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


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #326676 > unrolled thread

I'm back!

Started byTattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer>
First post2015-10-15 12:13 +0000
Last post2015-10-15 19:14 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 266 — 23 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-15 12:13 +0000
    Re: I'm back! William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-15 13:23 +0100
    Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-15 14:39 +0200
      Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-15 07:45 -0500
        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-15 08:55 -0400
          Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-15 18:41 +0200
            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-15 13:16 -0400
              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 10:18 -0700
              Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-15 20:21 -0400
                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 17:36 -0700
                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-15 21:10 -0400
                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 18:22 -0700
                    Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-16 09:10 +0200
                      Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-16 06:43 -0500
                        Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-16 13:44 +0200
                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 08:35 -0700
                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 09:32 -0400
                          Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-16 15:41 +0200
                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 09:48 -0400
                              Re: I'm back! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-16 15:59 +0200
                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 10:18 -0400
                                Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-16 09:38 -0500
                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 10:44 -0400
                                Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 00:47 +0000
                                  Re: I'm back! Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-16 20:51 -0400
                                  Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-17 08:49 -0400
                                  Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-19 09:05 -0500
                                    Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 14:14 +0000
                                      Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-19 08:23 -0700
                                        Re: I'm back! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-19 12:30 -0500
                                          Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-19 13:27 -0500
                                            Re: I'm back! Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-19 13:47 -0500
                                              Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-19 18:47 -0700
                                                Re: I'm back! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-20 04:20 +0200
                                                  Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 02:36 +0000
                                                    Re: I'm back! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-20 04:46 +0200
                                                      Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-20 03:45 -0700
                                                  Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-20 07:35 -0500
                                                    Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-20 07:11 -0700
                                                    Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 16:33 +0000
                                                      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 16:37 +0000
                                                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 12:44 -0400
                                                        Re: I'm back! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-20 15:28 -0600
                                                      Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-20 12:15 -0500
                                                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 13:17 -0400
                                                          Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 17:30 +0000
                                                            Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 10:41 -0700
                                                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 14:51 -0400
                                                              Re: I'm back! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-20 15:29 -0600
                                                          Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 10:38 -0700
                                                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 17:04 -0400
                                                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-20 15:55 -0700
                                                                Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 16:03 -0700
                                                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 19:33 -0400
                                                                  Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 16:41 -0700
                                                                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 08:30 -0400
                                                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 09:52 -0700
                                                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-20 16:57 -0700
                                                                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 08:35 -0400
                                                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 09:51 -0700
                                                                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 13:18 -0400
                                                                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 10:39 -0700
                                                                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 14:41 -0400
                                                                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 11:52 -0700
                                                                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 17:36 -0400
                                                                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 15:34 -0700
                                                                                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 18:48 -0400
                                                                                      Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 18:51 -0400
                                                                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 15:58 -0700
                                                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 10:06 -0700
                                                                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 13:34 -0400
                                                                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 10:48 -0700
                                                                            Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 11:01 -0700
                                                                              Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 17:02 -0400
                                                                                Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 17:18 -0400
                                                                                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 14:18 -0700
                                                                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 17:47 -0400
                                                                                    Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 15:29 -0700
                                                                                      Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 18:36 -0400
                                                                                        Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 15:38 -0700
                                                                                          Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 18:51 -0400
                                                                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 16:06 -0700
                                                                                              Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 19:32 -0400
                                                                                          Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 18:55 -0400
                                                                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 16:05 -0700
                                                                                              Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 19:54 -0400
                                                                                                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-22 00:02 +0000
                                                                                                Re: I'm back! Rhino Plastee <rhinoplastee8ball@mail.com> - 2015-10-21 20:04 -0400
                                                                                Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 15:07 -0700
                                                                          Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 10:58 -0700
                                                                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 14:52 -0400
                                                                        Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 10:37 -0700
                                                                          Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 14:41 -0400
                                                        Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 17:29 +0000
                                                        Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-20 19:57 -0500
                                                          Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 01:10 +0000
                                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-20 18:24 -0700
                                                              Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 01:29 +0000
                                                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-20 18:23 -0700
                                                    Re: I'm back! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-20 17:14 -0500
                                                      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 22:31 +0000
                                                    Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-20 19:25 -0500
                                                      Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-21 07:45 -0500
                                                        Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-21 11:23 -0400
                                                        Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-21 18:38 -0500
                                                          Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-21 17:39 -0700
                                              Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-19 18:47 -0700
                                          Re: I'm back! Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-19 13:45 -0500
                                            Re: I'm back! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-20 04:22 +0200
                                              Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 02:38 +0000
                                                Re: I'm back! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-20 04:49 +0200
                                              Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-20 08:34 -0500
                                                Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 13:44 +0000
                                                Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-20 06:58 -0700
                                                Re: I'm back! William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-20 23:00 +0100
                                                  Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 22:10 +0000
                                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-20 18:30 -0400
                                                    Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-21 00:44 +0200
                                                      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 23:11 +0000
                                                        Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 23:12 +0000
                                                      Re: I'm back! William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-21 00:10 +0100
                                                        Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 08:28 -0400
                                                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 10:10 -0700
                                                            Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 13:39 -0400
                                                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-21 10:42 -0700
                                                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 14:44 -0400
                                                  Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-20 19:18 -0500
                                                    Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 00:20 +0000
                                                    Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-21 07:33 -0500
                                                      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 12:48 +0000
                                                      Talking to yourself, Turdv? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-21 11:46 -0600
                                                      Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-21 18:40 -0500
                                                        Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-22 07:17 -0500
                                                          Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 12:27 +0000
                                                          Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-22 10:21 -0400
                                                            Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 07:45 -0700
                                                              Re: I'm back! Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 08:13 -0700
                                                          Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-22 21:44 -0500
                                                    Re: I'm back! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-21 11:45 -0600
                                                      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 17:54 +0000
                                                        Re: I'm back! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-21 16:37 -0600
                                              Re: I'm back! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-20 17:17 -0500
                                                Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 22:34 +0000
                                                Re: I'm back! William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-21 00:08 +0100
                                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-21 08:22 -0400
                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 07:35 -0700
                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 10:42 -0400
                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 08:19 -0700
                                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 12:21 -0400
                            Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-16 09:25 -0500
                              Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 10:29 -0400
                                Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-16 15:01 -0700
                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 18:52 -0400
                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 08:20 -0700
                                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 12:22 -0400
                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 10:12 -0700
                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 07:36 -0700
                            Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 00:42 +0000
                              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 18:46 -0700
                                Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-17 18:53 +0200
                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-17 12:55 -0400
                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 10:20 -0700
                                    Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-17 21:09 +0200
                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 13:26 -0700
                                      Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-18 16:16 -0500
                                      Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-18 16:37 -0500
                                        Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-18 23:41 +0200
                                          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 14:47 -0700
                                            Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-19 00:34 +0200
                                              Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-18 17:54 -0500
                                                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 16:11 -0700
                                          Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-18 17:45 -0500
                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 15:51 -0700
                                        Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 14:41 -0700
                              Ronb: "zero tolerance" for his imaginary friends. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 21:30 -0700
                              Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-17 10:45 -0400
                                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 09:43 -0700
                                Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-17 18:52 +0200
                                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-17 12:54 -0400
                                    Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 10:21 -0700
                                    Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-17 21:07 +0200
                                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 13:25 -0700
                                      Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-18 10:01 -0400
                                        Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-18 17:46 +0200
                                          Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-18 17:39 -0400
                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 14:42 -0700
                                        Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 10:30 -0700
                                          Snit Michael Glasser lying again (news at 11) Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-18 20:39 +0200
                                            Re: Snit Michael Glasser lying again (news at 11) Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-18 15:03 -0400
                                            Re: Snit Michael Glasser lying again (news at 11) Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-18 16:07 -0500
                                            Re: Snit Michael Glasser lying again (news at 11) "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-18 17:40 -0400
                                          Re: I'm back! "Dr. John Grubor" <grubor@grubor.org.invalid> - 2015-10-18 19:55 +0000
                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-18 13:32 -0700
                                              Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-18 22:39 +0200
                                              Re: I'm back! "Dr. John Grubor" <grubor@grubor.org.invalid> - 2015-10-19 00:23 +0000
                                          Re: I'm back! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 07:02 -0700
                                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-19 10:49 -0700
                                              Re: I'm back! Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-19 12:54 -0500
                                                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-19 11:01 -0700
                                                  Re: I'm back! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-19 20:10 +0200
                                                    Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-19 11:23 -0700
                                                  Re: I'm back! Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-19 13:50 -0500
                                                    Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-19 12:36 -0700
                                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 10:20 -0700
                              Pot kettle black.  Go look in a mirror. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-17 12:23 -0600
                        Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 08:36 -0700
                          Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 12:24 -0400
                            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 10:12 -0700
                      Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-16 09:31 -0400
                        Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 14:21 -0700
                      Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-16 08:37 -0700
                  Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-17 11:00 -0400
                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-17 11:18 -0400
            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 10:00 -0700
            Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 18:01 +0000
              Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 11:15 -0700
        Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 17:58 +0000
          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 11:14 -0700
          Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-15 19:55 -0500
            Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 18:08 -0700
        Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-15 19:57 -0500
          Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-15 21:19 -0400
          Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-15 18:33 -0700
    Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-15 06:02 -0700
      Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-15 09:10 -0400
    Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-15 10:16 -0400
      Re: I'm back! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 15:21 +0000
        Re: I'm back! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-15 16:29 -0600
      Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-16 00:26 +0000
        Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 01:02 +0000
          Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-15 21:18 -0400
          Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-16 12:06 +0000
            Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 13:29 +0000
              Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-17 00:56 +0000
                Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 13:45 +0000
                  Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-17 14:14 +0000
                    Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-17 13:24 -0400
                Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-19 07:30 -0500
                  Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-19 08:42 -0400
                  Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-19 22:25 +0000
                    Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-20 06:49 -0500
        Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-15 21:16 -0400
        Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-16 14:30 -0400
          Re: I'm back! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-16 11:52 -0700
            Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-16 16:20 -0400
              Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-16 14:57 -0700
                Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-17 08:29 -0400
                  Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-17 13:41 -0700
                    Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-17 18:29 -0700
              Re: I'm back! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-16 23:39 +0000
                Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-17 10:43 -0400
          Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-17 00:41 +0000
            Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-17 06:29 -0400
              Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-17 12:42 +0000
                Re: I'm back! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-17 10:02 -0500
                Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 09:22 -0700
                Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-17 13:24 -0400
                  Re: I'm back! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-17 10:27 -0700
                  Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-19 07:44 -0500
                    Re: I'm back! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-19 08:48 -0400
            Re: I'm back! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-19 12:20 -0400
              Re: I'm back! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-19 10:26 -0700
              Re: I'm back! Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-19 22:21 +0000
                Re: I'm back! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-20 06:52 -0500
    Re: I'm back! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-15 14:07 -0400
      Re: I'm back! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 19:14 +0000

Page 2 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 14  Next page →


#326804

From"A.M" <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-16 10:18 -0400
Message-ID<mvr0r9$m9j$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#326803
On 2015-10-16 9:59 AM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:48:58 -0400
> "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-16 9:41 AM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>   
>>>> On 2015-10-16 7:43 AM, chrisv wrote:  
>>>>> "If we're even mildly critical of GNU/Linux, we're liars and
>>>>> trolls."
>>>>> -  "Slimer", lying shamelessly  
>>>>
>>>> How is that a lie?
>>>>  
>>>
>>> You have never pretended to be "mildly critical of GNU/Linux"
>>>
>>> You have lied about from day one, lying imbecile  
>>
>> Laugh.
>>
>> What do you consider "mildly critical" then?
> 
> Linux advocates are mildly critical. You hate Linux's guts.

Meanwhile, I donate my time and money to it more often than all of you
put together do. Whether you are willing to admit it or not, I'm a lot
more valuable to the "cause" than you are.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#326811

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-16 09:38 -0500
Message-ID<5k222btfp8fof1od5vf2aspmho1nrg0nuh@4ax.com>
In reply to#326803
Melzzzzz wrote:

> slime wrote:
>> 
>> What do you consider "mildly critical" then?
>
> Linux advocates are mildly critical. You hate Linux's guts.

It sure isn't calling it "shit" and "garbage" and "an atrocity", as
"Slimer" does.

"How is a lie" to claim that those filth are called liars and trolls
because they are "mildly critical" of Linux.  Sheesh!

-- 
"I think it's a pre-requisite to have a serious mental deficiency to
use GNU/Linux."  -  "Slimer"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#326815

From"A.M" <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-16 10:44 -0400
Message-ID<mvr2cq$s5d$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#326811
On 2015-10-16 10:38 AM, chrisv wrote:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> slime wrote:
>>>
>>> What do you consider "mildly critical" then?
>>
>> Linux advocates are mildly critical. You hate Linux's guts.
> 
> It sure isn't calling it "shit" and "garbage" and "an atrocity", as
> "Slimer" does.
> 
> "How is a lie" to claim that those filth are called liars and trolls
> because they are "mildly critical" of Linux.  Sheesh!

Had people like you not been as detestable as you continue to be, I
wouldn't have felt prompted to get under your skin by being overly harsh
about Linux. However, let's be honest: it's not that great. If you feel
fondly about it, it is because you love the philosophy or the openness
of the operating system, not because you find that it does the job
better than the competition.

By the way, you can insult me all you want. Insults have no effect on me
unless the person spitting them out is respectable.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#326888

Fromronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-17 00:47 +0000
Message-ID<mvs5ro$25k$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#326803
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:59:40 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:

> Linux advocates are mildly critical. You hate Linux's guts.

There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really 
like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I 
want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is 
"built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going -- 
despite how I (personally) might feel about it.

This newsgroup is not for comparing particular features or Linux 
distributions, it's for general Linux advocacy. Not that I mind 
spotlighting and discussing (debating, arguing) about various Linux 
distributions and desktops. What I won't tolerate here is lying FUD about 
Linux.

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#326889

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-16 20:51 -0400
Message-ID<w6j1m8c116rg.1aa2opgefvt92.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#326888
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 00:47:52 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:59:40 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> Linux advocates are mildly critical. You hate Linux's guts.
> 
> There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really 
> like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I 
> want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is 
> "built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going -- 
> despite how I (personally) might feel about it.
> 
> This newsgroup is not for comparing particular features or Linux 
> distributions, it's for general Linux advocacy. Not that I mind 
> spotlighting and discussing (debating, arguing) about various Linux 
> distributions and desktops. What I won't tolerate here is lying FUD about 
> Linux.

Yet you tolerate lying FUD about Apple, OSX, Microsoft and Windows.
In fact you are a primary spewer of it.

Why is that?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#326899

FromDFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Date2015-10-17 08:49 -0400
Message-ID<mvtg1c$m6t$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#326888
On 10/16/2015 8:47 PM, ronb wrote:


> What I won't tolerate here is lying FUD about Linux.


Lying idiot.

You tolerate, encourage, and commit lying FUD about Linux, Windows and Mac.


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327042

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-19 09:05 -0500
Message-ID<bct92b9uf6snmrpdn1bnjtkqg4p7lg0ab1@4ax.com>
In reply to#326888
ronb wrote:

>There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really 
>like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I 
>want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is 
>"built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going -- 
>despite how I (personally) might feel about it.

Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and
therefore must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to
target specific niches.

The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
solution can be found.  

It also means that some distros will be completely wrong for many
people.  There's nothing bad about that, as the "wrong" products are
easily declined, as they are in all healthy markets.

-- 
'And its KDE - nothing there for the Gnome purist. "Choice" diluting
the useful applications once again.'  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron
Quark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327043

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-19 14:14 +0000
Message-ID<d8kc5gFlfnaU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#327042
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 09:05:44 -0500, chrisv wrote:

> ronb wrote:
> 
>>There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really
>>like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I
>>want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is
>>"built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going --
>>despite how I (personally) might feel about it.
> 
> Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore
> must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific
> niches.
> 
> The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
> solution can be found.
> 
> It also means that some distros will be completely wrong for many
> people.  There's nothing bad about that, as the "wrong" products are
> easily declined, as they are in all healthy markets.

While the theory behind that is solid, the reality is that it is just 
confusion for most potential users, especially the consumer that just 
wants something that works and allows them to get the things done they 
want to do.

For them those things that are actually real strengths for Linux on the 
desktop, are confusing.  And they can't call their buddy for some help in 
most cases.  And going online for help isn't any better for consumer level 
users since the level of free help there is just not on par with what is 
there for either OSX or Windows.

All it takes for a consumer is to try to get some help and get an answer 
like "well get xxxx distro instead" and the conversation is over and Linux 
on that consumers desktop is gone.

For the more astute user Linux on the desktop can be excellent, but there 
are still areas where apps and drivers for Linux just aren't up to snuff 
compared to their OSX and Windows equivalents.  That is just a fact of 
life.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327047

From-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Date2015-10-19 08:23 -0700
Message-ID<4516d19b-fbde-4250-95ea-d7884e955eaa@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#327043
Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>  chrisv wrote:
> > ronb wrote:
> > 
> >>There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really
> >>like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I
> >>want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is
> >>"built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going --
> >>despite how I (personally) might feel about it.
> > 
> > Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore
> > must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific
> > niches.
> > 
> > The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
> > solution can be found.

Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically
go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm.


> > It also means that some distros will be completely wrong for many
> > people.  There's nothing bad about that, as the "wrong" products are
> > easily declined, as they are in all healthy markets.
> 
> While the theory behind that is solid, the reality is that it is just 
> confusion for most potential users, especially the consumer that just 
> wants something that works and allows them to get the things done they 
> want to do.
> 
> For them those things that are actually real strengths for Linux on the 
> desktop, are confusing.  And they can't call their buddy for some help in 
> most cases.  And going online for help isn't any better for consumer level 
> users since the level of free help there is just not on par with what is 
> there for either OSX or Windows.

Right, as the same strength is also a weakness when it lacks suitable 
organizational tools for a perspective user to be able to recognize
and find these niches in the use cases, so as to be able to exploit them.

The alternative is to remain with the status quo, which is akin to a 
grocery store where none of the canned goods have labels on them:  one
thus needs to open the can to see what's actually inside.


> All it takes for a consumer is to try to get some help and get an answer 
> like "well get xxxx distro instead" and the conversation is over and Linux 
> on that consumers desktop is gone.
> 
> For the more astute user Linux on the desktop can be excellent, but there 
> are still areas where apps and drivers for Linux just aren't up to snuff 
> compared to their OSX and Windows equivalents.  That is just a fact of 
> life.

Thus, the same factors which afford it the opportunity to be a strength for
some use cases makes it a liability for others.


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327084

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-19 12:30 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn2aa57.1i7.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#327047
On 2015-10-19, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>>  chrisv wrote:
>> > ronb wrote:
>> > 
>> >>There are several Linux distributions and desktops that I don't really
>> >>like -- I've tried a few of them -- but I know that I can't (nor do I
>> >>want to) speak for everyone. Obviously if a distribution or desktop is
>> >>"built" and maintained there's enough interest in it to keep it going --
>> >>despite how I (personally) might feel about it.
>> > 
>> > Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore
>> > must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific
>> > niches.
>> > 
>> > The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
>> > solution can be found.
>
> Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically
> go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm.

...except most people don't need to do that. They can just use one of the
more prominent options because of the mass market effect. Most people don't
need the "special use case". They can just use one of the more common options.

[deletia]

   The only people that are even really aware of the "too much" are trolls
that go out of their way to find trouble.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327094

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-19 13:27 -0500
Message-ID<9jca2b5vip4p0fsvh5dbspotv5vgp3f3n8@4ax.com>
In reply to#327084
JEDIDIAH wrote:

> lying asshole "-hh" wrote:
>>
>>>  chrisv wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore
>>>> must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific
>>>> niches.
>>>> 
>>>> The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
>>>> solution can be found.
>>
>> Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically
>> go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm.

We can assume, of course, that highhorse is lying, because there is
obviously no need to do any such thing.

I'd like to see the asshole name some products that he has bought,
where he "systematically tried" every choice, before choosing one.

What is infinite is the "-hh" asshole's stupidity.  He's black-hole
stupid.  Stupid so dense that no intellect can escape.

>...except most people don't need to do that. They can just use one of the
>more prominent options because of the mass market effect. Most people don't
>need the "special use case". They can just use one of the more common options.

It's just mind-boggling, isn't it?  I get "rebutted" by nonsense that
a child knows is not true.  As if some research can't considerably
narrow-down the choices that need actually be tried!

>   The only people that are even really aware of the "too much" are trolls
>that go out of their way to find trouble.

-- 
"At one point, a Windows supercomputer was #58 on the Top 500, leaving
442 Linux supercomputers in the dust."  -  DumFSck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327100

FromLloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com>
Date2015-10-19 13:47 -0500
Message-ID<d8ks60FqbrcU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#327094
On 2015-10-19 18:27:59 +0000, chrisv said:

> JEDIDIAH wrote:
> 
>> lying asshole "-hh" wrote:
>>> 
>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore
>>>>> must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific
>>>>> niches.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal
>>>>> solution can be found.
>>> 
>>> Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically
>>> go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm.
> 
> We can assume, of course, that highhorse is lying, because there is
> obviously no need to do any such thing.

Oh really?  First he isn't lying, and 2nd he wasn't the one that 
brought up the many distros to be picked through.

That was you!

> 
> I'd like to see the asshole name some products that he has bought,
> where he "systematically tried" every choice, before choosing one.
> 
> What is infinite is the "-hh" asshole's stupidity.  He's black-hole
> stupid.  Stupid so dense that no intellect can escape.
> 
>> ...except most people don't need to do that. They can just use one of the
>> more prominent options because of the mass market effect. Most people don't
>> need the "special use case". They can just use one of the more common options.
> 
> It's just mind-boggling, isn't it?  I get "rebutted" by nonsense that
> a child knows is not true.  As if some research can't considerably
> narrow-down the choices that need actually be tried!

Consumers could research, but where would they find any real info that 
wasn't refuted in the very next link from a google search?  That IS an 
issue.

> 
>> The only people that are even really aware of the "too much" are trolls
>> that go out of their way to find trouble.


-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327163

From-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Date2015-10-19 18:47 -0700
Message-ID<9a83976b-73f2-4cd2-a724-760c9922a039@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#327100
Lloyd Parsons writes:
>, chrisv said: 
>> JEDIDIAH wrote: 
>>> lying asshole "-hh" wrote: 

Hypocrite "kill file" self-defeater ;-P

>>>>> chrisv wrote: 
>>>>>> Unlike Windows, which tries to be all things to all people and therefore 
>>>>>> must be a compromise, Linux distros have the freedom to target specific 
>>>>>> niches. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The increased choice means that it's more likely that an optimal 
>>>>>> solution can be found. 
>>>> 
>>>> Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically 
>>>> go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm. 
>> 
>> We can assume, of course, that highhorse is lying, because there is 
>> obviously no need to do any such thing. 
>
> Oh really?  First he isn't lying, and 2nd he wasn't the one that 
> brought up the many distros to be picked through. 
>
> That was you! 

Yup.

>> I'd like to see the asshole name some products that he has bought, 
>> where he "systematically tried" every choice, before choosing one. 

Faux Straw man, because in Capitalism, there is advertising to help 
inform the consumer...plus the same market forces also cull out the weak
so that there's not as many real contenders to contemplate choosing from.
And finally, the same market forces also create a consumer market for 
new product reviews, resulting in hands-on tests of all of those choices.

>> What is infinite is the "-hh" asshole's stupidity.  He's black-hole 
>> stupid.  Stupid so dense that no intellect can escape. 

Jealous, once again:  Sucks to be chrisv.  W

>>> ...except most people don't need to do that. They can just use one of the 
>>> more prominent options because of the mass market effect. Most people don't 
>>> need the "special use case". They can just use one of the more common options. 
>> 
>> It's just mind-boggling, isn't it?  I get "rebutted" by nonsense that 
>> a child knows is not true.  As if some research can't considerably 
>> narrow-down the choices that need actually be tried! 
>
> Consumers could research, but where would they find any real info that 
> wasn't refuted in the very next link from a google search?  That IS an 
> issue. 

And it was pointed out long ago:  the Linux 'distrowatch' style websites don't 
actually review products ... there's an active avoidance of providing formal 
recommendation guidance because that would be akin to fostering competition
as found in Capitalism & in contrast to FOSS philosophy...and it would also
foster ill will between volunteers (accusations of poaching, etc), which would
only aggravate the splintering / forking based on what the general public 
would only consider to be esoteric and meaningless geek techie minutia. 

>>> The only people that are even really aware of the "too much" are trolls 
>>> that go out of their way to find trouble. 

The test for the veracity of that claim can be found just by asking one simple 
question to the Advocates:  just which one distro should Joe Sixpack customer use?

The answer won't be a single distro, but a loud squabble among the crowd without
consensus to a clear, single answer: a failure to provide the consumer insight so 
that he doesn't have to go try each one himself.  So Joe Sixpack packs it up after
one or two and goes back to using Windows.

-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327168

FromMelzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date2015-10-20 04:20 +0200
Message-ID<20151020042005.7cd02e39@maxa-pc>
In reply to#327163
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> 
> The test for the veracity of that claim can be found just by asking
> one simple question to the Advocates:  just which one distro should
> Joe Sixpack customer use?

Question is not really about distro, rather desktop.

> 
> The answer won't be a single distro, but a loud squabble among the
> crowd without consensus to a clear,

Answer depends on what consumer wants. There is no single preferred
desktop, and that is why one first have to ask: which desktop?
Other things are not that important to user.

 single answer: a failure to
> provide the consumer insight so that he doesn't have to go try each
> one himself.  So Joe Sixpack packs it up after one or two and goes
> back to using Windows.

I don't think so. It really depends on what user wants.
Majority of users will have dual boot anyway...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327170

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-20 02:36 +0000
Message-ID<d8lnlcF2akhU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#327168
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:20:05 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> The test for the veracity of that claim can be found just by asking one
>> simple question to the Advocates:  just which one distro should Joe
>> Sixpack customer use?
> 
> Question is not really about distro, rather desktop.
> 
> 
>> The answer won't be a single distro, but a loud squabble among the
>> crowd without consensus to a clear,
> 
> Answer depends on what consumer wants. There is no single preferred
> desktop, and that is why one first have to ask: which desktop? Other
> things are not that important to user.
> 
>  single answer: a failure to
>> provide the consumer insight so that he doesn't have to go try each one
>> himself.  So Joe Sixpack packs it up after one or two and goes back to
>> using Windows.
> 
> I don't think so. It really depends on what user wants.
> Majority of users will have dual boot anyway...

Back away from the tech room a little, Melz.  We're talking Joe Sixpack 
and he won't be dual booting anything as he wouldn't see a benefit and 
frankly wouldn't understand what you were talking about if you brought it 
up.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327172

FromMelzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date2015-10-20 04:46 +0200
Message-ID<20151020044625.45a9e46e@maxa-pc>
In reply to#327170
On 20 Oct 2015 02:36:29 GMT
Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:20:05 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
> > -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> > 
> >   
> >> The test for the veracity of that claim can be found just by
> >> asking one simple question to the Advocates:  just which one
> >> distro should Joe Sixpack customer use?  
> > 
> > Question is not really about distro, rather desktop.
> > 
> >   
> >> The answer won't be a single distro, but a loud squabble among the
> >> crowd without consensus to a clear,  
> > 
> > Answer depends on what consumer wants. There is no single preferred
> > desktop, and that is why one first have to ask: which desktop? Other
> > things are not that important to user.
> > 
> >  single answer: a failure to  
> >> provide the consumer insight so that he doesn't have to go try
> >> each one himself.  So Joe Sixpack packs it up after one or two and
> >> goes back to using Windows.  
> > 
> > I don't think so. It really depends on what user wants.
> > Majority of users will have dual boot anyway...  
> 
> Back away from the tech room a little, Melz.  We're talking Joe
> Sixpack and he won't be dual booting anything as he wouldn't see a
> benefit and frankly wouldn't understand what you were talking about
> if you brought it up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
Then no problem at all. Joe Sixpack will use whatever is installed...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327185

From-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Date2015-10-20 03:45 -0700
Message-ID<7b91b970-abb1-4e18-9567-fc239c639af7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#327172
Melzzzzz writes:
> Lloyd Parsons <lloy...@gmail.com> wrote: 
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:20:05 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: 
>> > -hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote: 
>> >>   
>> >> The test for the veracity of that claim can be found just by 
>> >> asking one simple question to the Advocates:  just which one 
>> >> distro should Joe Sixpack customer use?   
>> > 
>> > Question is not really about distro, rather desktop. 

Hair splitting.
 
>> >> The answer won't be a single distro, but a loud squabble among the 
>> >> crowd without consensus to a clear,   
>> >
>> > Answer depends on what consumer wants. There is no single preferred 
>> > desktop, and that is why one first have to ask: which desktop? Other 
>> > things are not that important to user. 

"It depends":  prediction has been fulfilled.

>>> >  single answer: a failure to   
>> >> provide the consumer insight so that he doesn't have to go try 
>> >> each one himself.  So Joe Sixpack packs it up after one or two and 
>> >> goes back to using Windows.   
>> > 
>> > I don't think so. It really depends on what user wants. 
>> > Majority of users will have dual boot anyway...   
>> 
>> Back away from the tech room a little, Melz.  We're talking Joe 
>> Sixpack and he won't be dual booting anything as he wouldn't see a 
>> benefit and frankly wouldn't understand what you were talking about 
>> if you brought it up. 
> 
> Then no problem at all. Joe Sixpack will use whatever is installed... 

Merely two problems then.

The first is that you're effectively admitting that *all* Linux distros are niche use cases...

And secondly, since Linux has repeatedly failed to ever earn shelf space at B&M retailers,
that nothing will ever change for Linux.

Add the two together and it becomes even more evident that the product is (a) a mess 
that the general public doesn't want because it is a "By Geeks, For Geeks" niche, and 
(b) that its reported use share of ~1.5% is an overstatement of Marketshare because 
same said Geeks spend vastly more hours online ("usage") than the average Joe.

-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327195

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-20 07:35 -0500
Message-ID<fmbc2btu4ssdcndso6nrqusm54omem0j7i@4ax.com>
In reply to#327168
> lying asshole "-hh" wrote:
>> 
>> (idiocy and lies snipped)

Un-fscking-believable.

The asshole is still insisting that people need to try each one!
Still refusing to acknowledge that  research can considerably
narrow-down the choices that need actually be tried!

"If you ask different people what Joe Sixpack should use, you will get
different opinions", he declares.

How the FSCK is that different from any other market?

"You can test the veracity of your claim by asking this question."

Err...  No you can't!  My claim is indisputably correct!  It's
observed reality!  It's no different from any other healthy market!

Sheesh!

-- 
"But then Linux turns around and allows you to name all the virtual
desktops with the same name. huh? Half-finished hobbyware code strikes
again."  -  DumFSck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327209

From-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Date2015-10-20 07:11 -0700
Message-ID<0529bc6a-f3c2-470d-a349-34cca2124478@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#327195
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:00 AM UTC-4, chrisv wrote:
> > lying asshole "-hh" wrote:
> >> 
> >> (idiocy and lies snipped)

Translation:  chrisv once again defeats their own killfile,
as a hypocrite "kill file" self-defeater ;-P 


> Un-fscking-believable
> The asshole is still insisting that people need to try each one!
> Still refusing to acknowledge that  research can considerably
> narrow-down the choices that need actually be tried!

Liar, because what you snipped was:

"Faux Straw man, because in Capitalism...[and]...the same market 
forces also create a consumer market for new product reviews, 
resulting in hands-on tests of all of those choices."


> "If you ask different people what Joe Sixpack should use, you
> will get different opinions", he declares.
> 
> How the FSCK is that different from any other market?

Feel free to cite a credible website that does an actual,
suitable for Joe Sixpack, review of the different Linux
distributions and concludes that ABCD are losers and that
E is the winner.  

No, this is most certainly NOT a website which simply provides
data on just which distro happened to be downloaded the most.


> "You can test the veracity of your claim by asking this question."
> 
> Err...  No you can't!  

And chrisv becomes yet another self-selected 'advocate' who 
doesn't have the balls to commit to a specific recommendation.  
All of the various means of deflection such as this were not 
explicitly predicted, but should have been expected:  so noted.

> My claim is indisputably correct!  It's observed 
> reality!  It's no different from any other healthy market!

Except that it is different, because it lacks the profit incentives 
of Capitalism:  that's what makes it profoundly different from 
*all* other markets.


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327235

Fromronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-20 16:33 +0000
Message-ID<n05qd6$grj$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#327195
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:35:57 -0500, chrisv wrote:

> The asshole is still insisting that people need to try each one!

Just another of the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy committee. What you 
expect? Lying FUD is in his genes.

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 14  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web