-01 00:05 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 20:05 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 17:24 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-03-31 20:43 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 19:03 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Marti Van Lin <ml2mst@dontevenbother.invalid> - 2013-04-01 19:56 +0200
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates "Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com> - 2013-04-01 21:25 +0200
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Marti Van Lin <ml2mst@dontevenbother.invalid> - 2013-04-02 15:59 +0200
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:05 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-02 12:32 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:25 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 09:11 -0500
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:19 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-02 17:57 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 06:56 +0100
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2013-04-02 21:42 -0600
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-03 08:53 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-02 12:21 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:24 -0700
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-02 17:57 -0400
Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 13:12 -0700
csiph-web