Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #87280 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-20 15:33 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-01-27 06:40 -0500 |
| Articles | 12 on this page of 92 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-01-20 15:33 +0100
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-01-20 14:22 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-20 20:02 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-20 15:04 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-20 20:23 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day android <here@there.was> - 2016-01-20 21:15 +0100
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-01-20 19:52 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-21 01:56 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-01-20 22:24 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-21 03:49 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-01-20 23:07 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-21 04:16 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-21 04:45 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-21 04:52 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-01-21 11:43 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 01:17 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-21 08:57 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 09:59 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-21 10:22 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 14:30 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 11:42 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 14:50 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-01-21 20:28 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 11:33 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-21 12:05 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 11:35 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 11:41 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-21 22:19 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-01-21 11:46 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 14:30 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-01-20 23:38 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-21 08:52 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-01-21 11:48 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 14:30 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-21 21:49 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:50 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-21 22:18 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-21 21:48 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-02-21 19:09 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-22 00:18 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-02-21 20:08 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-21 20:09 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-02-21 20:34 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-02-22 13:06 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-22 17:34 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 01:08 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Ed Mullen <ejEMOVER@edmullen.net> - 2016-01-20 22:08 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 09:45 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-21 13:36 -0200
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-21 11:31 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 11:39 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2016-01-21 02:37 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-27 06:43 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-27 07:26 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-01-27 13:15 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-27 11:27 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-27 16:41 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-27 17:01 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-27 17:23 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-27 17:58 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-27 18:22 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-27 18:44 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-27 19:21 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-27 20:06 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-28 03:17 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-28 08:25 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-28 10:42 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-28 16:33 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-28 16:55 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2016-01-29 18:47 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-30 03:28 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2016-01-31 12:03 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-31 21:27 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2016-02-01 07:01 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-02-01 17:16 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2016-02-02 17:05 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 23:02 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-02-01 02:04 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 01:02 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-31 04:35 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Jake" <jakethesnake@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 17:47 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-02-21 00:06 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2016-02-20 19:48 -0800
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2016-01-31 03:59 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-26 19:42 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-02-26 17:17 -0300
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-26 20:22 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-02-26 20:15 -0300
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-26 23:27 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-02-21 21:45 +0000
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-27 06:28 -0500
Re: 'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-27 06:40 -0500
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
| From | "Jake" <jakethesnake@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 17:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <naaq8s$hgs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88032 |
"Jolly Roger" wrote in message news:dguu6uF427gU1@mid.individual.net... On 2016-01-28, Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 28/01/2016 08:25, Bod wrote: >> On 28/01/2016 03:17, Jolly Roger wrote: >>> Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Oppo Find 7 >>>> http://www.gsmarena.com/oppo_find_7-6214.php >>> >>> That's not an Android feature phone. Do you know the difference? >>> >> Then explain the difference to me. I can open apps with gestures etc. >> I class most modern mobile phones these days as smart. >> I've never heard of a mobile phone being advertised as a feature phone. >> > Just checked and found this: > > *Feature phone* > noun > plural noun: feature phones > a mobile phone that incorporates features such as the ability to access > the Internet and store and play music but lacks the advanced > functionality of a smartphone. > > And this from Wikipedia: > > "Although a feature phone is a low-end device and a smartphone a > high-end one, there is no standard way of distinguishing them.[24][25] > Smartphone and feature phone are not mutually exclusive categories." > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_phone#Difference_between_smartphones_and_feature_phones > > So please explain what you are on about please >Keep reading and learning. You'll get there eventually - I have faith in >you! Why don't you crawl back to your mac group, Apphole?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 00:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <disdctFp1e7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89045 |
On 2016-02-20, Jake <jakethesnake@aol.com> wrote: > "Jolly Roger" wrote in message news:dguu6uF427gU1@mid.individual.net... > >>Keep reading and learning. You'll get there eventually - I have faith in >>you! > > Why don't you crawl back to your mac group, Apphole? Why don't you suck my left nut first? While you're at it, learn what cross posting is. I *am* in the Mac group, dip shit. If you have a problem with this thread appearing in your news group, complain to the original poster who cross posted it there. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 19:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vilain-4ACB84.19481920022016@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89045 |
In article <naaq8s$hgs$1@dont-email.me>, "Jake" <jakethesnake@aol.com> wrote: > "Jolly Roger" wrote in message news:dguu6uF427gU1@mid.individual.net... > > On 2016-01-28, Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > On 28/01/2016 08:25, Bod wrote: > >> On 28/01/2016 03:17, Jolly Roger wrote: > >>> Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Oppo Find 7 > >>>> http://www.gsmarena.com/oppo_find_7-6214.php > >>> > >>> That's not an Android feature phone. Do you know the difference? > >>> > >> Then explain the difference to me. I can open apps with gestures etc. > >> I class most modern mobile phones these days as smart. > >> I've never heard of a mobile phone being advertised as a feature phone. > >> > > Just checked and found this: > > > > *Feature phone* > > noun > > plural noun: feature phones > > a mobile phone that incorporates features such as the ability to access > > the Internet and store and play music but lacks the advanced > > functionality of a smartphone. > > > > And this from Wikipedia: > > > > "Although a feature phone is a low-end device and a smartphone a > > high-end one, there is no standard way of distinguishing them.[24][25] > > Smartphone and feature phone are not mutually exclusive categories." > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_phone#Difference_between_smartphones_a > > nd_feature_phones > > > > So please explain what you are on about please > > >Keep reading and learning. You'll get there eventually - I have faith in > >you! > > Why don't you crawl back to your mac group, Apphole? He's just got a really small snake. That's why his mouth is so big and his brain is so small. -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-31 03:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <56ad8691$0$32878$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #88018 |
In article <dgu1k9FrghsU1@mid.individual.net>, Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >On 28/01/2016 03:17, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >> That's not an Android feature phone. Do you know the difference? >> >Then explain the difference to me. You could Google it yourself, but here's the definition that pops up from Google Search: "a mobile phone that incorporates features such as the ability to access the Internet and store and play music but lacks the advanced functionality of a smartphone." My Nokia cellphone is a feature phone. It's definitely not a smartphone. >I class most modern mobile phones these days as smart. Most of the ones I see here in Silicon Valley certainly are. I imagine that there are plenty of feature phones being used in poorer, rural areas of the world that only got telecommunications when wireless phone systems became available. >I've never heard of a mobile phone being advertised as a feature phone. If you live in a relatively wealthy part of the world, then you're encountering providers who have no incentive to push feature phones when they can sell a smartphone instead. I use my Nokia feature phone with an AT&T prepaid plan, but you certainly aren't going to find those devices on AT&T's home page. Patty
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <op.ydgg1po186ebyl@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #87910 |
On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:22:20 -0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> On 27/01/2016 17:23, Jolly Roger wrote: >>> Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> On 27/01/2016 16:41, Jolly Roger wrote: >>>>> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>> In message <68KdnV-lOs7MMDXLnZ2dnUU7-N-dnZ2d@supernews.com> >>>>>> Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Davoud <star@sky.net> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A lot of people? Linux has a steady lock on about 1.5% of OS usage, >>>>>>>> with the majority of that in server applications. As a desktop >>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess you forgot all of the embedded applications and the mobile >>>>>>> devices that use Linux. They far outnumber desktop usage of any OS. >>>>>> >>>>>> Oh, are you one of those "Android is Linux" morons? >>>>>> >>>>>> Android is not linux. Android is Java. >>>>> >>>>> Sounds similar to dimwits who proclaim Android is WINNING the smartphone >>>>> "wars" because Android is used on so many phones while ignore the fact that >>>>> most of those Android phones are actually feature phones rather than smart >>>>> phones. ; ) >>>>> >>>> smartphone - definition of smartphone >>> >>> We all know what smart phones are, silly. >>> >> Just checking ;-) > > The fact is Android is used on many feature phones and those are typically > included in Android smartphone market share figures despite the fact that > they are not really smartphones.. Who give a fuck about a little phone anyway? Computers are what counts. -- They say Confucius does his crosswords with a pen.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 17:17 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <0fc1dbtonpja1tcqfb5ts97uu3fr4j4l38@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #89228 |
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:42:51 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: >Who give a fuck about a little phone anyway? Computers are what counts. I thought you were a fan of dumb terminals, with all your voice patterns, passwords, keystrokes, documents and history "safely" on the cloud. That is NOT my description of a computer, but I'm back from the days when a Personal Computer was Personal. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 20:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <op.ydgiv6jt86ebyl@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #89230 |
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:17:01 -0000, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:42:51 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: > >> Who give a fuck about a little phone anyway? Computers are what counts. > > I thought you were a fan of dumb terminals, with all your > voice patterns, passwords, keystrokes, documents and history "safely" > on the cloud. > That is NOT my description of a computer, but I'm back from > the days when a Personal Computer was Personal. > []'s Me? No I don't use any clouds. MY documents are on MY property. I only access the internet from a desktop. My mobile phone is for texts and phonecalls. In fact it usually lives at home so I don't lose it or get it wet. It's also cheaper than using a landline. -- Time is what keeps everything from happening at once.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 20:15 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <10n1db5lgc62em9k29qfc16is1mu4cklmd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #89231 |
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:22:44 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: >On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:17:01 -0000, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote: > >> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:42:51 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: >> >>> Who give a fuck about a little phone anyway? Computers are what counts. >> >> I thought you were a fan of dumb terminals, with all your >> voice patterns, passwords, keystrokes, documents and history "safely" >> on the cloud. >> That is NOT my description of a computer, but I'm back from >> the days when a Personal Computer was Personal. >> []'s > >Me? No I don't use any clouds. MY documents are on MY property. I only access the internet from a desktop. Sorry, I must have mistaken you for someone that said they used Win 10 on their Desktop. And if you read the TOS, Win 10 IS a cloud app. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 23:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <op.ydgrguw686ebyl@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #89247 |
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:15:19 -0000, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:22:44 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:17:01 -0000, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:42:51 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Who give a fuck about a little phone anyway? Computers are what counts. >>> >>> I thought you were a fan of dumb terminals, with all your >>> voice patterns, passwords, keystrokes, documents and history "safely" >>> on the cloud. >>> That is NOT my description of a computer, but I'm back from >>> the days when a Personal Computer was Personal. >>> []'s >> >> Me? No I don't use any clouds. MY documents are on MY property. I only access the internet from a desktop. > > Sorry, I must have mistaken you for someone that said they > used Win 10 on their Desktop. And if you read the TOS, Win 10 IS a > cloud app. They store my documents on the cloud without me asking? Prove this with a link or shut up trolling. -- What's the best form of birth control after 50? Nudity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 21:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <op.yc7degz086ebyl@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #87283 |
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 20:02:07 -0000, Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 20/01/2016 19:22, Davoud wrote: >> Someone wrote: >>>> Linux will never be a viable windows alternative because the linux >>>> community does not have that as a goal and viciously attacks >>>> anyone who does. >> >> True, but I don't think that Linux was meant to compete with Windows or >> Mac OS. Like Mac OS, it was intended to occupy a certain niche, and it >> does its job in that niche. It would be my go-to system if I were >> running only servers. But for productivity, I'll stick with my Macs. >> No, GIMP is not a Photoshop substitute, and the free office suites are >> not MS Office substitutes. >> > Maybe not for you, but they are for a lot of people. It depends on > an individuals requirements. I have used Microsoft Office for years, > but Open Office supplies my basic requirements now. > My demands do not warrant M$ Office. I hardly use M$ Office to its full extent, but whenever I've tried these free alternatives, within 5 minutes I'm thinking "I wish I could do this". -- WinError: Unable to exit Windows. Try the door.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-27 06:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <OJKdnQ5MTKhpNDXLnZ2dnUU7-Y346u6z@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #87281 |
Davoud <star@sky.net> writes: > Someone wrote: >> > Linux will never be a viable windows alternative because the linux >> > community does not have that as a goal and viciously attacks >> > anyone who does. > > True, but I don't think that Linux was meant to compete with Windows or > Mac OS. Like Mac OS, it was intended to occupy a certain niche, and it > does its job in that niche. It would be my go-to system if I were > running only servers. But for productivity, I'll stick with my Macs. > No, GIMP is not a Photoshop substitute, and the free office suites are > not MS Office substitutes. Unlike Windows and Mac OS X, Linux wasn't created to compete, or to occupy a certain niche with the consumer. It's not a product, although some companies have used the code in their products. Linux can be very good for use on servers, although there are places where I would choose other OSes like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, or AIX. I'm also very productive using Linux. GIMP is fine for image manipulation, and LibreOffice is a wonderful office suite that works better than MS Office. You may not agree, but that's fine. BTW, if your definition of productivity means MS Office and Adobe products, you should be using Windows instead of a Mac. Adobe's main focus is Windows since that's where the bulk of their revenue comes from.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-27 06:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <270120160640076073%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #87851 |
In article <OJKdnQ5MTKhpNDXLnZ2dnUU7-Y346u6z@supernews.com>, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote: > >> > Linux will never be a viable windows alternative because the linux > >> > community does not have that as a goal and viciously attacks > >> > anyone who does. > > > > True, but I don't think that Linux was meant to compete with Windows or > > Mac OS. Like Mac OS, it was intended to occupy a certain niche, and it > > does its job in that niche. It would be my go-to system if I were > > running only servers. But for productivity, I'll stick with my Macs. > > No, GIMP is not a Photoshop substitute, and the free office suites are > > not MS Office substitutes. > > Unlike Windows and Mac OS X, Linux wasn't created to compete, or to > occupy a certain niche with the consumer. It's not a product, although > some companies have used the code in their products. that's one reason why it's a horrible choice for desktop use. it *doesn't* compete with mac/windows. > Linux can be very good for use on servers, although there are places > where I would choose other OSes like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, or AIX. linux works well for servers, but that's about it. > I'm also very productive using Linux. GIMP is fine for image > manipulation, then you don't do anything serious with it. the gimp is a toy. not only is it substantially slower than photoshop, but it also lacks features that photoshop had 20 years ago. > and LibreOffice is a wonderful office suite that works > better than MS Office. except when it doesn't. exchange files with people who use the real microsoft office and you're going to have problems. > You may not agree, but that's fine. BTW, if your definition of > productivity means MS Office and Adobe products, you should be using > Windows instead of a Mac. Adobe's main focus is Windows since that's > where the bulk of their revenue comes from. wrong on that too.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web