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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #486886 > unrolled thread

Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund?

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

Contents

  Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2019-02-06 22:16 +0000
    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 15:03 -0800
    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-08 07:40 -0600
      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-08 14:49 +0000
        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-08 10:28 -0500
          Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-02-08 17:56 +0000
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-08 13:19 -0500
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-08 13:32 -0500
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-08 12:35 -0600
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:23 +0000
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-08 13:00 -0600
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-09 03:21 +0000
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-09 18:55 -0500
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:29 +0000
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-09 18:54 -0500
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:34 +0000
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? tom <tom@0.0.0.0> - 2019-02-09 20:23 -0800
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-10 19:34 -0500
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:06 +0000
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-03-14 04:39 +0000
                      When I see "malware", the phrase "clueless idiot" pops into my head. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-03-13 21:49 -0700
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? tom <tom@0.0.0.0> - 2019-02-09 20:22 -0800
                Please kill yourself on the way out of the door Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:46 -0800
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-10 15:02 -0500
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2019-02-10 21:32 +0000
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 21:48 +0000
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-10 23:04 +0000
                      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 23:15 +0000
                        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-10 23:23 +0000
                          Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 23:37 +0000
                            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-10 23:39 +0000
                              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 23:50 +0000
                                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-11 00:29 +0000
                                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:01 +0000
                                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-11 10:24 +0100
                                      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-11 03:44 -0800
                                        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-11 13:26 +0100
                                          To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-02-11 04:46 -0800
                                            Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2019-02-11 10:41 -0500
                                              Re: 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT! ⏰🔫🔫🔫 Sir Gerg teh Yechh Master ""Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake>" 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT!  ⏰🔫🔫🔫❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 09:57 -0600
                                              Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 10:29 -0600
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 10:38 -0600
                                                  Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 11:08 -0600
                                                    Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2019-02-11 13:22 -0500
                                                      Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 12:56 -0600
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 16:44 +0000
                                              Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 09:11 -0800
                                                Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 12:59 -0600
                                                  Re: ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-11 12:10 -0700
                                                    Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 13:20 -0600
                                                      Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 12:22 -0700
                                                        Re: Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 14:51 -0600
                                                          Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 13:55 -0700
                                                            Re: Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ ? Snowflake ?? Snowflake ?? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-11 14:59 -0600
                                                  Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 15:35 -0600
                                                    Re: Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-02-12 10:56 -0600
                                                      Re: ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-12 11:12 -0600
                                            Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 09:41 -0600
                                              Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 13:47 -0500
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 13:04 -0800
                                                  Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 15:39 -0600
                                            Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-11 17:56 +0000
                                            Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 13:03 -0800
                                              Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 15:53 -0600
                                              To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-02-11 13:57 -0800
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 15:03 -0700
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 22:03 +0000
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 17:07 -0600
                                                  Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-11 15:38 -0800
                                                Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 17:14 -0500
                                          Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-11 06:10 -0800
                                            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-11 16:38 +0100
                                              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-11 10:39 -0800
                                              *You* can't, I can. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-02-11 14:00 -0800
                                        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 13:50 +0000
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-10 19:36 -0500
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:12 +0000
                      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-03-14 19:05 -0400
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-11 07:11 -0600
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-11 06:35 -0800
          Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-02-08 18:53 +0000
            Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-08 14:26 -0500
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-02-08 19:59 +0000
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-09 03:26 +0000
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-09 19:00 -0500
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-09 18:59 -0500
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-09 19:58 -0800
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-11 07:17 -0600
                      Signatures are for posts with ZERO informational content Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 05:27 -0800
                        Re: Signatures are for posts with ZERO informational content chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-11 07:33 -0600
                          A person could actually grow old waiting to be enlighten on COLA about Linux. Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 05:36 -0800
                            Re: A person could actually grow old waiting to be enlighten on COLA about Linux. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-11 13:52 -0500
                      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-02-11 06:12 -0800
                        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-11 08:33 -0600
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-10 12:23 -0500
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-09 21:54 -0500
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2019-02-10 14:16 +0000
                    Russell's shitty attitude is the PROBLEM, rather than the solution Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 06:29 -0800
              Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:36 +0000
                Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-09 22:03 -0500
                  Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 14:52 +0000
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-10 13:14 -0500
                      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 18:18 +0000
                    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2019-02-23 14:59 +0000
    There is stupid, then there is vallor stupid Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-09 05:25 -0800
    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-09 18:48 -0500
      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:40 +0000
        Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-02-10 19:31 -0500
          Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? Ratchetjaw <ratchetjaw@mail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:05 +0000
      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-09 21:47 -0500
      The Linux Advocates on COLA are total ass-holes Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 02:51 -0800
        Re: The Linux Advocates on COLA are total ass-holes DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-10 08:13 -0500
          Time to drop a MOAB on COLA Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 04:52 -0800
          Re: The Linux Advocates on COLA are total ass-holes Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2019-02-16 02:41 +0000
      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-11 14:47 -0500
    Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-02-11 14:49 -0500
      Re: Desktop vs. Server -- are we, indeed, moribund? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2019-02-12 09:26 +0000

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

#487176 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 3:04 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 2/11/2019 10:47 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 2/11/2019 10:41 AM, Serg Io wrote:
>>> On 2/11/2019 6:46 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>>> Branimir wrote:
>>>>> Windows is highly insecure...
>>>>
>>>> You are insecure about Windows.
>>>>
>>>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>>>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>>>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll send some over for ya!
>>> the attachment automatically opens and runs when you open this post
>>>
>> <SNORT>!
>>
>> Oh Crap! I've opened this post :-(
> 
> Ahhh shi%. Windoze syphilitic brain smelter version -1.5.



    sh*t, I opened it too,

so far nothing has happened......

    ^e#(dsH23,...  sH@1!%3234, 482Lfj*2Hx!!

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

#487145 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2019-02-11, Jeff-Relf.Me  @. <Jeff-Relf.Me@> wrote:
> Branimir wrote:
>> Windows is highly insecure...
>
> You are insecure about Windows.
>
> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
That is why you troll Linux newsgroup... of course you don't run AV
software and you never get cought pents down...

-- 
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

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

#487169 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 4:46 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Branimir wrote:
>> Windows is highly insecure...
> 
> You are insecure about Windows.
> 
> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
> 

The best virus is one that you do not know you have.

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

#487178 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 3:03 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 2/11/2019 4:46 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> Branimir wrote:
>>> Windows is highly insecure...
>>
>> You are insecure about Windows.
>>
>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>
> 
> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.



I got a bad one on XP, it replaced one of the first files windows starts
up (forgot the name)- all external IO goes through it, so it shut the
computer off from internet, all the ports,

I emailed Kaspersky and they helped me out sent me a killfile for that,
which was a race condition between the killfile and boot up, so it took
about 20 times before it stopped the file from running, then I renamed
it, (xx) I found a good copy of the file (on the same machine in Windows
cab files) and replace the bad one.  It turnes out that that file had
about 2k of unused space at the end, so the bad guys put their code
there but have the CRC check calculate the same, so it is almost
undetectable.

the code can intercept all internal/external traffic, credit card #s
etc.   Roumered that NSA does this too.

It took a week.

(we have about 10 computers around here, xp, win7,win10, raspberypi,
linux mint, Centos 6 on HP server, ubuntou on a small server(no fans)
Mac, even wait for it......   C/PM ! in the garage on a shelf that OS
fits in 150k on a 8" floppy disk, called the Ferguison or Big Board.

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

#487179 — To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

Chris replied:
> > In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
> > I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
> > To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
> 
> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.

*You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.

I don't know what it's like to be you,
but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.

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

#487183 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2019-02-11 2:57 p.m., Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Chris replied:
>>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>
>> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.
> 
> *You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.
> 
> I don't know what it's like to be you,
> but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.
> 
yours is just a rerun of daily usenet

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

#487184 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2019-02-11, Jeff-Relf.Me  @. <Jeff-Relf.Me@> wrote:
> Chris replied:
>> > In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>> > I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>> > To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>> 
>> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.
>
> *You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.
>
> I don't know what it's like to be you,
> but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.

No question about that. Somehow I doubt he shits in a bucket.


-- 
Ratchet Jaw
The Locked and Loaded Jew

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

#487193 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 3:57 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Chris replied:
>>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>
>> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.
> 
> *You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.
> 
> I don't know what it's like to be you,
> but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.
> 

Inshallah

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

#487196 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 3:07 PM, Serg Io wrote:
> On 2/11/2019 3:57 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> Chris replied:
>>>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>>>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>>>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>>
>>> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.
>>
>> *You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.
>>
>> I don't know what it's like to be you,
>> but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.
>>
> 
> Inshallah
> 

Pretty deep.

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

#487293 — Re: To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.

On 2/11/2019 4:57 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Chris replied:
>>> In all my years of using Windows, since 1989 ( and DOS, since 1983 ),
>>> I've yet to experience a malware problem of any kind, shape or form.
>>> To run the best software, on the best hardware, you need Windows 10.
>>
>> The best virus is one that you do not know you have.
> 
> *You* are the one who doesn't know, I assure you.
> 
> I don't know what it's like to be you,
> but I do know that it's NOTHING like my life.
> 
Rolf, that would certainly be true for any normal person on the planet.

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

#487124

On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:26:56 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 4:24:55 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > Linux has exploits, but nowhere near Windows. That is in million 
> > > cases where Windows desktop is cracked, you will not find single 
> > > linux case.
> >
> >
> > Linux also has users, but nowhere near Windows.  
> >
> > As such, there's an element of Sutton's law ("Because that's
> > where the money is") behind the simple raw number comparisons. 
>
> 
> Windows is highly insecure...

Windows used to be quite bad, granted, but MS did finally wake 
up and started to fix things in Vista.  By the time that MS got
to Win8, attacks had transitioned from OS vulnerabilities over
to social engineering, which is effectively OS agnostic. 


-hh

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

#487134

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:10:54 -0800 (PST), -hh 
<recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:26:56 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 4:24:55 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > 
> > > > Linux has exploits, but nowhere near Windows. That is in 
million 
> > > > cases where Windows desktop is cracked, you will not find 
single 
> > > > linux case.
> > >
> > >
> > > Linux also has users, but nowhere near Windows.  
> > >
> > > As such, there's an element of Sutton's law ("Because that's
> > > where the money is") behind the simple raw number comparisons. 
> >
> > 
> > Windows is highly insecure...


> Windows used to be quite bad, granted, but MS did finally wake 
> up and started to fix things in Vista.  By the time that MS got
> to Win8, attacks had transitioned from OS vulnerabilities over
> to social engineering, which is effectively OS agnostic. 




> -hh

Nope. That is not true. You can't run Windows without antivirus...

-- 
Press any key to continue or any other to quit 

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

#487151

On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:38:23 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Mel wrote:
> > > -hh wrote:
> > > > Mel wrote:
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Linux has exploits, but nowhere near Windows. That is 
> > > > > in million cases where Windows desktop is cracked, you 
> > > > > will not find single linux case.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Linux also has users, but nowhere near Windows.  
> > > >
> > > > As such, there's an element of Sutton's law ("Because that's
> > > > where the money is") behind the simple raw number comparisons. 
> > >
> > > 
> > > Windows is highly insecure...
> 
> > Windows used to be quite bad, granted, but MS did finally wake 
> > up and started to fix things in Vista.  By the time that MS got
> > to Win8, attacks had transitioned from OS vulnerabilities over
> > to social engineering, which is effectively OS agnostic. 
> 
> Nope. That is not true. You can't run Windows without antivirus...

Oh, its possible; the question is what level of risk from which 
activities.  If you're not using Windows for email or for online 
browsing, what other threat vectors are there to be concerned about?
Especially if your router has a firewall.


-hh

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

#487180 — *You* can't, I can.

Branimir wrote:
> You can't run Windows without antivirus...

*You* can't, I can.

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

#487121

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 03:44:11 -0800, -hh wrote:

> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 4:24:55 AM UTC-5, Mel wrote:
>> ...
>> 
>> Linux has exploits, but nowhere near Windows. That is in million cases
>> where Windows desktop is cracked, you will not find single linux case.
> 
> 
> Linux also has users, but nowhere near Windows.
> 
> As such, there's an element of Sutton's law ("Because that's where the
> money is")
> behind the simple raw number comparisons.
>  
>  
> -hh

That is correct.





-- 
Ratchet Jaw
The Locked and Loaded Jew

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

#487087

F. Russell wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 15:02:41 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>> Corporations are run by pragmatic people, and 
>> Windows is the only realistic desktop to deploy in a company.

Only in companies that force it to be the only realistic desktop, by
actively locking out other operating systems.

Inertia is basically what it is.

> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  Corporations are run by ignorant idiots
> that have never even HEARD of GNU/Linux.
>
> These profound dummies know only one thing: Microshit Winblows.
> Then they hire a staff of IT idiots who know only one thing:
> Microshit Winblows.
>
> That's how it's been seen the first IBM PCs made their way
> into the first corp offices and that's how it will be far
> into the future.  Microshit is kept alive by brain-dead imbeciles.
>
> Those people are so fucking stupid that the sudden absence of
> the "Start" button, as would be manifest with GNU/Linux, would
> send them all into a paralytic stupor.  All the MBAs and M$ Certs
> would be staring blankly at the screens with mouths agape.
>


-- 
Good day for overcoming obstacles.  Try a steeplechase.

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

#487091

On 2019-02-11, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> F. Russell wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 15:02:41 -0500, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> Corporations are run by pragmatic people, and 
>>> Windows is the only realistic desktop to deploy in a company.
>
> Only in companies that force it to be the only realistic desktop, by
> actively locking out other operating systems.

Why should a corporation have to support multiple desktops?
Do you interact with clients outside your company?
If you do, you full well know that trying to use Linux can have mixed 
results.

> Inertia is basically what it is.

No.
Using the OS that your clients use is what it is.
Object: sell a product, a service, etc.
Solution: Don't aggravate the very people you are trying to sell to.

You sound like a low level cube-farm type person so you won't get this.


-- 
Ratchet Jaw
The Locked and Loaded Jew

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

#488613

Ratchetjaw wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> <chaff snipped>

On the desktop, in corporations, the Cisco/Microsoft duopoly rules.
The reason are partly stupid, partly reasonable.

In the server room, Linux is a common presence, as is Windows.

I think Linux should be more prevalent, but inertia rules.

-- 
Your talents will be recognized and suitably rewarded.

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

#487111

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>If your Corp forces you to use Windows, what choice do you have?
>Find a company that allows you to use Linux?  How do you figure that out
>before you apply?
>
>Windows is basically locked in at most companies.  A sad fact, but true.

The notion that someone who thinks that Linux is better, or that
Micro$oft has engaged in unethical behavior, must limit their job
options to those few where Windows is not used, is ridiculous.  

"You claim that Microsoft has unfairly monopolized, yet you use their
product!"

Sneering assholes.  At least they have each other.

-- 
"So DFS was right about your slimy two faced nature all along. You are
an MS hater and spew nonsense in order to impress your Master Roy."  -
"True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

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

#487128

On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 8:11:30 AM UTC-5, chrisv wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> >If your Corp forces you to use Windows, what choice do you have?
> >Find a company that allows you to use Linux?  How do you figure that out
> >before you apply?
> >
> >Windows is basically locked in at most companies.  A sad fact, but true.
> 
> The notion that someone who thinks that Linux is better, or that
> Micro$oft has engaged in unethical behavior, must limit their job
> options to those few where Windows is not used, is ridiculous.  

Except for how this topic has been hashed over before...

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/0_UtEGothEY/3EciMz6kAwAJ>

If one really does despise MS, then it isn't hard to find a career 
field where one isn't 'forced' to go use Windows.  A few examples
include: general construction, plumbing & electricity trades, car 
wash attendant, blacksmith, bricklayer, janitor, trash collection, 
HVAC installation, snow removal, restaurant staff, Linux server admin, 
as well as lots & lots of other Linux jobs:
 
<https://www.indeed.com/q-Linux-jobs.html>
<https://www.monster.com/jobs/q-linux-jobs.aspx>

Thus, there really is no plausibility in "but, but I use Windows
because my employer FORCES me to only use Windows" because jobs 
aren't slavery.  

So instead of compromising your ethics, use your free will to go 
find another job.  And if you chose a career field that makes 
this too hard for you, then kick yourself for making a bad 
career field choice and go change your career field to one which
doesn't give you this ethical stress on your wellbeing.


-hh

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

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

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

csiph-web