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


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #328501 > unrolled thread

Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago

Started bycc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com>
First post2015-10-26 05:03 -0700
Last post2015-10-27 08:55 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 166 — 19 participants

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


Contents

  Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 05:03 -0700
    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 10:09 -0400
      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:33 -0700
      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 16:49 -0500
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 15:18 -0700
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 19:03 -0400
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 21:27 -0500
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 02:46 +0000
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:57 -0400
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 20:50 -0700
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 07:56 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:49 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:52 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:29 -0500
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:02 +0100
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:44 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:59 +0100
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:11 +0000
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:23 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:15 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-29 19:39 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:37 -0400
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:09 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-28 12:11 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 17:38 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:54 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:05 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 13:09 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 13:30 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 14:22 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 15:48 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Normal Peelman" <norm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 23:49 +0100
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:43 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2015-10-28 03:17 +0100
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 13:15 -0700
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:00 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-27 22:06 +0000
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 04:45 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:07 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:40 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-27 21:24 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:31 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:04 -0500
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:27 -0500
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:13 -0700
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:58 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:32 -0500
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:38 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 17:04 +0100
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:34 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:57 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 13:06 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:18 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 14:33 -0700
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 23:30 +0100
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 19:01 -0400
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 00:20 +0100
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 16:57 -0700
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 20:06 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 14:03 +0100
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:09 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 14:28 +0100
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 09:36 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:17 -0500
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:22 -0600
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 10:44 -0400
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:08 -0700
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:15 -0500
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:20 -0600
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 01:45 +0100
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 17:49 -0700
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-27 23:55 +0000
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:34 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-29 19:52 +0000
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:11 -0500
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:49 -0700
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:17 +0000
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 13:43 -0400
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 23:45 -0600
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 08:53 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:20 -0500
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:24 -0600
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 06:53 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:07 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:25 -0600
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 21:24 -0400
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:08 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:21 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 11:32 -0700
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 23:18 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 16:53 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 11:28 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-27 21:22 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 14:21 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:29 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 15:07 -0700
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:03 +0000
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-28 11:26 +0000
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:09 -0700
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:57 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 09:50 -0700
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-27 13:05 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:43 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:30 -0500
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:20 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:45 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 13:43 -0500
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:21 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 14:21 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 15:12 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-27 13:38 -0700
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:33 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:22 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:01 -0500
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 11:39 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 11:45 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 12:48 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 12:12 -0500
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:55 +0000
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 14:22 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 16:57 -0400
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 17:52 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 20:17 -0500
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 10:09 +0100
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:46 +0000
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 14:50 +0100
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 09:54 -0400
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:59 +0000
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 15:21 +0100
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 14:24 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 10:00 -0500
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:05 +0000
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-29 11:27 -0400
                                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:02 -0400
                                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:22 -0500
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:14 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:43 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 12:24 -0400
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 16:32 +0000
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:33 -0400
                                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 13:51 -0500
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-29 10:45 -0700
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:32 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 20:15 -0500
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 08:22 -0400
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:31 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 08:37 -0400
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:40 -0400
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 09:10 -0400
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 09:19 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 10:44 -0400
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-29 08:26 -0700
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 12:26 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 09:57 -0500
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-29 15:48 +0000
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 09:55 -0500
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:00 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:20 -0500
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-29 12:15 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:14 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 12:10 -0500
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:27 -0600
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:37 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 13:59 -0400
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 07:00 -0500
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-27 08:55 -0400

Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9  Next page →


#329183

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-28 11:20 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn31te5.ed1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#329109
On 2015-10-28, Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:45:10 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>
>> On 10/27/15 17:01, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>>> On 2015-10-27 6:30 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:18:57 -0400
>>>> Charmed Tuna<.m@nsn.s>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-10-27 2:06 PM, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> troll wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's only weakness is speed
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not more than Linux.
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> Way to clarify your statement.
>>>
>>>>   While the computers themselves must come from
>>>>> Apple, OS X generally handles any third-party hardware thrown at it
>>>>> without issue.
>>>>
>>>> NVIDIA and Intel only...
>>>
>>> If that's all that Apple sells its machines with, why the Hell would
>>> they bother to support AMD? Besides, AMD has routinely shown itself to
>>> be incompetent at delivering drivers in Linux which gives them every
>>> reason to avoid the manufacturer.
>>>
>>>>> The same can't be said of Linux.
>>>>
>>>> Linux runs on Macs while OS X does not run on PC...
>>>
>>> Actually, OS X indeed runs on a PC. What prevents it from running on
>>> your typical PC is the fact that OS X is tied to Apple's specific
>>> machines but the hardware is no different in most cases.
>> 
>> OS X can be installed on a PC.  There are a few YouTube videos that 
>> shows how to do it.
>
> http://www.tonymacx86.com
>

   Unlike our troll friends, some of us have actually tried this stuff
and investigated the situation beyond just citing an URL.

   This stuff comes with caveats... lots of caveats.

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


#329321

FromGreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>
Date2015-10-28 18:24 -0600
Message-ID<zaCdnSaxhKyt-qzLnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@bresnan.com>
In reply to#329183
On 10/28/15 10:20, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2015-10-28, Big Fish in a Small Crotch<bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com>  wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:45:10 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/27/15 17:01, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>>>> On 2015-10-27 6:30 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:18:57 -0400
>>>>> Charmed Tuna<.m@nsn.s>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-10-27 2:06 PM, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> troll wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's only weakness is speed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not more than Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>> Way to clarify your statement.
>>>>
>>>>>    While the computers themselves must come from
>>>>>> Apple, OS X generally handles any third-party hardware thrown at it
>>>>>> without issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> NVIDIA and Intel only...
>>>>
>>>> If that's all that Apple sells its machines with, why the Hell would
>>>> they bother to support AMD? Besides, AMD has routinely shown itself to
>>>> be incompetent at delivering drivers in Linux which gives them every
>>>> reason to avoid the manufacturer.
>>>>
>>>>>> The same can't be said of Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux runs on Macs while OS X does not run on PC...
>>>>
>>>> Actually, OS X indeed runs on a PC. What prevents it from running on
>>>> your typical PC is the fact that OS X is tied to Apple's specific
>>>> machines but the hardware is no different in most cases.
>>>
>>> OS X can be installed on a PC.  There are a few YouTube videos that
>>> shows how to do it.
>>
>> http://www.tonymacx86.com
>>
>
>     Unlike our troll friends, some of us have actually tried this stuff
> and investigated the situation beyond just citing an URL.
>
>     This stuff comes with caveats... lots of caveats.

It works, but don't expect any updates to the os to work.


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

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


#329099

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-28 06:53 -0500
Message-ID<qbd13bh8mmnati35o9ocmseu2l4dpbqs7i@4ax.com>
In reply to#328974
Melzzzzz wrote:

> troll wrote:
>>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.  
>> 
>> Not more than Linux.

Liar.

>Nope.

There are only a half-dozen or so (expensive) machines offered that
OSX will run on.  Linux offers, obviously, *vastly* more choices, in
hardware.  Linux also has far more choice in user interfaces and
operations.

Windows offers vastly more than OSX in both hardware and software, and
is also less "rigid" than OSX.

The Mac has these drawbacks.  Period.

-- 
'Some of the "advocates" are about the same age or even older than
Gates. So why didn't they take the ball and run with it? Why didn't
they even bother trying?'  -  trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"

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


#329115

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-28 09:07 -0400
Message-ID<n0qh6f$j6r$8@dont-email.me>
In reply to#329099
On 2015-10-28 7:53 AM, chrisv wrote:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> troll wrote:
>>>
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.  
>>>
>>> Not more than Linux.
> 
> Liar.

Actually, it's accurate. _You_ are lying by claiming that it's a lie.

>> Nope.
> 
> There are only a half-dozen or so (expensive) machines offered that
> OSX will run on.  Linux offers, obviously, *vastly* more choices, in
> hardware.  Linux also has far more choice in user interfaces and
> operations.

There's a reason Apple only sells a few machines and only in specific
configurations: it allows them to guarantee the customer that everything
will work right, out of the box. It's one of the reasons why System76, a
Linux-based computer manufacturer, does more or less the same thing.

> Windows offers vastly more than OSX in both hardware and software, and
> is also less "rigid" than OSX.
> 
> The Mac has these drawbacks.  Period.

Says you, but your opinion is worthless as you are a liar.

-- 
Charmed Tuna

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


#329322

FromGreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>
Date2015-10-28 18:25 -0600
Message-ID<zaCdnSGxhKz7-qzLnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@bresnan.com>
In reply to#329115
On 10/28/15 07:07, Charmed Tuna wrote:
> On 2015-10-28 7:53 AM, chrisv wrote:
>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>
>>> troll wrote:
>>>>
>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.
>>>>
>>>> Not more than Linux.
>>
>> Liar.
>
> Actually, it's accurate. _You_ are lying by claiming that it's a lie.
>
>>> Nope.
>>
>> There are only a half-dozen or so (expensive) machines offered that
>> OSX will run on.  Linux offers, obviously, *vastly* more choices, in
>> hardware.  Linux also has far more choice in user interfaces and
>> operations.
>
> There's a reason Apple only sells a few machines and only in specific
> configurations: it allows them to guarantee the customer that everything
> will work right, out of the box. It's one of the reasons why System76, a
> Linux-based computer manufacturer, does more or less the same thing.
>
>> Windows offers vastly more than OSX in both hardware and software, and
>> is also less "rigid" than OSX.
>>
>> The Mac has these drawbacks.  Period.
>
> Says you, but your opinion is worthless as you are a liar.
>
Maybe everyone should just not respond to that POS.
Let the herd members hump his leg for a while.


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

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


#329340

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-28 21:24 -0400
Message-ID<n0rsd5$2tr$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#329322
On 2015-10-28 8:25 PM, GreyCloud wrote:
> On 10/28/15 07:07, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>> On 2015-10-28 7:53 AM, chrisv wrote:
>>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>
>>>> troll wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not more than Linux.
>>>
>>> Liar.
>>
>> Actually, it's accurate. _You_ are lying by claiming that it's a lie.
>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> There are only a half-dozen or so (expensive) machines offered that
>>> OSX will run on.  Linux offers, obviously, *vastly* more choices, in
>>> hardware.  Linux also has far more choice in user interfaces and
>>> operations.
>>
>> There's a reason Apple only sells a few machines and only in specific
>> configurations: it allows them to guarantee the customer that everything
>> will work right, out of the box. It's one of the reasons why System76, a
>> Linux-based computer manufacturer, does more or less the same thing.
>>
>>> Windows offers vastly more than OSX in both hardware and software, and
>>> is also less "rigid" than OSX.
>>>
>>> The Mac has these drawbacks.  Period.
>>
>> Says you, but your opinion is worthless as you are a liar.
>>
> Maybe everyone should just not respond to that POS.
> Let the herd members hump his leg for a while.

It's not a bad idea but I doubt that the other "wintrolls" will ignore him.


-- 
Charmed Tuna

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


#329178

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-28 11:08 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn31so8.ed1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#328974
On 2015-10-27, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:18:57 -0400
> Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-10-27 2:06 PM, chrisv wrote:
>> > Melzzzzz wrote:
>> >   
>> >> troll wrote:  
>> >>>  
>> >> It's only weakness is speed   
>> > 
>> > Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.  
>> 
>> Not more than Linux.
>
> Nope.
>
>  While the computers themselves must come from
>> Apple, OS X generally handles any third-party hardware thrown at it
>> without issue.

    That would be why there are multiple 3rd party vendors for scanner drivers?

    I found this out trying to get a Dell AIO working with one of my Macs.

>
> NVIDIA and Intel only...
>
>> The same can't be said of Linux. 
>
> Linux runs on Macs while OS X does not run on PC...

    I have not worried about Linux compatibility of devices for a long time.
For the pedestrian stuff it seems to not be a problem. The USB generic device
types cover a lot of ground. For stuff that's more obscure, I would not blindly
trust a Mac to handle it.

    ...of course anything that comes as an internal card is off the table anyways.

    Those are excluded by design.

    Just try building a Hackintosh for yourself and see how hard it is and how
precise you have to be with the specs.

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


#329211

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-28 17:21 +0000
Message-ID<d9cehbFpcgnU4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#329178
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:08:40 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2015-10-27, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:18:57 -0400 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-10-27 2:06 PM, chrisv wrote:
>>> > Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> >   
>>> >> troll wrote:
>>> >>>  
>>> >> It's only weakness is speed
>>> > 
>>> > Liar.  It is very restricting in hardware and software choices.
>>> 
>>> Not more than Linux.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>  While the computers themselves must come from
>>> Apple, OS X generally handles any third-party hardware thrown at it
>>> without issue.
> 
>     That would be why there are multiple 3rd party vendors for scanner
>     drivers?
>
Mostly for older scanners these days.
 
>     I found this out trying to get a Dell AIO working with one of my
>     Macs.
>
You bought a POS Dell AIO and expected something else?
 
> 
>> NVIDIA and Intel only...
>>
>>> The same can't be said of Linux.
>>
>> Linux runs on Macs while OS X does not run on PC...
> 
>     I have not worried about Linux compatibility of devices for a long
>     time.

I haven't either, and that's because I found the workaround that makes it 
not really an issue.

> For the pedestrian stuff it seems to not be a problem. The USB generic
> device types cover a lot of ground. For stuff that's more obscure, I
> would not blindly trust a Mac to handle it.
> 
For stuff that is more obscure I wouldn't trust Linux to work with it 
either.  That's why smart people research when they are stepping out of 
the mainstream for stuff.

>     ...of course anything that comes as an internal card is off the
>     table anyways.
> 
>     Those are excluded by design.
> 
yep, one of Apple's best decisions.

>     Just try building a Hackintosh for yourself and see how hard it is
>     and how
> precise you have to be with the specs.

Not all that hard, but the results are much less than overwhelming, and 
the next update/upgrade can make things puke.  IOW, a total waste of time 
except for avowed geeks with lots of time on their hands and no real 
needs.




-- 
Lloyd

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


#328892

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-27 11:32 -0700
Message-ID<D255115D.61AB8%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328880
On 10/27/15, 10:57 AM, in article 20151027185759.15db3dc9@maxa-pc,
"Melzzzzz" <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 13:34:36 -0400
> Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> 
>>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>>> 
>>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it....
>>> ')  
>> 
>> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
>> not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system is clearly very
>> intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would expect such
>> technology would.
> 
> Don't think so...

What you think is not as important as what you can show. Maybe you can take
on some of the tasks I *show* and show them on Linux:

* From a single online recipe (or art project, lesson plan, whatever) save
it and email a PDF version where you add notes to it. Now I know this can be
done on Linux; save, open, edit, email. Just curious to see how you people
would generally do it and how streamlined the workflow would be. A couple
ways I might: <https://youtu.be/NPM_WldEBs0>.

* Make a video, as Owl and I have been, but with cursor replacement /
resizing (post production), window highlighting, zooming, arbitrary area
highlighting. For me these were done just to show something else:
<https://youtu.be/aSNpnYpmKag>. I have many other options but picked these
because they fit the real-world example I did shortly before coming up with
the "challenge".

* Getting a WayBackArchive page and getting images of all links, the HTML
validation and CSS validation from W3.org, and a active link to the archive
page, as I did here (does not have to look the exact same, of course):
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/sandman/sandman-archive.pdf>.

>> It's only weakness is speed and it's a matter of time before Apple addresses
>> that. If you don't see how Apple might be better than Linux, you're either
>> blind or lying.
> 
> I use both and prefer Linux. It is far easier to setup build
> environment for open source projects in Linux than in OS X.
> As I am software developer this is my main concern.
> GUI I don't mind much...but prefer Gnome.

On Linux I prefer the GNOME derivative as well. I think KDE is utter
garbage. And if you do most of your work in the CLI then I think Linux is a
great choice for you. Even if I did not, you know my "motto": use what you
like. That is what I advocate.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* 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 KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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


#328968

FromMelzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date2015-10-27 23:18 +0100
Message-ID<20151027231858.7989d28a@maxa-pc>
In reply to#328892
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:32:45 -0700
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 10/27/15, 10:57 AM, in article 20151027185759.15db3dc9@maxa-pc,
> "Melzzzzz" <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 13:34:36 -0400
> > Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:  
> >>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
> >>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>     
> >>>> 
> >>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web
> >>>> development than OS X is and I'll consider it.  
> >>> 
> >>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it....
> >>> ')    
> >> 
> >> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's
> >> superiority not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system
> >> is clearly very intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would
> >> expect such technology would.  
> > 
> > Don't think so...  
> 
> What you think is not as important as what you can show. Maybe you
> can take on some of the tasks I *show* and show them on Linux:

Not.
> 
> >> It's only weakness is speed and it's a matter of time before Apple
> >> addresses that. If you don't see how Apple might be better than
> >> Linux, you're either blind or lying.  
> > 
> > I use both and prefer Linux. It is far easier to setup build
> > environment for open source projects in Linux than in OS X.
> > As I am software developer this is my main concern.
> > GUI I don't mind much...but prefer Gnome.  
> 
> On Linux I prefer the GNOME derivative as well. I think KDE is utter
> garbage.

KDE is not garbage. Only problem is that I use Manjaro and here is KDE
5 which is buggy. Didn't check version 5.4 but 5.3 was fiasco.
KDE 4 is stable as rock now...


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


#328996

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-27 16:53 -0700
Message-ID<D2555C91.61B7A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328968
On 10/27/15, 3:18 PM, in article 20151027231858.7989d28a@maxa-pc, "Melzzzzz"
<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:32:45 -0700
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/27/15, 10:57 AM, in article 20151027185759.15db3dc9@maxa-pc,
>> "Melzzzzz" <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 13:34:36 -0400
>>> Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web
>>>>>> development than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it....
>>>>> ')    
>>>> 
>>>> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's
>>>> superiority not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system
>>>> is clearly very intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would
>>>> expect such technology would.
>>> 
>>> Don't think so...
>> 
>> What you think is not as important as what you can show. Maybe you
>> can take on some of the tasks I *show* and show them on Linux:
> 
> Not.

Thank you for the admission.

>>>> It's only weakness is speed and it's a matter of time before Apple
>>>> addresses that. If you don't see how Apple might be better than
>>>> Linux, you're either blind or lying.
>>> 
>>> I use both and prefer Linux. It is far easier to setup build
>>> environment for open source projects in Linux than in OS X.
>>> As I am software developer this is my main concern.
>>> GUI I don't mind much...but prefer Gnome.
>> 
>> On Linux I prefer the GNOME derivative as well. I think KDE is utter
>> garbage.
> 
> KDE is not garbage. Only problem is that I use Manjaro and here is KDE
> 5 which is buggy. Didn't check version 5.4 but 5.3 was fiasco.
> KDE 4 is stable as rock now...

I have not used it since whatever they had a while back when I made my
videos, below, but I keep hearing how it is *finally* not garbage... and
every time I use it I find it is.

But if you like it, fine. Use what you like.



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* 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 KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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


#328890

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-27 11:28 -0700
Message-ID<D255105F.61AB5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328869
On 10/27/15, 10:34 AM, in article n0ocf8$ger$1@dont-email.me, "Charmed Tuna"
<.m@nsn.s> wrote:

> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>> 
>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
> 
> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
> not only to Linux but to Windows.

And I welcome the herd to show tasks they think Linux will handle well.

> The operating system is clearly very intuitive and behaves the way a human
> brain would expect such technology would. It's only weakness is speed and it's
> a matter of time before Apple addresses that.

Speed - and that seems tied to the stupid 5400 RPM drives Apple uses, as
well as the ecosystem not serving some areas as well as Windows (games,
quilters, a large number of specific business apps, etc.). And Linux better
serves those who have free hardware but no OS license and those who "live"
in the command line.

> If you don't see how Apple might be better than Linux, you're either blind or
> lying.

Given the lack of evidence the herd shows about Linux doing any task well I
think we can say it is just outright lying.



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* 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 KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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


#328930

FromPeter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>
Date2015-10-27 21:22 +0100
Message-ID<n0omag$ok6$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328869
Charmed Tuna wrote:

> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>> 
>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
> 
> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
> not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system is clearly very
> intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would expect such technology
> would. 

You are completely nuts if you beleive any of that balderdash

> It's only weakness is speed 

OSX is slow. And then it is slow. And it is, did I mention it, slow. *Very* 
slow, even compared to windows, which itself isn't exactly "fast"

> and it's a matter of time before
> Apple addresses that. 

By what? Their FS HFS is crappy. Their kernel is crappy

> If you don't see how Apple might be better than
> Linux, you're either blind or lying.
> 

Linux is already better than OSX in nearly every aspect. Linux got better. 
OSX got worse. 

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


#328940

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-27 14:21 -0700
Message-ID<D25538CF.61B16%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328930
On 10/27/15, 1:22 PM, in article n0omag$ok6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Charmed Tuna wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>>> 
>>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
>> 
>> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
>> not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system is clearly very
>> intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would expect such technology
>> would. 
> 
> You are completely nuts if you beleive any of that balderdash

So show where I am wrong. Oh. You can't. And every time you talk about OS X
you make a complete fool of yourself. Here is one examples:

  Peter Köhlmann <http://goo.gl/600BHt>:
    -----
    Scanning [on OS X] is not supported *at* *all* without jumping
    through several hoops. This includes hunting down 3 different
    software packages (libusb, sane-backend and sane) *and* installing
    them. Out of the box no scanning is supported at all. This is in
    stark contrast to linux where scanning is supported right from the
    start after setting up the printer

    The same is true about *all* OfficeJet Pro printers under OSX.
    -----    

LOL!

>> It's only weakness is speed
> 
> OSX is slow. And then it is slow. And it is, did I mention it, slow. *Very*
> slow, even compared to windows, which itself isn't exactly "fast"

So show it. Would love to see your video where you back this!

>> and it's a matter of time before
>> Apple addresses that.
> 
> By what? Their FS HFS is crappy. Their kernel is crappy

So show how this effects usability. Would love to see it. And off Peter
runs... leaving a wake of insults behind. 100% predictable.
 
>> If you don't see how Apple might be better than
>> Linux, you're either blind or lying.
>> 
> 
> Linux is already better than OSX in nearly every aspect. Linux got better.
> OSX got worse. 
> 
But you are not able to show it at all. LOL!

Yes, Peter, you are oh-so-very convincing!


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* 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 KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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


#328944

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-27 17:29 -0400
Message-ID<n0oq88$6k7$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328930
On 2015-10-27 4:22 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> Charmed Tuna wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>>>
>>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
>>
>> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
>> not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system is clearly very
>> intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would expect such technology
>> would. 
> 
> You are completely nuts if you beleive any of that balderdash

I do. You're free to believe that I'm nuts.

>> It's only weakness is speed 
> 
> OSX is slow. And then it is slow. And it is, did I mention it, slow. *Very* 
> slow, even compared to windows, which itself isn't exactly "fast"

Windows is actually very fast on all of the hardware I've used with it.
Even the tablet I have, whose processor is fairly pathetic, runs the
operating system very well. I have no idea how you would consider it slow.

>> and it's a matter of time before
>> Apple addresses that. 
> 
> By what? Their FS HFS is crappy. Their kernel is crappy

I don't like it either, but it's our opinion.

>> If you don't see how Apple might be better than
>> Linux, you're either blind or lying.
>>
> 
> Linux is already better than OSX in nearly every aspect. Linux got better. 
> OSX got worse. 

I don't disagree that Linux got better, but OS X itself got a lot better
as well. The kernel got worse as can be seen from the fact that the
overall operating system now requires a ridiculous amount of memory to
provide a decent experience.

-- 
Charmed Tuna

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


#328956

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-27 15:07 -0700
Message-ID<D25543C7.61B33%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328944
On 10/27/15, 2:29 PM, in article n0oq88$6k7$6@dont-email.me, "Charmed Tuna"
<.m@nsn.s> wrote:

> On 2015-10-27 4:22 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> Charmed Tuna wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2015-10-27 12:04 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development
>>>>> than OS X is and I'll consider it.
>>>> 
>>>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
>>> 
>>> Snit already does a very good job of demonstrating OS X's superiority
>>> not only to Linux but to Windows. The operating system is clearly very
>>> intuitive and behaves the way a human brain would expect such technology
>>> would. 
>> 
>> You are completely nuts if you beleive any of that balderdash
> 
> I do. You're free to believe that I'm nuts.

I believe the evidence. Peter shows *none* even with me pretty much begging
him to.

>>> It's only weakness is speed
>> 
>> OSX is slow. And then it is slow. And it is, did I mention it, slow. *Very*
>> slow, even compared to windows, which itself isn't exactly "fast"
> 
> Windows is actually very fast on all of the hardware I've used with it.
> Even the tablet I have, whose processor is fairly pathetic, runs the
> operating system very well. I have no idea how you would consider it slow.

My Mac is fine - though booting is slower than I would like and disk
intensive tasks can also be slow.

>>> and it's a matter of time before
>>> Apple addresses that.
>> 
>> By what? Their FS HFS is crappy. Their kernel is crappy
> 
> I don't like it either, but it's our opinion.
> 
>>> If you don't see how Apple might be better than
>>> Linux, you're either blind or lying.
>>> 
>> 
>> Linux is already better than OSX in nearly every aspect. Linux got better.
>> OSX got worse. 
> 
> I don't disagree that Linux got better, but OS X itself got a lot better
> as well. The kernel got worse as can be seen from the fact that the
> overall operating system now requires a ridiculous amount of memory to
> provide a decent experience.

My wife has 4GB and it works fine, esp. for a 2007 computer.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* 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 KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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


#329074

Fromronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-28 05:03 +0000
Message-ID<n0pkvc$ncq$7@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328848
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:04:34 +0100, Melzzzzz wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development than
>> OS X is and I'll consider it.
> 
> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')

It's got a rotten, half-eaten apple logo. How could you NOT take it 
seriously?

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

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


#329097

FromWilliam Poaster <wp@dev.null>
Date2015-10-28 11:26 +0000
Message-ID<cvn6gc-66b.ln1@user-1842.linux.individual.net>
In reply to#329074
It was reported that ronb posted:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:04:34 +0100, Melzzzzz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Show me why Linux is better for audio recording or web development than
>>> OS X is and I'll consider it.
>> 
>> Show me where OS X is better than Linux and I'll consider it.... ')
>
> It's got a rotten, half-eaten apple logo. How could you NOT take it 
> seriously?

They even pinched that from the Beatles, & took a chunk out of it.

-- 
openSUSE 13.2 64-bit
KDE 4.14.9
Kernel: 4.2.2-1.gb3ecf72-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT 
Tue Sep 29 18:51:15 UTC 2015 (b3ecf72) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

This message is virus free, as absolutely 
NO Micro$oft products were used in its preparation. 

"If you do want to clean your computer of malware, the first software to
delete is Windows."
http://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html

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


#328837

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-27 08:09 -0700
Message-ID<e08001b1-0da3-42a3-aa81-66e6bf401f57@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328660
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> > On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> >> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
> >>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
> >>>
> >>> "I have no use for an Mp3 player.
> >>>
> >>> My house has a CD player.
> >>> My car has a CD player.
> >>> My Mac has a CD player"
> >>>
> >>> "All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? 
> >>> The Reality Distiortion Field  is starting to warp Steve's mind 
> >>> if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
> >>>
> >>> "This iPod is for spoil rich kids with insane parents or an Apple fan 
> >>> as fannatic as a Taliban. It has good features but forget about getting 
> >>> it for $399!!!! Never, who gets that thing is a very stupid person."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sounds like cola advocates.
> > 
> >    Repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true.
> 
> And yet to continue your constant WinDOS lies.
> 
> >> Agreed. At the time, I also thought that there were better alternatives
> > 
> >    You're both morons.
> 
> Coming from you, that's triply insulting.
> 
> >    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
> > available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
> > would have at least held my entire collection.
> > 
> >    It ran Linux.
> > 
> >    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
> > the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
> 
> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 

Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.

> It's
> nice that you didn't like it, but nobody cared what you thought back
> then and nobody cares what you think now. Apple made a fortune selling
> iPods because they _were_ better than the alternatives.

Apple may have had better software but, sound-wise, all of the early units I ever listened to (from anyone) were crap. When you spend time and money to get music sounding a certain way,  to then have the living snot compressed out of it so that tons of sh*tty sounding files can 'fit in your pocket', only to hear how 'good' it sounds from clueless people (most people),  that's pretty disheartening.

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


#328845

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-27 11:57 -0400
Message-ID<n0o6op$os4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328837
On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
>>>>>
>>>>> "I have no use for an Mp3 player.
>>>>>
>>>>> My house has a CD player.
>>>>> My car has a CD player.
>>>>> My Mac has a CD player"
>>>>>
>>>>> "All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? 
>>>>> The Reality Distiortion Field  is starting to warp Steve's mind 
>>>>> if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off."
>>>>>
>>>>> "This iPod is for spoil rich kids with insane parents or an Apple fan 
>>>>> as fannatic as a Taliban. It has good features but forget about getting 
>>>>> it for $399!!!! Never, who gets that thing is a very stupid person."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like cola advocates.
>>>
>>>    Repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true.
>>
>> And yet to continue your constant WinDOS lies.
>>
>>>> Agreed. At the time, I also thought that there were better alternatives
>>>
>>>    You're both morons.
>>
>> Coming from you, that's triply insulting.
>>
>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
>>>
>>>    It ran Linux.
>>>
>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
>>
>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
> 
> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.

No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people
prefer to play their songs through Bluetooth rather than use the Aux
connector in their card. Bluetooth will ensure perfect playback of the
digital file whereas the Aux connection will only play the music as well
as the unit itself is capable. Sony has since developed (and released?)
a portable player for high quality sound which has enough storage for
people to put FLACs on it.
<http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/5/7493145/new-sony-walkman-zx2-ces-2015>

>> It's
>> nice that you didn't like it, but nobody cared what you thought back
>> then and nobody cares what you think now. Apple made a fortune selling
>> iPods because they _were_ better than the alternatives.
> 
> Apple may have had better software but, sound-wise, all of the early units I ever listened to (from anyone) were crap. When you spend time and money to get music sounding a certain way,  to then have the living snot compressed out of it so that tons of sh*tty sounding files can 'fit in your pocket', only to hear how 'good' it sounds from clueless people (most people),  that's pretty disheartening.

I'm one of the few people who can hear the difference between a file
compressed at 192kbps and one compressed at 320kbps. As a result, it's
very important for me to use the best codec if I am compressing. Right
now, it seems to be WMA Pro at 320kbps in VBR. Of course, I much prefer
the sound of a FLAC file but the storage required for that is insane.


-- 
Charmed Tuna

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


Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9  Next page →

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


csiph-web