Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #104793

Re: Poor "Snit"

Path csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Subject Re: Poor "Snit"
Date Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:21:24 -0700
Lines 60
Message-ID <D51F7184.A09F5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References <elqhejFcdfdU1@mid.individual.net> <RJ-dneSHn9uGh2XFnZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sandman-953bb6cb11d575707a765b01a99daeb8@individual.net> <1PqdnSW4J-lSl2TFnZ2dnUU7-fPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <odb2n7$2kr$1@dont-email.me> <D51E60AD.A0817%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <odb46d$85h$1@dont-email.me> <200420171620314053%nospam@nospam.invalid> <odbcnp$7ba$1@dont-email.me> <200420171900239610%nospam@nospam.invalid> <odceeg$h8p$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding 8bit
X-Trace individual.net Vf/f5sdFb2jF+b3egRvAaACVASJCgx07OB5QYEP0jKPWnaZDyW
Cancel-Lock sha1:cIg6teaML1I8E8rgscOPNkc7pMQ=
User-Agent Microsoft-Entourage/12.36.0.130206
Thread-Topic Poor "Snit"
Thread-Index AdK6su/2aYOyOWYwkkaDaOaVeb4QVg==
Xref csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:410290 comp.sys.mac.system:104793 alt.comp.os.windows-10:40283 alt.cellular-phone-tech:1217

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On 4/21/17, 1:07 AM, in article odceeg$h8p$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> nospam wrote:
> 
>> In article <odbcnp$7ba$1@dont-email.me>, Jonathan N. Little
>> <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Some DEs do not have the New Folder hot key work on the desktop and
>>>>>> if you go fast with your pressing of hot keys they can get
>>>>>> "confused". Others, such
>>>>>> as most Gnome based ones, handle it better. But here is the issue
>>>>>> that was being discussed:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 'tis the beauty of Linux. Don't like that DE, then pick another to
>>>>> suit you. That is in contrast to MS or Apple where you are stuck with
>>>>> whatever they tell you to have.
>>>> 
>>>> wrong.
>>> 
>>> How so?
>> 
>> neither apple nor microsoft stop anyone from running whatever they want.
> 
> Wrong

What program do you think Apple or MS stops me from running? Be specific.

>> macos is unix under the hood and win10 has a bash shell which even
>> supports linux binaries. xwindows runs under it, as well as plenty
>> more.
> 
> Wrong again. The "windows bash shell" (as half assed as it is) will *never*
> be able to "support" linux binaries. Those will not run under windows, no
> matter what.
> 
>> the real question is why anyone would willingly do that because by
>> doing so, they won't be able to use the vast amount of mac/windows
>> software that is not available in linux. it's a downgrade.
> 
> Whereas windows or Mac will never run more than a small part of linux
> software. The little bit which is ported makes only a small portion of the
> available software

Why not list some of the software, say, you run which does not run on a Mac?

Keep in mind I, and other Mac users, can easily run Windows and Linux in
virtual machines.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Poor "Snit" Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-04-20 14:23 -0500
  Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 15:41 -0400
    Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 12:57 -0700
      Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 13:01 -0700
      Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 16:06 -0400
        Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-20 16:20 -0400
          Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 18:32 -0400
            Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 15:36 -0700
              Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 21:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 18:29 -0700
            Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-20 19:00 -0400
              Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 16:17 -0700
              Re: Poor "Snit" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-04-21 10:07 +0200
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 07:11 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-04-21 16:19 +0200
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:32 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:19 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:34 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:38 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:52 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 15:07 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:41 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:47 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 09:19 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:32 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 09:39 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:45 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:21 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 11:59 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:25 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:18 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:48 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 11:56 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:14 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 12:24 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:36 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:23 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:26 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:39 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:17 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:43 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:24 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:44 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:20 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:23 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:18 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:21 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2017-04-21 12:13 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 15:19 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 17:40 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 15:13 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:20 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:42 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2017-04-21 17:21 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 15:15 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
        Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 13:35 -0700
  Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 12:53 -0700

csiph-web