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 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 08:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lk01km$lq8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241195 |
Tattoo Vampire wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, > Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But > the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." > > Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The > writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're > losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to > profitability. > > "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to > profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the > same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower > during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling > season." > > http://goo.gl/vUyG84 Like Greycloud says, you get a pass for dissing Windows. :-D (Sure to appear in a Zeke sig or DFS "hypocrites" quote post, minus the smiley, of course!) -- A doctor was stranded with a Wintroll in a leaky life raft in shark-infested waters. The doctor tried to swim ashore but was eaten by the sharks. The Wintroll, however, swam safely past the bloodthirsty sharks. "Professional courtesy," he explained.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 08:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lk04mk$bis$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241195 |
On 2014-05-02 7:06 AM, Tattoo Vampire wrote: > "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, > Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But > the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." > > Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The > writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're > losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to > profitability. > > "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to > profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the > same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower > during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling > season." > > http://goo.gl/vUyG84 Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). -- Silver Slimer Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 09:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <14wh7yro0ar7q.10xzt6d6qiit3$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #241214 |
On Fri, 02 May 2014 08:57:08 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote: > On 2014-05-02 7:06 AM, Tattoo Vampire wrote: >> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >> >> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >> profitability. >> >> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >> season." >> >> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 > > Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the > company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it > is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an > operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features > all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, > but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of > the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features > they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers > with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, > it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface > tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a > Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful > computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should > become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the > course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were > immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). Well stated! While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and iPhone have far better support that way. I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of unified interfaces clicks, if ever. The Linux loons hate stuff like they. They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect killing their product. -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 09:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lk05qj$gm2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241222 |
On 2014-05-02 9:04 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: >>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>> >>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>> profitability. >>> >>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>> season." >>> >>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >> >> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). > > Well stated! > > While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin > LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For > example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that > are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a > huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. > > I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the > interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like > me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > > Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who > have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. > The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and > iPhone have far better support that way. > > I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of > unified interfaces clicks, if ever. > > The Linux loons hate stuff like they. > They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that > all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. > > They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect > killing their product. Clearly, the best approach for Windows 8 and 9 going forward is to allow people to CHOOSE whether they want to use Tiles or not but make it available in case they do. However, abandoning it entirely, which seems to be what many people were clamoring for, would be a gigantic mistake. It's the same thing with the Surface. I think that the RT ones should be abandoned as they clearly aren't that great of a deal, but the Surface Pro ones are excellent machines which allow you to have the equivalent of a useful iPad. It is an excellent hybrid of convenience and productivity but people don't realize it YET because they've been sold on the iPad, especially since it has such an attractive collection of apps. Stay the course and the people will figure things out on their own. -- Silver Slimer Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 09:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <y7p3jf1dgsf.11bdnznk2dx03.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #241225 |
On Fri, 02 May 2014 09:16:20 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote: > On 2014-05-02 9:04 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: >>>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>>> >>>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>>> profitability. >>>> >>>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>>> season." >>>> >>>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >>> >>> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >>> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >>> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >>> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >>> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >>> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >>> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >>> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >>> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >>> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >>> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >>> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >>> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >>> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >>> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >>> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). >> >> Well stated! >> >> While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin >> LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For >> example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that >> are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a >> huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. >> >> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >> >> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >> iPhone have far better support that way. >> >> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >> >> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >> >> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >> killing their product. > > Clearly, the best approach for Windows 8 and 9 going forward is to allow > people to CHOOSE whether they want to use Tiles or not but make it > available in case they do. And that's where they went very wrong with Windows 8.0. It should have been an option to load the classic interface. -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 10:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lk0bkp$q1l$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241229 |
On 2014-05-02 9:25 AM, flatfish+++ wrote: > On Fri, 02 May 2014 09:16:20 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote: > >> On 2014-05-02 9:04 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: >>>>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>>>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>>>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>>>> >>>>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>>>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>>>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>>>> profitability. >>>>> >>>>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>>>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>>>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>>>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>>>> season." >>>>> >>>>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >>>> >>>> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >>>> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >>>> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >>>> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >>>> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >>>> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >>>> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >>>> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >>>> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >>>> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >>>> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >>>> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >>>> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >>>> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >>>> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >>>> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). >>> >>> Well stated! >>> >>> While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin >>> LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For >>> example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that >>> are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a >>> huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. >>> >>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >>> >>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >>> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >>> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >>> iPhone have far better support that way. >>> >>> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >>> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >>> >>> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >>> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >>> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >>> >>> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >>> killing their product. >> >> Clearly, the best approach for Windows 8 and 9 going forward is to allow >> people to CHOOSE whether they want to use Tiles or not but make it >> available in case they do. > > And that's where they went very wrong with Windows 8.0. > It should have been an option to load the classic interface. And if it ISN'T a choice, they should have presented some sort of tutorial which properly explains how to use the operating system. For me, it was simple because I had read extensively about it and had some experience using Gnome 3 (I therefore had some experience working with hot corners). However, most people are not as curious as I am and don't understand the point or the concept of hot corners. I tend to have a tiny bit of respect for my cousin's intelligence, but even he came to me at some point in the year begging me to install Windows 7 to replace 8 because he couldn't stand the way it works (and the fact that it opened up Modern interface software to do something as simple as display photos). I modified the whole thing to make it run the way 7 did and he was content but he couldn't understand WHY Microsoft would want people to use a Modern program for so many tasks. It makes some sense for PDF files (and I'm stretching here because it's truly not that great) but it's absolutely ridiculous for image viewing. -- Silver Slimer Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | White Spirit <wspirit@homechoice.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 16:04 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bshqf1FmqceU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #241222 |
On 02/05/2014 14:04, flatfish+++ wrote: > I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the > interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like > me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who > have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. > The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and > iPhone have far better support that way. > I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of > unified interfaces clicks, if ever. > The Linux loons hate stuff like they. Do we? I actually think it's a good idea even if my needs are better served elsewhere. Unfortunately for MS, a number of their best ideas come about too late for them to be as effective as they could. Look at C#, for example. > They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that > all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. Not true. > They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect > killing their product. You're obsessed with market share and unable to see the bigger picture.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 11:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1btu1e34upuwf.1kgtij7k6egcv.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #241241 |
On Fri, 02 May 2014 16:04:01 +0100, White Spirit wrote: > On 02/05/2014 14:04, flatfish+++ wrote: > >> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > >> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >> iPhone have far better support that way. > >> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. > >> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. > > Do we? I actually think it's a good idea even if my needs are better > served elsewhere. Unfortunately for MS, a number of their best ideas > come about too late for them to be as effective as they could. Look at > C#, for example. You break the mold then because the majority of Linux users prefer 100 different ways of doing something and thus they end up with not one of those 100 ways being decent. Take desktop environments for example. What if the resources dedicated to the major desktop environments (kde,gnome,mate etc) pooled their resources and produced a single, unified environment that worked as well as Windows or OSX desktop does? >> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. > > Not true. Sure it is. The *nix mentality is many little programs rather than a single "does it all" type program. It's been like that for decades. >> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >> killing their product. > > You're obsessed with market share and unable to see the bigger picture. The bigger picture will never exist unless desktop Linux can gain market share. -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 11:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lk0dh6$aq0$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #241246 |
On 2014-05-02 11:20 AM, flatfish+++ wrote: >>> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >>> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >> >> Not true. > > Sure it is. > The *nix mentality is many little programs rather than a single "does > it all" type program. > It's been like that for decades. There have been a number of posts from advocates confirming what you just said. Anyone stating the opposite hasn't been paying attention to the forum or even to their own statements. -- Silver Slimer Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 17:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87oazg6voa.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #241246 |
flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> writes: > On Fri, 02 May 2014 16:04:01 +0100, White Spirit wrote: > >> On 02/05/2014 14:04, flatfish+++ wrote: >> >>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >> >>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >>> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >>> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >>> iPhone have far better support that way. >> >>> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >>> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >> >>> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >> >> Do we? I actually think it's a good idea even if my needs are better >> served elsewhere. Unfortunately for MS, a number of their best ideas >> come about too late for them to be as effective as they could. Look at >> C#, for example. > > You break the mold then because the majority of Linux users prefer > 100 different ways of doing something and thus they end up with not > one of those 100 ways being decent. > > Take desktop environments for example. > > What if the resources dedicated to the major desktop environments > (kde,gnome,mate etc) pooled their resources and produced a single, > unified environment that worked as well as Windows or OSX desktop > does? > >>> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >>> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >> >> Not true. > > Sure it is. > The *nix mentality is many little programs rather than a single "does > it all" type program. > It's been like that for decades. And works brilliantly when the tools are properly integrated into a working system. Exactly like KDE does NOT do it would be a good example. As you see White Spirit is clueless. Despite his world class code ... LOL! I think he might be related to that big head Ian "legend in his own lunchtime" Hilliard. > >>> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >>> killing their product. >> >> You're obsessed with market share and unable to see the bigger >> picture. The people that write the stuff would like people to use it. > > The bigger picture will never exist unless desktop Linux can gain > market share. -- "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 | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 09:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <CF890FEC.36340%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #241257 |
On 5/2/14, 8:35 AM, in article 87oazg6voa.fsf@gmail.com, "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Not true. >> >> Sure it is. >> The *nix mentality is many little programs rather than a single "does >> it all" type program. >> It's been like that for decades. > > And works brilliantly when the tools are properly integrated into a > working system. Exactly like KDE does NOT do it would be a good example. KDE is an utter mess in more ways than I could have possibly imagined. Even the most basic of bugs had not even been reported... and they are everywhere. It is as if they do not care. -- * 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 | Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 11:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <09aa42d1-797f-4717-8621-632aa18b7083@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #241271 |
On Friday, May 2, 2014 4:03:40 PM UTC, Snit wrote: > On 5/2/14, 8:35 AM, in article 87oazg6voa.fsf@gmail.com, "Hadron" > > <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>> Not true. > > >> > > >> Sure it is. > > >> The *nix mentality is many little programs rather than a single "does > > >> it all" type program. > > >> It's been like that for decades. > > > > > > And works brilliantly when the tools are properly integrated into a > > > working system. Exactly like KDE does NOT do it would be a good example. > > > > KDE is an utter mess in more ways than I could have possibly imagined. Even > > the most basic of bugs had not even been reported... and they are > > everywhere. It is as if they do not care. > > > > > > -- > > * 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> Another thread ruined by 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 | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 11:01 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <8OSdneOzfM4OUv7OnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #241241 |
On 5/2/2014 9:04 AM, White Spirit wrote: > On 02/05/2014 14:04, flatfish+++ wrote: > >> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > >> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >> iPhone have far better support that way. > >> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. > >> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. > > Do we? I actually think it's a good idea even if my needs are better > served elsewhere. Unfortunately for MS, a number of their best ideas > come about too late for them to be as effective as they could. Look at > C#, for example. True, but after working with C# I find it a very productive product to use in many various paradigms. > >> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. > > Not true. > >> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >> killing their product. > > You're obsessed with market share and unable to see the bigger picture. > Hard to see the big picture when the end user is constantly fighting alligators all the time. -- We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true -- Robert Wilensky, 1997
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 10:58 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <8OSdneCzfM5BU_7OnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #241222 |
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: >>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>> >>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>> profitability. >>> >>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>> season." >>> >>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >> >> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). > > Well stated! > > While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin > LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For > example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that > are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a > huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. > > I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the > interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like > me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. > > Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who > have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. > The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and > iPhone have far better support that way. > > I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of > unified interfaces clicks, if ever. > > The Linux loons hate stuff like they. > They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that > all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. > > They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect > killing their product. > A thought occured to me for another way for MS to make some more money. They can call it legacy windows, modernized of course, and resell all of their old stuff for all of us old timers that were used to doing things that way. They just don't have to charge as much, and they can reuse their old software. -- We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true -- Robert Wilensky, 1997
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 12:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bsi1f0Fo9smU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #241281 |
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: >>>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>>> >>>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>>> profitability. >>>> >>>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>>> season." >>>> >>>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >>> >>> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >>> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >>> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >>> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >>> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >>> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >>> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >>> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >>> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >>> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >>> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >>> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >>> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >>> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >>> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >>> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). >> >> Well stated! >> >> While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin >> LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For >> example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that >> are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a >> huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. >> >> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >> >> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >> iPhone have far better support that way. >> >> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >> >> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >> >> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >> killing their product. >> > A thought occured to me for another way for MS to make some more money. > They can call it legacy windows, modernized of course, and resell all of > their old stuff for all of us old timers that were used to doing things > that way. They just don't have to charge as much, and they can reuse > their old software. 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 OneDrive which is probably the best overall implementation of Cloud services and you've got the makings of a real killer combo IMO. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 13:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sg167jtevaft.1haqfbde3pbxl.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #241285 |
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: >>>>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>>>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>>>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>>>> >>>>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>>>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>>>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>>>> profitability. >>>>> >>>>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>>>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>>>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>>>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>>>> season." >>>>> >>>>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >>>> >>>> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >>>> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >>>> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >>>> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >>>> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >>>> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >>>> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >>>> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >>>> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >>>> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >>>> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >>>> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >>>> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >>>> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >>>> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >>>> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). >>> >>> Well stated! >>> >>> While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin >>> LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For >>> example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that >>> are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a >>> huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. >>> >>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >>> >>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >>> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >>> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >>> iPhone have far better support that way. >>> >>> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >>> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >>> >>> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >>> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >>> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >>> >>> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >>> killing their product. >>> >> A thought occured to me for another way for MS to make some more money. >> They can call it legacy windows, modernized of course, and resell all of >> their old stuff for all of us old timers that were used to doing things >> that way. They just don't have to charge as much, and they can reuse >> their old software. > > 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 > OneDrive which is probably the best overall implementation of Cloud > services and you've got the makings of a real killer combo IMO. They have most of the right ideas but I think the timing is just a little bit too early. The majority are still legacy/traditional desktop users and that is where a lot of the backlash is coming from. -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 13:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bsi6p8FpekpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #241297 |
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: >>>>>> "In its latest filing, Microsoft disclosed that for the March quarter, >>>>>> Microsoft's Surface tablets and accessories pulled in $494 million. But >>>>>> the company spent $539 million in chasing those sales..." >>>>>> >>>>>> Microsoft continues to spend more on the things than it's taking in. The >>>>>> writer here must be a Microsoft shill, though - he says since they're >>>>>> losing less on them now than earlier this year, they're on the way to >>>>>> profitability. >>>>>> >>>>>> "If nothing else, Microsoft's tablet line appears to be on the road to >>>>>> profitability, losing less money and generating more revenue than the >>>>>> same period a year ago. And, understandably, Surface revenue was lower >>>>>> during the first quarter than at the height of the holiday selling >>>>>> season." >>>>>> >>>>>> http://goo.gl/vUyG84 >>>>> >>>>> Losing money to advertise a product which is clearly important in the >>>>> company's financial strategy going forward isn't entirely crazy. As it >>>>> is, Microsoft needs to convince the consumers that it not only has an >>>>> operating system which allows them to take advantage of touch features >>>>> all the while preserving the usability of a traditional Windows desktop, >>>>> but also that it can produce the hardware which will give them all of >>>>> the benefits of an Apple or Android tablet IN ADDITION to the features >>>>> they've come to expect. Considering people WANT very portable computers >>>>> with long battery life which also happen to be useful for productivity, >>>>> it makes sense that Microsoft would produce Windows 8 AND a Surface >>>>> tablet to go with it. As it is, anyone I've seen who has purchase a >>>>> Surface Pro thinks they're quite a marvel and probably the most useful >>>>> computer they've ever owned. With word of mouth, these devices should >>>>> become a lot more popular. The best thing Microsoft can do is stay the >>>>> course (unlike other pieces of hardware they've produced which were >>>>> immediately abandoned once it was clear they weren't selling like hotcakes). >>>> >>>> Well stated! >>>> >>>> While I loath the Windows 8.1 tiles interface on a desktop with twin >>>> LCD, non-touch, I've seen how well it works with touch screens. For >>>> example, a friend of mine is using twin touch screen monitors that >>>> are embedded into his studio desk. He has the display duplicated on a >>>> huge plasma screen up on the wall and it works really well. >>>> >>>> I think Microsoft is ahead of the curve here by trying to unify the >>>> interface across multiple device types. They are battling people like >>>> me who are set in our ways and somewhat resist change. >>>> >>>> Tiles on a phone is brilliant in fact. Especially for older folks who >>>> have trouble seeing miniscule icons and so forth. >>>> The big problem is lack of support applications wise. Android and >>>> iPhone have far better support that way. >>>> >>>> I agree, Microsoft should keep plodding along till the concept of >>>> unified interfaces clicks, if ever. >>>> >>>> The Linux loons hate stuff like they. >>>> They prefer a mish-mash of code fragments, little program"ettes" that >>>> all do a specific function rather than "use this it works" approach. >>>> >>>> They are also totally hung up on the choice mantra which is in effect >>>> killing their product. >>>> >>> A thought occured to me for another way for MS to make some more money. >>> They can call it legacy windows, modernized of course, and resell all of >>> their old stuff for all of us old timers that were used to doing things >>> that way. They just don't have to charge as much, and they can reuse >>> their old software. >> >> 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 >> OneDrive which is probably the best overall implementation of Cloud >> services and you've got the makings of a real killer combo IMO. > > They have most of the right ideas but I think the timing is just a > little bit too early. > The majority are still legacy/traditional desktop users and that is > where a lot of the backlash is coming from. As small business moves more and more to Office365, the rest of the market will follow. But yeah, it could be a bit longer than I would expect. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 14:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlm7r1f.5u7.jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
| In reply to | #241321 |
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]
--
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 14:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bsi9rpFq3hpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #241328 |
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. 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!! :) -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-02 15:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1vnmn9np2tcps.gua1i3t0b1kx$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #241336 |
On Fri, 2 May 2014 14:26:50 -0500, Lloyd E Parsons 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. Jeb is moron still living in 1985. > > 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 might ruin his fantasy world of green screens and text based applications. -- flatfish+++ 163 Reasons not to deal with Michael "Snit" Glasser, the Prescott Computer Guy http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web