Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #241195 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-02 11:06 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-05-08 14:54 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 218 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
No one wants Surface tablets Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2014-05-02 11:06 +0000
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Sinister Midget <fardblossom@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 11:36 +0000
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 07:44 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-02 13:16 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-02 10:37 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 11:24 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2014-05-03 02:33 +0000
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-03 10:08 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-03 07:25 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-03 07:09 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-03 08:59 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-03 12:57 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 13:54 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 14:31 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 16:58 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 08:58 -0700
No one wants Surface Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-03 12:46 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-03 12:48 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 12:42 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 07:16 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 07:32 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 07:46 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 09:12 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-06 15:29 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 10:57 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 12:32 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 12:30 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 12:36 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 10:53 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:07 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-06 21:14 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 18:34 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-06 15:38 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 12:38 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:11 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:41 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 14:06 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 12:14 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:20 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-03 08:56 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 06:55 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 08:11 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-06 14:26 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 07:44 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 08:04 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. "Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com> - 2014-05-06 17:00 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 12:44 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-06 13:58 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:09 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:17 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:40 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 12:13 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-06 17:23 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:16 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:03 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:16 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 13:22 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:46 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 12:08 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-06 17:44 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 12:56 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 13:10 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:34 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-06 13:40 -0700
Many want Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-06 21:10 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 21:13 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-06 21:33 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-06 21:30 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 19:25 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 18:36 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-06 23:40 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 12:43 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:14 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:33 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:44 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 12:09 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 12:41 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 13:13 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 13:25 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-06 13:42 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 14:49 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 15:55 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-06 13:51 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-07 01:21 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 20:33 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-07 03:01 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 21:09 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-07 10:22 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 06:47 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-07 13:20 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-07 14:38 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 07:54 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-07 22:52 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-08 06:58 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 08:24 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-07 10:16 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 19:01 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. tinus61 <tinus61@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-08 01:18 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-07 18:18 -0600
Re: No one wants Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-08 09:01 +0100
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-12 14:00 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-12 11:16 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-12 20:17 +0200
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-12 11:33 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-06 21:21 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 18:34 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 21:50 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 19:21 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-06 21:04 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-06 20:51 -0600
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 20:23 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 11:19 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 14:30 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 08:00 -0500
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 09:10 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-06 09:21 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 09:40 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 08:57 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-06 09:56 -0700
Re: No one wants Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-03 08:53 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-02 08:04 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-02 08:57 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 09:04 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-02 09:16 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 09:25 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-02 10:55 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets White Spirit <wspirit@homechoice.co.uk> - 2014-05-02 16:04 +0100
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 11:20 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-02 11:27 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 17:35 +0200
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-02 09:03 -0700
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 11:31 -0700
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 11:01 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 10:58 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 12:03 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 13:53 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 13:34 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-02 14:04 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 14:26 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 15:49 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-02 14:59 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 15:20 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-02 16:00 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 23:11 +0200
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 17:13 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-03 00:11 +0200
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 22:11 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 18:05 -0700
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 22:05 -0500
My C# macro/extension hides the sign·in button. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2014-05-03 00:41 -0700
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 13:28 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 14:30 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 13:28 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 13:26 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 14:29 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-02 14:43 -0600
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2014-05-02 14:36 +0100
Re: No one wants Surface tablets flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-02 09:39 -0400
Re: No one wants Surface tablets "Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com> - 2014-05-02 16:37 +0200
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 16:12 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-05-02 16:53 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-02 22:14 -0500
Re: No one wants Surface tablets Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 23:01 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 20:14 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-06 21:15 -0400
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-06 23:42 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-06 20:14 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-06 18:35 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-07 05:53 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-07 11:16 +0100
Re: Many want Linux. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 12:21 +0200
Re: Many want Linux. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 10:25 +0000
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 08:23 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 11:08 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 09:32 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 11:45 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 13:10 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 11:20 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 13:25 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 20:39 +0200
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 12:11 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 12:12 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 13:16 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 13:26 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 13:48 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-05-07 12:49 -0600
Re: No one wants Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-07 18:41 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 23:47 +0000
Re: Many want Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 16:57 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 22:14 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 20:54 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-07 09:05 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-07 10:11 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 08:38 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-07 12:34 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. side job scooter <sjs@aol.com> - 2014-05-08 00:16 +0000
Re: Many want Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-07 20:24 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 17:55 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 22:17 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 20:51 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 05:55 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-08 07:03 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-08 08:47 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 00:28 +0000
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 17:54 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 17:57 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-07 22:04 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 19:13 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-07 22:16 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-07 20:53 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-12 11:44 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-12 14:40 -0500
Re: Many want Linux. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-12 12:57 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-05-12 13:26 -0700
Re: Many want Linux. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 05:54 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-08 11:14 +0100
Re: Many want Linux. Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-08 09:15 -0400
Re: Many want Linux. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 14:54 +0200
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
| From | JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 16:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlm84vm.q7b.jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
| In reply to | #241373 |
On 2014-05-02, Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote:
>>> On 2014-05-02 19:59:44 +0000, JEDIDIAH said:
>>>
>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2014-05-02 19:04:15 +0000, JEDIDIAH said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 17:53:40 +0000, flatfish+++ said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2014 12:03:30 -0500, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 16:58:54 +0000, GreyCloud said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/2/2014 7:04 AM, flatfish+++ wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 08:57:08 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 7:06 AM, Tattoo Vampire wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the
>>>>>>>>>>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean like how Ubuntu was doing before them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One would hope so. It's a bit of a disaster on desktops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, can't be 'legacy' if you modernize it!! :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I keep thinking that MS really does have the right stuff going forward.
>>>>>>>>> The SurfacePro is a superb little ultrabook and the 3rd party mfgs
>>>>>>>>> that are doing full Windows on Baytrail cpus fill in the rest of the
>>>>>>>>> blanks that the RT left.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Add to that Office365 that small business is really in love with and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? You actually believe that line? You need to stop swimming
>>>>>> in the Kool-aid quite so much. Web based stuff might be fine for those
>>>>>> apps that represent some sort of "IT burden", but simple office apps
>>>>>> from the dawn of computing really don't fit into that category. If
>>>>>> anything, they are a nuissance that you don't want to spend money on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you that stupid Jed? Of course you are.
>>>>
>>>> No. I just do more than troll Usenet forums.
>>>
>>> Bullshit! Your inane and often totally incorrect posts can only be
>>> attributed to trolling.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The Office365 apps are not web based though they do default to save at
>>>>> OneDrive. Not a big problem to change that.
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to do some research on what makes up Office365 for small
>>>>> business. Hint: it brings much more to the table than 'simple office
>>>>> apps'. You're thinking of Linux for that!! :)
>>>>
>>>> You need to do some research on small business.
>>>
>>> Since I used to sell technology to small businesses as well as schools,
>>> I suspect I have a much better grasp of what works and what doesn't.
>>
>> Even if your claims aren't total bullshit, there's still a world
>> of difference between selling something to someone and that thing
>> actually being useful or a positive net gain for them.
>>
>> Really. You're a former SALESMAN and you're trying to lecture us about technology?
>>
>
> Absolutely! Being in tech sales for a small VAR means more than making presentations.
What a fucking loser.
You're a has-been salesdeone and you come to a place like this and expect anyone
to take you the least bit seriously. You have the mainstream American pop culture though.
That's something.
[deletia]
--
Oracle... can't live with it... |||
/ | \
can't just replace it with postgres...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 22:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bsj590FsgeU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #241389 |
On 2014-05-02 21:53:58 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: > On 2014-05-02, Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>> On 2014-05-02 19:59:44 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: >>>> >>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 2014-05-02 19:04:15 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 17:53:40 +0000, flatfish+++ said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2014 12:03:30 -0500, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 16:58:54 +0000, GreyCloud said: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/2/2014 7:04 AM, flatfish+++ wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 08:57:08 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 7:06 AM, Tattoo Vampire wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [deletia] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >>>>>>>>>>>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You mean like how Ubuntu was doing before them? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One would hope so. It's a bit of a disaster on desktops. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [deletia] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No, can't be 'legacy' if you modernize it!! :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I keep thinking that MS really does have the right stuff going forward. >>>>>>>>>> The SurfacePro is a superb little ultrabook and the 3rd party mfgs >>>>>>>>>> that are doing full Windows on Baytrail cpus fill in the rest of the >>>>>>>>>> blanks that the RT left. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Add to that Office365 that small business is really in love with and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Really? You actually believe that line? You need to stop swimming >>>>>>> in the Kool-aid quite so much. Web based stuff might be fine for those >>>>>>> apps that represent some sort of "IT burden", but simple office apps >>>>>>> from the dawn of computing really don't fit into that category. If >>>>>>> anything, they are a nuissance that you don't want to spend money on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [deletia] >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you that stupid Jed? Of course you are. >>>>> >>>>> No. I just do more than troll Usenet forums. >>>> >>>> Bullshit! Your inane and often totally incorrect posts can only be >>>> attributed to trolling. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The Office365 apps are not web based though they do default to save at >>>>>> OneDrive. Not a big problem to change that. >>>>>> >>>>>> You need to do some research on what makes up Office365 for small >>>>>> business. Hint: it brings much more to the table than 'simple office >>>>>> apps'. You're thinking of Linux for that!! :) >>>>> >>>>> You need to do some research on small business. >>>> >>>> Since I used to sell technology to small businesses as well as schools, >>>> I suspect I have a much better grasp of what works and what doesn't. >>> >>> Even if your claims aren't total bullshit, there's still a world >>> of difference between selling something to someone and that thing >>> actually being useful or a positive net gain for them. >>> >>> Really. You're a former SALESMAN and you're trying to lecture us about >>> technology? >>> >> >> Absolutely! Being in tech sales for a small VAR means more than making >> presentations. > > What a fucking loser. No that would be a definition for someone that has shown no business acumen and nearly no tech skills. > > You're a has-been salesdeone and you come to a place like this and > expect anyone > to take you the least bit seriously. You have the mainstream American > pop culture though. I'm retired and doing nicely. Here's the nice thing about a professional salesperson, we know our products and if we get stumped we know the phone number of the person that is an expert and can just hire their expertise when it is needed. Did it anytime it was needed. But idiots like you wouldn't need to sit by the phone 'cause we only called people that actually did know! > > That's something. > > [deletia] -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 23:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <71813043-3b76-459a-9765-c55e1b488fb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #241490 |
On Saturday, May 3, 2014 3:14:42 AM UTC, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On 2014-05-02 21:53:58 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: > > > > > On 2014-05-02, Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > > >>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > > >>>> On 2014-05-02 19:59:44 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: > > >>>> > > >>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > > >>>>>> On 2014-05-02 19:04:15 +0000, JEDIDIAH said: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 2014-05-02, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 17:53:40 +0000, flatfish+++ said: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2014 12:03:30 -0500, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 16:58:54 +0000, GreyCloud said: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/2/2014 7:04 AM, flatfish+++ wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 08:57:08 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-02 7:06 AM, Tattoo Vampire wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [deletia] > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> You mean like how Ubuntu was doing before them? > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> One would hope so. It's a bit of a disaster on desktops. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [deletia] > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> No, can't be 'legacy' if you modernize it!! :) > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I keep thinking that MS really does have the right stuff going forward. > > >>>>>>>>>> The SurfacePro is a superb little ultrabook and the 3rd party mfgs > > >>>>>>>>>> that are doing full Windows on Baytrail cpus fill in the rest of the > > >>>>>>>>>> blanks that the RT left. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Add to that Office365 that small business is really in love with and > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Really? You actually believe that line? You need to stop swimming > > >>>>>>> in the Kool-aid quite so much. Web based stuff might be fine for those > > >>>>>>> apps that represent some sort of "IT burden", but simple office apps > > >>>>>>> from the dawn of computing really don't fit into that category. If > > >>>>>>> anything, they are a nuissance that you don't want to spend money on. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [deletia] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Are you that stupid Jed? Of course you are. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> No. I just do more than troll Usenet forums. > > >>>> > > >>>> Bullshit! Your inane and often totally incorrect posts can only be > > >>>> attributed to trolling. > > >>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The Office365 apps are not web based though they do default to save at > > >>>>>> OneDrive. Not a big problem to change that. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> You need to do some research on what makes up Office365 for small > > >>>>>> business. Hint: it brings much more to the table than 'simple office > > >>>>>> apps'. You're thinking of Linux for that!! :) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> You need to do some research on small business. > > >>>> > > >>>> Since I used to sell technology to small businesses as well as schools, > > >>>> I suspect I have a much better grasp of what works and what doesn't. > > >>> > > >>> Even if your claims aren't total bullshit, there's still a world > > >>> of difference between selling something to someone and that thing > > >>> actually being useful or a positive net gain for them. > > >>> > > >>> Really. You're a former SALESMAN and you're trying to lecture us about > > >>> technology? > > >>> > > >> > > >> Absolutely! Being in tech sales for a small VAR means more than making > > >> presentations. > > > > > > What a fucking loser. > > > > No that would be a definition for someone that has shown no business > > acumen and nearly no tech skills. > > > > > > > > You're a has-been salesdeone and you come to a place like this and > > > expect anyone > > > to take you the least bit seriously. You have the mainstream American > > > pop culture though. > > > > I'm retired and doing nicely. > > > > Here's the nice thing about a professional salesperson, we know our > > products and if we get stumped we know the phone number of the person > > that is an expert and can just hire their expertise when it is needed. > > Did it anytime it was needed. > > > > But idiots like you wouldn't need to sit by the phone 'cause we only > > called people that actually did know! > > > > > > > > > > That's something. > > > > > > [deletia] > > > > > > -- > > Lloyd Another sock of Michael Glasser Prescott Computer Guy of Prescott, Arizona. http://prescottcomputerguy.com His video expertise is shown here http://prescottcomputerguy.com/screenflow
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-06 20:14 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <lkc1df$617$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241195 |
> Lloyd E Parsons wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 2014-05-06 13:04:11 +0000, chrisv said: >> >>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>> >>>> Since business is all about profits, show where Linux is producing fat >>>> profits for anyone. >>> >>> Dumbshit. How many times does it need to be explained to you? FOSS >>> is a tool that reduces costs and time to market. It's not "sold". >>> So, yes, it use is increasing the profits of *countless* companies, >>> even if it cannot easily be quantified on the balance sheet. >> >> At 2% market share, Linux on the desktop isn't on 'countless' anything! > > 20 million Linux desktops? For a product you basically have to find and > install yourself? > > Sounds pretty good to me, especially since Microsoft has the commercial > desktop market on cheap PCs locked up, and has since about 1995. > > Sounds like a thriving community to me, Lloyd. > > -- > Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought her back. > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on them. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-06 21:15 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <19gajaef2z2ib.1rskbt70n1aoj$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #242218 |
On Tue, 06 May 2014 20:14:28 -0500, Lloyd wrote: >> Lloyd E Parsons wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 2014-05-06 13:04:11 +0000, chrisv said: >>> >>>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>>> Since business is all about profits, show where Linux is producing fat >>>>> profits for anyone. >>>> >>>> Dumbshit. How many times does it need to be explained to you? FOSS >>>> is a tool that reduces costs and time to market. It's not "sold". >>>> So, yes, it use is increasing the profits of *countless* companies, >>>> even if it cannot easily be quantified on the balance sheet. >>> >>> At 2% market share, Linux on the desktop isn't on 'countless' anything! >> >> 20 million Linux desktops? For a product you basically have to find and >> install yourself? >> >> Sounds pretty good to me, especially since Microsoft has the commercial >> desktop market on cheap PCs locked up, and has since about 1995. >> >> Sounds like a thriving community to me, Lloyd. >> >> -- >> Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought her back. >> > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on them. As DFS would say: "Keep the hope alive!" -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-06 23:42 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: No one wants Linux. |
| Message-ID | <lkca3s$j0d$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242218 |
On 05/06/2014 09:14 PM, Lloyd wrote: >> Lloyd E Parsons wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 2014-05-06 13:04:11 +0000, chrisv said: >>> >>>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>>> Since business is all about profits, show where Linux is producing fat >>>>> profits for anyone. >>>> >>>> Dumbshit. How many times does it need to be explained to you? FOSS >>>> is a tool that reduces costs and time to market. It's not "sold". >>>> So, yes, it use is increasing the profits of *countless* companies, >>>> even if it cannot easily be quantified on the balance sheet. >>> >>> At 2% market share, Linux on the desktop isn't on 'countless' anything! >> >> 20 million Linux desktops? For a product you basically have to find and >> install yourself? >> >> Sounds pretty good to me, especially since Microsoft has the commercial >> desktop market on cheap PCs locked up, and has since about 1995. >> >> Sounds like a thriving community to me, Lloyd. >> >> -- >> Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought her back. >> > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground > are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on > them. ... or has yet to reject it. If Linux hasn't taken sizeable chunks of market share in the face of the Vista and Win8 [relative] fiascos, I think it never will.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-06 20:14 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <lkc1df$61g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241195 |
> Lloyd E Parsons wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 2014-05-06 13:04:11 +0000, chrisv said: >> >>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>> >>>> Since business is all about profits, show where Linux is producing fat >>>> profits for anyone. >>> >>> Dumbshit. How many times does it need to be explained to you? FOSS >>> is a tool that reduces costs and time to market. It's not "sold". >>> So, yes, it use is increasing the profits of *countless* companies, >>> even if it cannot easily be quantified on the balance sheet. >> >> At 2% market share, Linux on the desktop isn't on 'countless' anything! > > 20 million Linux desktops? For a product you basically have to find and > install yourself? > > Sounds pretty good to me, especially since Microsoft has the commercial > desktop market on cheap PCs locked up, and has since about 1995. > > Sounds like a thriving community to me, Lloyd. > > -- > Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought her back. > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on them. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-06 18:35 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <CF8EDBF2.369E9%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #242219 |
On 5/6/14, 6:14 PM, in article lkc1df$61g$1@dont-email.me, "Lloyd" <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >> Lloyd E Parsons wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 2014-05-06 13:04:11 +0000, chrisv said: >>> >>>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>>> Since business is all about profits, show where Linux is producing fat >>>>> profits for anyone. >>>> >>>> Dumbshit. How many times does it need to be explained to you? FOSS >>>> is a tool that reduces costs and time to market. It's not "sold". >>>> So, yes, it use is increasing the profits of *countless* companies, >>>> even if it cannot easily be quantified on the balance sheet. >>> >>> At 2% market share, Linux on the desktop isn't on 'countless' anything! >> >> 20 million Linux desktops? For a product you basically have to find and >> install yourself? >> >> Sounds pretty good to me, especially since Microsoft has the commercial >> desktop market on cheap PCs locked up, and has since about 1995. >> >> Sounds like a thriving community to me, Lloyd. >> >> -- >> Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought her back. >> > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground are > that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on them. Exactly. And that is with desktop Linux being free and having been marketed by Dell, HP, Walmart, and others. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 05:53 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <lkcvq7$6do$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242219 |
Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground > are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on > them. How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no matter): http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market has rejected Jaguar on the road! -- A closed mouth gathers no foot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 11:16 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <7pdp3b-v34.ln1@myhost.linuxnetworkbeta.net> |
| In reply to | #242281 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground >> are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on >> them. > > How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? > > Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no > matter): > > http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ > > Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market has > rejected Jaguar on the road! And Rolls-Royce isn't even mentioned! So according to Parsons, 100% of the market rejected buying a Roller! Oh, that's right, (according to Parson's "logic") it's because they probably didn't advertise! LOL -- "Microsoft has vast resources, literally billions of dollars in cash, or liquid assets reserves. Microsoft is an incredibly successful empire built on the premise of market dominance with low-quality goods." -- Former White House adviser Richard A. Clarke --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 12:21 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <87iophubwa.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #242282 |
William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> writes: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the ground >>> are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected Linux on >>> them. >> >> How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? >> >> Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no >> matter): >> >> http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ >> >> Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market has >> rejected Jaguar on the road! Please tell me you're not as dumb as this comment makes you look Creepy. Please. Not even a sycophantic little twat like you can really be comparing a marque product like Jaguar with a free for all OS? The difference for even a submissive little whiner like you should be VERY clear. The jag is a pricey to buy and run classic. Not to everyone's taste sure, but to many. Ask how many fiat uno owners would swap if you offered to cover the cost of the maintenance and the insurance. You really are an arsehole of the worst kind Creepy. > > And Rolls-Royce isn't even mentioned! So according to Parsons, 100% of the > market rejected buying a Roller! Oh, that's right, (according to Parson's > "logic") it's because they probably didn't advertise! LOL Do you work hard at being such a clueless fucking idiot Dumb Willy. I'd dread to think it came naturally. Twisting logic, sucking up to weenies like Creepy Chris and "+"ing everything is no way to go through life son. -- "I have a BSEE.... Negative feedback has many benefits, but "maintaining stability" is not one of them. Just the opposite, in fact." The turdv/chrisv idiot and his pretend BSEE degree. PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 10:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <lkd1m9$kuc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242281 |
On Wed, 07 May 2014 05:53:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the >> ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected >> Linux on them. > > How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? > > Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no > matter): > > http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ > > Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market > has rejected Jaguar on the road! Why bother with "Lloyd" -- he's an unhappy mix of the bitter old biddy Hadron and the obsessive crank Snit. Let him burble his nonsense to himself. -- Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 08:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <CF8F9E19.36A78%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #242284 |
On 5/7/14, 3:25 AM, in article lkd1m9$kuc$1@dont-email.me, "RonB" <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 07 May 2014 05:53:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the >>> ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected >>> Linux on them. >> >> How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? >> >> Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no >> matter): >> >> http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ >> >> Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market >> has rejected Jaguar on the road! > > Why bother with "Lloyd" -- he's an unhappy mix of the bitter old biddy > Hadron and the obsessive crank Snit. > > Let him burble his nonsense to himself. In the end you cannot refute him nor can you do anything but blame the boogieman for the extreme failure of Linux on the desktop. It is free. It is readily available. It has been marketed by Dell and HP and Walmart and others. It runs on most hardware. It has a cult-like group pushing it and its "philosophy". It offers massive "choice", if you want to see distros as that (though when we talk usage somehow they all get combined as if they are one... funny that, eh?). With all of that, with all distros combined as if they were the same and offered no choice, it still has yet to get to 2% usage. And much of that is because it is free and runs on older hardware. That is not what success looks like. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 11:08 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <bsv446FgnrrU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #242327 |
On 2014-05-07 15:23:53 +0000, Snit said: > On 5/7/14, 3:25 AM, in article lkd1m9$kuc$1@dont-email.me, "RonB" > <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 07 May 2014 05:53:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >>> Lloyd wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> It only sounds that way because you want it to. The facts on the >>>> ground are that in laptops/desktops, 98% of the market has rejected >>>> Linux on them. >>> >>> How can the market reject what isn't marketed to them, "Lloyd"? >>> >>> Here's an example of a healthy market, "Lloyd" (numbers are old, but no >>> matter): >>> >>> http://www.am-online.com/new-car-sales-figures/ >>> >>> Jeez, Jaguar's market share didn't even meet 1%! Over 99% of the market >>> has rejected Jaguar on the road! >> >> Why bother with "Lloyd" -- he's an unhappy mix of the bitter old biddy >> Hadron and the obsessive crank Snit. >> >> Let him burble his nonsense to himself. > > In the end you cannot refute him nor can you do anything but blame the > boogieman for the extreme failure of Linux on the desktop. It is free. It is > readily available. It has been marketed by Dell and HP and Walmart and > others. It runs on most hardware. It has a cult-like group pushing it and > its "philosophy". It offers massive "choice", if you want to see distros as > that (though when we talk usage somehow they all get combined as if they are > one... funny that, eh?). > > With all of that, with all distros combined as if they were the same and > offered no choice, it still has yet to get to 2% usage. And much of that is > because it is free and runs on older hardware. > > That is not what success looks like. They don't often have anything in their bag of tricks to show that facts on the ground say that Linux desktop is a dud anyway you look at it. Well except for the hobby nature of it. First they tried to denigrate me because of my sales background, yet then they show where sales and marketing makes a huge difference in how well a product does. They all seem to be of a mind that the 'engineer' or geeks are the ones that make or break a product when history shows that not to be the case. A great design needs a great marketing campaign to do well in the market. That's just a fact. Now here's some idiocy from them: Chrisv talked about how desktop Linux wasn't ever 'marketed'. If that is true, that pretty much tells the tale of why it continues to not find a market. You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, what would have been the result? First would have been the disappearance of most of the 'distributions', the slew of them just confuse a market. But of course, the old conspiracies would come into play about how it isn't 'fair' and all that other bullshit. But here's Google, taking on MS' wheelhouse on the desktop/laptop with Chromebooks and finding a market for them. If all the bullshit conspiracies were correct, this just couldn't happen. Then one other pinhead here mentioned Rolls Royce among other auto makers that don't 'market'. Well of course, that is horseshit of the purest sort. Rolls Royce does market, just not where the normal consumer markets are looking. Why would they want to advertise in mediums that are reaching mostly people that couldn't afford the Rolls at all. The answer is, you don't. That's why it isn't just 'marketing', it is 'effective marketing'. Picking your market and then feeding it in the way that gets to those that can take advantage of it. It appears to me that the geeks and 'engineers' here need to get out of the shop more! -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 09:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <CF8FAE20.36AAA%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #242349 |
On 5/7/14, 9:08 AM, in article bsv446FgnrrU1@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd E Parsons" <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: ... >>> Why bother with "Lloyd" -- he's an unhappy mix of the bitter old biddy >>> Hadron and the obsessive crank Snit. >>> >>> Let him burble his nonsense to himself. >> >> In the end you cannot refute him nor can you do anything but blame the >> boogieman for the extreme failure of Linux on the desktop. It is free. It is >> readily available. It has been marketed by Dell and HP and Walmart and >> others. It runs on most hardware. It has a cult-like group pushing it and >> its "philosophy". It offers massive "choice", if you want to see distros as >> that (though when we talk usage somehow they all get combined as if they are >> one... funny that, eh?). >> >> With all of that, with all distros combined as if they were the same and >> offered no choice, it still has yet to get to 2% usage. And much of that is >> because it is free and runs on older hardware. >> >> That is not what success looks like. > > They don't often have anything in their bag of tricks to show that > facts on the ground say that Linux desktop is a dud anyway you look at > it. Well except for the hobby nature of it. Hobbyists and some programmers and others who live in the command line. And people who cannot afford other solutions or who are willing to sacrifice usability and functionality, both in a big way, for a philosophy. To be clear: I am not putting any of these groups down - but they are, even combined, fairly small. From the data: less than 2% of usage. Considering how lots of people try Linux for a while and then give up on it, it is likely that maybe a half of that usage is from people doing this (all it takes is a very small percentage of "others" to get this). This means there *might* be 1% of users who stick with Linux. And that is all distros combined... if you count those as "choices", no one choice (distro) likely has 1/3 of one percent of usage in terms of a standard desktop for users. That is *not* success for a free product that is readily available and has been marketed by some of the largest companies in the world! > First they tried to denigrate me because of my sales background, yet > then they show where sales and marketing makes a huge difference in how > well a product does. They all seem to be of a mind that the 'engineer' > or geeks are the ones that make or break a product when history shows > that not to be the case. A great design needs a great marketing > campaign to do well in the market. That's just a fact. Attacking you for your background is a non-starter anyway. The evidence is what matters. > Now here's some idiocy from them: > > Chrisv talked about how desktop Linux wasn't ever 'marketed'. If that > is true, that pretty much tells the tale of why it continues to not > find a market. You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, > what would have been the result? First would have been the > disappearance of most of the 'distributions', the slew of them just > confuse a market. But of course, the old conspiracies would come into > play about how it isn't 'fair' and all that other bullshit. But here's > Google, taking on MS' wheelhouse on the desktop/laptop with Chromebooks > and finding a market for them. If all the bullshit conspiracies were > correct, this just couldn't happen. Right. And Ubuntu *has* been marketed by Dell and HP and Walmart (I think they each used Ubuntu - but even if not, some flavor has been). The idea it has not been marketed is simply wrong... and if it was a good solution it would be marketed more. Do you think Dell and HP like having to dance to the tune of MS? Do you think they want to pay for an OS for the hardware they sell? They would jump at a chance to cut those costs if they could make more money doing so. > Then one other pinhead here mentioned Rolls Royce among other auto > makers that don't 'market'. Well of course, that is horseshit of the > purest sort. Rolls Royce does market, just not where the normal > consumer markets are looking. Why would they want to advertise in > mediums that are reaching mostly people that couldn't afford the Rolls > at all. The answer is, you don't. That's why it isn't just > 'marketing', it is 'effective marketing'. Picking your market and then > feeding it in the way that gets to those that can take advantage of it. Again, correct. > It appears to me that the geeks and 'engineers' here need to get out of > the shop more! The COLA "advocates" need to stop blaming the boogieman for the failure of desktop Linux. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 11:45 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <3cokm9p6oq81rnmhqokhr4fht1ices4mh5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #242349 |
Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, >(completely made-up fsckwittery about "confusion" >and distros disappearing snipped) I doubt that even idiots would be fooled by your idiocy, "Lloyd". You're simply too stupid to understand how FOSS works. The the Nth time, it's a tool, not a product which is marketed and sold. -- "(The iPad is) only limited and locked down by some artificial definition of the term that's completely irrelevant to most every user." - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", lying his ass off
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 13:10 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <bsvb8jFi9esU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #242365 |
On 2014-05-07 16:45:57 +0000, chrisv said: > Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > >> You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, >> (completely made-up fsckwittery about "confusion" >> and distros disappearing snipped) > > I doubt that even idiots would be fooled by your idiocy, "Lloyd". > > You're simply too stupid to understand how FOSS works. > > The the Nth time, it's a tool, not a product which is marketed and > sold. And you show nearly every day that you have no clue about how business and markets work. The problem with Linux on the desktop is not a quality issue at all, it is all about the marketing or lack of. It is aggravated by way too many distros which make it nearly impossible to gain any traction in a highly competitive market. And of course, it would help if you as such an avowed Linux advocate actually used it. There is no evidence that you do. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 11:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <CF8FC795.36AF5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #242387 |
On 5/7/14, 11:10 AM, in article bsvb8jFi9esU1@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd E Parsons" <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > On 2014-05-07 16:45:57 +0000, chrisv said: > >> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >> >>> You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, >>> (completely made-up fsckwittery about "confusion" >>> and distros disappearing snipped) >> >> I doubt that even idiots would be fooled by your idiocy, "Lloyd". >> >> You're simply too stupid to understand how FOSS works. >> >> The the Nth time, it's a tool, not a product which is marketed and >> sold. > > And you show nearly every day that you have no clue about how business > and markets work. > > The problem with Linux on the desktop is not a quality issue at all, it > is all about the marketing or lack of. It is aggravated by way too > many distros which make it nearly impossible to gain any traction in a > highly competitive market. > > And of course, it would help if you as such an avowed Linux advocate > actually used it. There is no evidence that you do. It is also a quality issue. Watch the videos in my .sig for strong evidence of this. The quality is just horrible in far too many areas. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 13:25 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <bsvc49Fif8rU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #242390 |
On 2014-05-07 18:20:53 +0000, Snit said: > On 5/7/14, 11:10 AM, in article bsvb8jFi9esU1@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd E > Parsons" <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: > >> On 2014-05-07 16:45:57 +0000, chrisv said: >> >>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>> >>>> You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, >>>> (completely made-up fsckwittery about "confusion" >>>> and distros disappearing snipped) >>> >>> I doubt that even idiots would be fooled by your idiocy, "Lloyd". >>> >>> You're simply too stupid to understand how FOSS works. >>> >>> The the Nth time, it's a tool, not a product which is marketed and >>> sold. >> >> And you show nearly every day that you have no clue about how business >> and markets work. >> >> The problem with Linux on the desktop is not a quality issue at all, it >> is all about the marketing or lack of. It is aggravated by way too >> many distros which make it nearly impossible to gain any traction in a >> highly competitive market. >> >> And of course, it would help if you as such an avowed Linux advocate >> actually used it. There is no evidence that you do. > > It is also a quality issue. Watch the videos in my .sig for strong evidence > of this. The quality is just horrible in far too many areas. I don't happen to agree with your assessment. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-07 20:39 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Many want Linux. |
| Message-ID | <87r44577rh.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #242392 |
Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> writes: > On 2014-05-07 18:20:53 +0000, Snit said: > >> On 5/7/14, 11:10 AM, in article bsvb8jFi9esU1@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd E >> Parsons" <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >> >>> On 2014-05-07 16:45:57 +0000, chrisv said: >>> >>>> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >>>> >>>>> You have to wonder if desktop Linux had been marketed, >>>>> (completely made-up fsckwittery about "confusion" >>>>> and distros disappearing snipped) >>>> >>>> I doubt that even idiots would be fooled by your idiocy, "Lloyd". >>>> >>>> You're simply too stupid to understand how FOSS works. >>>> >>>> The the Nth time, it's a tool, not a product which is marketed and >>>> sold. >>> >>> And you show nearly every day that you have no clue about how business >>> and markets work. >>> >>> The problem with Linux on the desktop is not a quality issue at all, it >>> is all about the marketing or lack of. It is aggravated by way too >>> many distros which make it nearly impossible to gain any traction in a >>> highly competitive market. >>> >>> And of course, it would help if you as such an avowed Linux advocate >>> actually used it. There is no evidence that you do. >> >> It is also a quality issue. Watch the videos in my .sig for strong evidence >> of this. The quality is just horrible in far too many areas. > > I don't happen to agree with your assessment. It isnt an "assessment". Its a fact. KDE is a mess. And those videos demonstrate it very well. -- "I have a BSEE.... Negative feedback has many benefits, but "maintaining stability" is not one of them. Just the opposite, in fact." The turdv/chrisv idiot and his pretend BSEE degree. PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web