Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #355182 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-13 22:37 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-05-14 06:52 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 215 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-13 22:37 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-13 18:44 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-13 20:55 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior CrimsonIdol <CrimsonIdol@invalid.com> - 2016-05-14 09:19 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:05 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-13 16:27 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 01:52 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 17:29 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:09 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 03:13 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:25 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:36 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-14 13:55 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 16:02 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:19 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:30 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:55 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 19:18 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 21:28 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 23:53 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 06:41 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:34 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior sbd <sbd.pambu@safe-mail.net> - 2016-05-15 08:33 -0300
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 08:01 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 13:45 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 09:39 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 10:42 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:02 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 05:07 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 23:53 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 13:18 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:43 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-14 22:44 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 22:25 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 00:57 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 18:08 -0700
Ronb needs to get what is left of his mind out of the gutter. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 18:55 -0700
Another inebriated evening in Richmond Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-05-14 22:06 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 04:25 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 05:01 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 13:20 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 06:44 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 15:10 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 07:26 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:12 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:34 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:43 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:50 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 10:31 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 12:05 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:42 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 12:34 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 12:02 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 13:08 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 21:35 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 18:48 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 18:55 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 02:03 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 19:17 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:05 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:06 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:05 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-15 22:32 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-18 09:14 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-18 16:49 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-18 16:59 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-18 23:23 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-18 14:49 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-18 22:52 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-18 16:27 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-06-07 13:43 -0500
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-18 23:08 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 22:39 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 20:17 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 21:08 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:27 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:32 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:37 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:40 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:42 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-15 22:32 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-16 07:14 -0500
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-25 17:23 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-25 23:36 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-25 17:49 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 00:00 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-26 19:26 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 18:33 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 16:49 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:19 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-25 21:21 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:23 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 08:24 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:22 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 10:17 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 09:54 -0700
Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 19:37 +0200
Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Jack Sperm Whale Whalen <jackspermwhalepacific@noemail9.org> - 2016-05-26 17:38 +0000
Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 10:43 -0700
Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 10:42 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Jack Sperm Whale Whalen <jackspermwhalepacific@noemail9.org> - 2016-05-26 17:41 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:37 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Meat Puppet <up@yourfat.ass> - 2016-05-14 17:20 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 14:32 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 16:36 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 15:17 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 14:44 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 07:57 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 15:36 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-14 15:52 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:07 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 17:05 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 10:09 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 08:20 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:26 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 13:32 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:24 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 15:14 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:24 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 16:26 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:23 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 05:28 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 12:00 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 21:20 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 14:21 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 05:31 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 09:51 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-16 19:49 -0600
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:30 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-16 19:45 -0600
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-17 05:52 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-17 19:26 -0600
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:28 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 12:41 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 08:18 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:23 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 06:23 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 06:52 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 07:24 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:30 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 06:58 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:33 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 07:59 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:06 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:12 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 08:44 -0700
Re: I paid $293 for my TeraByte SSD, a Samsung 850 EVO. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 20:04 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 09:27 -0700
Re: If you know nothing about computers, or you're really poor... benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-05-16 00:33 -0400
Re: If you know nothing about computers, or you're really poor... "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-15 22:49 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 13:23 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:21 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 16:07 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:22 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 16:48 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:03 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:47 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:55 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:15 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:19 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:22 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:24 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-15 18:08 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:10 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 16:24 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 09:36 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:16 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 21:20 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:28 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:33 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 15:12 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 16:27 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 23:00 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 22:56 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:09 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 20:20 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 21:16 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 09:49 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:29 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 12:07 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:04 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:28 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:55 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:15 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:40 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:43 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:44 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:47 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 22:59 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 12:44 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-05-16 11:27 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-16 13:27 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-16 12:46 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-05-16 13:07 +0100
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:03 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-16 19:12 +0200
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-16 12:29 -0500
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-16 15:19 -0400
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:32 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 10:51 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:02 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:23 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 12:17 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:04 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-14 13:58 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:35 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-14 21:16 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 14:51 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 00:59 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-15 00:27 +0000
GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-13 17:59 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Mick Maelstrom <mickmael@tehsaurus.invalid> - 2016-05-14 01:26 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 12:31 +0000
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:35 -0700
Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY [sic] Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 06:52 -0700
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 11:22 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior |
| Message-ID | <ybydnRe3UY_PI6XKnZ2dnUU7-UudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #355530 |
On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 5/15/2016 1:55 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>> It's a money loser other than servers, which is why they only offer one >>> Linux desktop system, the "XPS 13 Developer Edition". >> >> Wrong about that. Why not go back to the Dell site and customize >> yourself a Precision Tower or Laptop. And you'll find Linux is an option >> in the OS for each of those. And you'll find you can buy a Dell >> Latitude laptop with Linux as well. I have all of these, with Linux, >> direct from Dell. And as you noted, their servers offer Linux as well. >> >> So DFS, are you just stupid or a liar? > > Idiot. So you're just stupid... I thought so.. Like fishing in a bucket. You're too easy to blow of the water. Trying thinking first, it will help you. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 14:24 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior |
| Message-ID | <nhaeme$khc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #355531 |
On 5/15/2016 2:22 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> On 5/15/2016 1:55 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>> It's a money loser other than servers, which is why they only offer one >>>> Linux desktop system, the "XPS 13 Developer Edition". >>> >>> Wrong about that. Why not go back to the Dell site and customize >>> yourself a Precision Tower or Laptop. And you'll find Linux is an option >>> in the OS for each of those. And you'll find you can buy a Dell >>> Latitude laptop with Linux as well. I have all of these, with Linux, >>> direct from Dell. And as you noted, their servers offer Linux as well. >>> >>> So DFS, are you just stupid or a liar? >> >> Idiot. > > So you're just stupid... I thought so.. Like fishing in a bucket. You're > too easy to blow of the water. > Trying thinking first, it will help you. heh! Good self-nuke, idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 18:08 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior |
| Message-ID | <fhjdo2qr3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #355519 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 5/15/2016 1:03 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-05-15, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote: >> >> // snip >> >>> Interesting thoughts. >>> And sort of following on from that, how many people are downloading & >>> installing GNU/Linux distros onto those machines that they've built. >>> These "self-build" machines are not being counted in the "market sales" >>> figures. & (unlike M$ Windows) because Linux is free, there is no known >>> accurate way of knowing just how many Linux PCs there are out there. > > > You're a fucking idiot, Dumb Willie. Why don't you keep your piehole shut? > > > > >>> BTW, when I said I have "three towers" I should have added that's only >>> in *this* house. I have more in another house. I've been building my own >>> machines for about 16 years. >>> My wife has also built all her own machines, & has done so for about 20 >>> years. >> >> I too have been building them for years and years. More then two decades >> easily. >> >> I also agree with Linux. You cannot count it. The Document Foundation >> has no idea how many users they have. > > > Easy: > > > A. Internet users = 3,366,261,156 > Nov 2015 > http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm > > > B. desktop Linux % of wikimedia page requests = 1.35% > Jun 2015 (all Linux minus Android) > https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm > > C. naive # of Linux users: A * B = 45,444,526 > > D. now divide by the avg number of systems per Linux user: 4.894 > https://web.archive.org/web/20131030134137/http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net/ > > 45,444,526 / 4.894 = 9,285,763 > > > There you go: approx 9.3 million Linux desktop users in the world. > Why are you dividing by number of systems? The 4.894 machines would probably share the router's IP address and would have been counted as only one user.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 14:10 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior |
| Message-ID | <nhadss$avp$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #355524 |
On 5/15/2016 2:08 PM, owl wrote: > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> On 5/15/2016 1:03 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-05-15, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote: >>> >>> // snip >>> >>>> Interesting thoughts. >>>> And sort of following on from that, how many people are downloading & >>>> installing GNU/Linux distros onto those machines that they've built. >>>> These "self-build" machines are not being counted in the "market sales" >>>> figures. & (unlike M$ Windows) because Linux is free, there is no known >>>> accurate way of knowing just how many Linux PCs there are out there. >> >> >> You're a fucking idiot, Dumb Willie. Why don't you keep your piehole shut? >> >> >> >> >>>> BTW, when I said I have "three towers" I should have added that's only >>>> in *this* house. I have more in another house. I've been building my own >>>> machines for about 16 years. >>>> My wife has also built all her own machines, & has done so for about 20 >>>> years. >>> >>> I too have been building them for years and years. More then two decades >>> easily. >>> >>> I also agree with Linux. You cannot count it. The Document Foundation >>> has no idea how many users they have. >> >> >> Easy: >> >> >> A. Internet users = 3,366,261,156 >> Nov 2015 >> http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm >> >> >> B. desktop Linux % of wikimedia page requests = 1.35% >> Jun 2015 (all Linux minus Android) >> https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm >> >> C. naive # of Linux users: A * B = 45,444,526 >> >> D. now divide by the avg number of systems per Linux user: 4.894 >> https://web.archive.org/web/20131030134137/http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net/ >> >> 45,444,526 / 4.894 = 9,285,763 >> >> >> There you go: approx 9.3 million Linux desktop users in the world. >> > > Why are you dividing by number of systems? The 4.894 machines would > probably share the router's IP address and would have been counted > as only one user. Maybe. Maybe not. I erred on the side of caution.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 16:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sandman-108d12bdec54585226133dd59a643778@individual.net> |
| In reply to | #355469 |
In article <PK-dnaz9ucRxGKXKnZ2dnUU7-KfNnZ2d@giganews.com>, Marek Novotny wrote: > > > Marek Novotny: > > > Yes I understand your claim. I'm simply stating that ignoring > > > the professional and the enterprise to solely focus on the > > > consumer market is not the best strategy. Again, all they are > > > selling are chocolate donuts. > > > > Sandman: > > The revenue streams Apple is enjoying today compared to when they > > launched the Xserve and FCP was the hot cakes says otherwise. > > The revenue they enjoy today is 90% due to the iOS arena, not > MacBooks or iMacs. I.e. the consumer space. > > Sandman: > > If you noticed that you can sell 100 times as many chocolate > > donuts than niche cranberry donuts, you'd soon stop making those > > cranberry donuts since the thousands of customers that come to > > your store to buy your chocolate donuts far outnumber the one guy > > that comes in once a week to get one cranberry donut. It's just > > business. > > If you mean since 10% of their business is computers they could just > axe the Mac, they could do that. Sure, but as of now it's not very likely. I'm sure that will happen some day, when "computing" is done more and more on mobile devices. Were moving closer each day. Anyway, if Macs are 10% of their business, consider then that professional users are some 0.01% of their business. And server users even fewer. > Again, I don't think that would be > wise. You need to understand the history of consumer electronics. > Sony thought the WalkMan would never die. It died. Palm owned the > market for a long time. Sony, HandSring and others also made Palm > devices. And they are all dead now. Blackberry was king of the hill > for a nice long time. Also pretty much on life support and about to > die. You seem to think this iPhone model will last forever. I never said any such thing. Maybe in ten years we'll do all our computing on voice controlled chips surgically inserted into our body, who knows? For the time being Apple is offering a range of products that appeal to enough users for them to be profitable. If that trend changes or dies, then Apple has to change if they still want to sell devices. Blackberry and Windows Phone died *because* they couldn't change with the trend. Maybe that will happen to Apple some day as well, it's not impossible. But hey, these things happen and companies are too slow to listen to the trend and they die because a new player comes in and swoops up the market. > It won't. Consumers have the attention span of a fly. They move on. > Remember MySpace? Remember AOL? All kings in their respective > categories only to be completely out of the game now. Indeed. The iPhone is the Facebook to RIM's MySpace. And just like Facebook may one day be dethroned so could Apple. > Consumer interest isn't lasting. The enterprise is a nice steady > stream of cash. You'll see for yourself. I said the same thing in a > Blackberry forum and was booted out. Who's laughing now? Not them. The Enterprise is slower, yes, but with far less money. By stagnating and selling licenses to the enterprise you will become Microsoft. Entrenched but not really liked. By being more alert to what the consumer need or want, you can be really successful. But nothing lasts, like always :) > > Sandman: > > That's in 2002. Then cloud companies came and grabbed that away, > > where companies realized that it was cheaper to rent a server in a > > rack than have IT staff handle an in-house server. Also, youtube > > came along and obliterated the need for the quicktime streaming > > server. > > > Now you go to a cloud host, tell them exactly what you need and > > they give you a monthly quote for the hardware, maintenance and > > bandwidth for that service. Contrasted to the hardware cost and > > then employment and/or training of IT staff in-house. > > > I know this since I was in this very situation. I was managing the > > web pages of one of Sweden's largest publishing houses back in > > 2000, and my department shrunk from 9 people down to just me and > > finally I was let go in 2003 and they ran all their servers > > externally. Luckily, I started a cloud service of my own :) > > Not luck. You saw the writing on the wall and correctly responded to > the changes you saw in the market. If only Apple did that... They did exactly that. Since they had no market in cloud hosting (i.e. the companies that provided cloud hosting valued price over ease of use; enter Linux) their server business died when their customers died out. > > Sandman: > > They didn't do it because they didn't want to do it. Apple has > > *never* been a enterprise supplier. There's a big difference > > between what you would have wanted them to do and what made > > business sense for them to do. > > Disagree. If they didn't want this they would not have started the > XServe and the XRAID in the first place. Maybe there's a difference in what we call "the enterprise" then. To me, Enterprise business is what MS does best - they get site licenses for 500, 1,000, 10,000 users in an enterprise and provide support for those. It's a lot of money but there's few companies of that size so it's a lot of management (from MS) to trickle down to medium or small companies and you earn money on volume, not margins. Apple's non-consumer products have been directed towards professionals. I.e. the PowerMac was sold to graphic artists, art directors, magazine editor, musicians etc etc. While they may be one of those 10,000 employees, Apple didn't make money buy selling bulk installations of Macs to the enterprise. They did (and do) sell bulk to education, however. The Xserve was a server to support those professionals, and to give an easy to use, power efficient and fully redundant server solution to *small* and *medium sized* companies. Not to huge corporations, not enterprise-scope licenses. So if you were a small Advertising company with 20 employees, you could get an Xserve and handle all file sharing, mail, even your small web site on it. It was a neat all-in-one solution for smaller outfits. And it worked well! Well, until the market changed and those small outfits could get a better deal from a cloud hosting company (which for obvious reasons didn't use Xserves) and they didn't need to maintain the hardware themselves. > They did want this at one point. They are simply clueless idiots > when it comes to the enterprise and they know this so with their > tail between their legs they ran away from it. As I said, they have never gone after the enterprise. > > Sandman: > > Not to home users, they don't. When was the last time you even > > *saw* a tower computer in someone's home if that person wasn't an > > avid gamer? > > I'm not a gamer and I have three towers. You're obviously special in your own way - but the question was about the generic user, not you or I. So - how many tower PCs do you see in the homes of people > And since when was this only about consumers? You said "nobody's > buying towers". Actually, what I said was: "The only ones that are still buying towers at home are gamers" So I made it clear that the scope was home users. > I guess all those motherboards being bought and sold on NewEgg or > being plugged into laptops? Nope, gaming towers mostly, I.d say. > The market, and this discussion, isn't just about consumers. I'm > talking the whole market. You guys love to focus in on these narrow > little markets and ignore everything else. Well, then. When was the last time you saw a tower workstation in an enterprise that was bought in the last three or four years? Professionals, those that edit video, music, model in 3D, they're the ones that buy towers. Home users don't and I bet the spread of workstation towers in the enterprise is shrinking rapidly as well. And I am talking about "consumers" only because I've been trying to explain why Apple isn't selling to the gaming- or enterprise market; because the money is where the consumers are. > > Sandman: > > No, but that's what *people* is buying. You're mixing up things > > that enterprise (not Apples market) or servers use with what > > Generic Joe gets when he wants a computer. People use laptops at > > home these days. And in business, small clients are used by desk > > workers but more and more are moving to laptops, especially for > > people that attend meetings a lot. And as you probably know, > > smartphones and iPads are taking their role more and more as well. > > I'm not mixing up anything. *people* work in businesses. *people* > use desktops. If a business buys a desktop it somehow doesn't count > according to you. That's insane logic. If no one bought them no one > would be selling them. Obviously they are being sold. And obviously, > they are being bought. I'm only talking about the consumers because we're talking about Apple's current product lineup. While I disagree with your claim that the enterprise is buying workstations in any significant capacity, even if they were, they're not Apple's market and thus they have no interest in providing them with a solution. > > Sandman: > > Well, the *reason* is obviously to make the device as thin and > > light as possible. And with the first model you were stuck with > > 2GB of RAM and now it's 4GB or 8GB, which is plenty for most > > people. Again, people aren't buying Macbook Air's to edit home > > movies or do heavy CPU lifting. It's a thin and light laptop that > > is perfect for email, web and your common word > > processing/spreadsheet/whatever. If you want upgradeability, get > > another Macbook. > > Nor should you have to decide your use-case at the time of the > purchase. The computer should be able to grow with your needs to > some extent. Like adding memory, storage, better graphics and faster > networking. But... we're still talking about laptops here, or did you change to towers again? Like I said, few people to know how to, know it has been possible, or even consider upgrading the internal. Their computer is just a black box of which innards they know nothing about. > Again, it's not supposed to be a BIC lighter. It's a major purchase > for a lot of people, but in the eyes of Apple, hey just buy a new > one... Sorry dude, I just don't agree with you. You're entitled to > your opinion as am I. Yeah, well - my personal opinion is in line with yours - I wouldn't mind being able to upgrade my Macs as time goes, and I have! I'm just saying that the limitations of Apple's product is a direct result of people not having the need or desire to muck about in the inside of their computers. > > Sandman: > > Or, they have no desire to upgrade the video, an option you never > > even considered to be possible I imagine :) > > You don't know that. You're only speculating. It's an assumption based on the fact that few people actually do open up their computers. I don't know how it is where you are, but those small PC shops where you could take your PC and have a guy with beard muck about inside of it, they're pretty much gone. One of my best friend owned one of those and had to close up shop because people just don't use tower PC's and have them upgraded in the same capacity any longer. They have laptops and smart phones. He tried to sustain his business for a while by helping people replace batteries and cracks glass on their smart phones, but that wasn't sustainable in the long run for him. This is the real world, where computers have become mere devices, just a tool. People care less about how it works and how they can enhance or change the tool. They just want it to work - and for the most part, most contemporary computers do just that. -- Sandman
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 09:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1fc9cc68-617a-483d-8181-3d089aa62d11@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #355498 |
On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 10:24:11 AM UTC-6, Sandman wrote: > Maybe in ten years we'll do all our computing on voice controlled > chips surgically inserted into our body, who knows? And if security is no better then there's a chance that all of Snit's 'ouput' to the world could be hacked and 'repaired' ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 10:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <CsadnU2g0Yh0M6XKnZ2dnUU7-XOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #355498 |
On 2016-05-15, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: Sandman, I have all your comments. I'm not going to argue with you as I don't see the value in it. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is fine. Best, -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 21:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sandman-d66304caa807dbedb57198b3cd6025ed@individual.net> |
| In reply to | #355513 |
In article <CsadnU2g0Yh0M6XKnZ2dnUU7-XOdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Marek Novotny wrote: > Sandman, > I have all your comments. I'm not going to argue with you as I don't > see the value in it. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is > fine. Sure, thanks for the talk :) -- Sandman
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D35E0DF0.7306B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #355469 |
On 5/15/16, 7:21 AM, in article PK-dnaz9ucRxGKXKnZ2dnUU7-KfNnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny" <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote: ... >> The revenue streams Apple is enjoying today compared to when they launched >> the Xserve and FCP was the hot cakes says otherwise. > > The revenue they enjoy today is 90% due to the iOS arena, not MacBooks > or iMacs. Which is amazing when you consider that they make more money from their OS X products than any other OEM makes from Windows or Linux products. Or even Windows and Linux combined. >> If you noticed that you can sell 100 times as many chocolate donuts than >> niche cranberry donuts, you'd soon stop making those cranberry donuts since >> the thousands of customers that come to your store to buy your chocolate >> donuts far outnumber the one guy that comes in once a week to get one >> cranberry donut. It's just business. > > If you mean since 10% of their business is computers they could just axe > the Mac, they could do that. Again, I don't think that would be wise. Agreed. The Mac is a great "hub" for their iOS devices *and* offers many benefits the competition does not. It has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any competing product and makes Apple more money than any other competing product. Seems it would be insane of them to drop it. They are rumored to be re-branding it soon. If so this suggests a renewed focus on it... which I would love to see. ... > Consumer interest isn't lasting. People will be buying desktop / laptop computers for some time, even if the demand has waned over the last number of years. ... >> Not to home users, they don't. When was the last time you even *saw* a tower >> computer in someone's home if that person wasn't an avid gamer? > > I'm not a gamer and I have three towers. And since when was this only > about consumers? You said "nobody's buying towers". I guess all those > motherboards being bought and sold on NewEgg or being plugged into > laptops? The market, and this discussion, isn't just about consumers. > I'm talking the whole market. You guys love to focus in on these narrow > little markets and ignore everything else. I doubt NewEgg is that large of a business of selling motherboards compared to the PC industry as a whole... but, sure, I still see a fair number of towers. ... -- * 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]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 11:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D35E0F14.7306E%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #355451 |
On 5/15/16, 5:23 AM, in article a66dne9EsIve96XKnZ2dnUU7-RfNnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny" <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote: ... >> Sure, some years down the line with a few upgrades to OSX/Windows, the laptop >> will start to feel sluggish and they'll ask someone "who knows about >> computers" what they can do about it, and when that person lets them know >> that Apple has soldered the RAM to the mob they may think it's a bummer that >> they can't upgrade it. But with today's hardware, most computers doesn't need >> to be replaced as much as they used to be. Both OS X and Windows has great >> backwards compatibility (often 5-6 years for OS X) and most computers will >> fail for other reasons before that (cracked screen, keys falling of the >> keyboard, etc) > > This is an Apple apologist speaking. There is simply no excuse for > soldering the ram directly on the motherboard. It's cheap-shit > engineering plain and simple. It is designed to cut cost and lowers the > quality of the hardware. You've essentially made a BIC lighter. If there is little demand for post-purchase upgrades and it leads to a lower price and reduced weight and other benefits I can see the argument for doing so on some systems. ... >> Well, I can't upgrade the graphics in my iMac, which is ok, since I don't >> game on it - but I've already upgraded to a SSD and tons of RAM in it so I >> guess that's my answer - I would add it :) > > For a computer that expensive you can't even upgrade the video. The only > people lining up to buy iMacs are iSheep. I do not think it is only "sheep" who want to get the best productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction they can for their money... and for many consumers that is what Apple offers. You can see this in COLA: even the most extreme Linux supporters have a very hard time thinking of and showing tasks where Linux handles them better than the competition. -- * 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]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 15:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dpu6b4F6tu7U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #355437 |
On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:18:09 +0000, Sandman wrote: > Just as a small visual example, not based on actual raw data, but rather > a "hunch" since I am in this business and has been since 1994. Back in > 2002 the server market was probably divided more or less as such: > > [---|------------|--] > | | | > | | `- Cloud-based hosting | ` Large businesses with > in-house hosting > `- Small business with in-house hosting > > And when 2009 came around, the landscape was probably more like this: > > [-|--|--------------] > | | | > | | `- Cloud-based hosting | ` Large businesses with in-house hosting > `- Small business with in-house hosting > > And, since the middle segment are the ones that pour the most money into > servers, losing them to cloud servers meant a lot of revenue just > vanished. 1) No, it just moved to the hardware bought by cloud providers. 2) A lot of large businesses deploy their own "clouds". -- -v "Desktops, workstations and servers are and Microsoft is doing very well. AS well as Linux." -"Slimer" "I do not see desktop Linux as a failure." -"Snit"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 16:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sandman-f67e64f918706f8ae1ecd1c59c429fb4@individual.net> |
| In reply to | #355616 |
In article <dpu6b4F6tu7U5@mid.individual.net>, vallor wrote: > > Sandman: > > And, since the middle segment are the ones that pour the most > > money into servers, losing them to cloud servers meant a lot of > > revenue just vanished. > > 1) No, it just moved to the hardware bought by cloud providers. Which was exactly my point. Cloud providers never even considered the Xserve since it was too expansive, they valued cheap PC hardware and free Linux over ease of configuration and stylish rack mounting - and rightly so! > 2) A lot of large businesses deploy their own "clouds". I think "a lot" is a bit of a stretch when you compare to 2002 when the Xserve was launched. And again, few "large companies" (i.e. 1,000+ seats) would use the Xserve to begin with. It was a neat server for the medium to small company that wanted a server platform that was easy to maintain and didn't eat up a lot of rack space. Apple never targeted the large enterprises. But the medium to small companies soon one too cloud hosting because - well, it was cheaper and they didn't need anyone to manage the servers at all, it was all done for them. And these days, the web interfaces for domain management or mail setup is in a lot of places just as easy as it was (is) with the OS X server. So while it's a pity they cancelled it since it was a really neat machine, I'm not a bit surprised that they did - makes perfect business sense. -- Sandman
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-14 23:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nh8ohr$tp8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #355287 |
On 5/14/2016 10:57 AM, Marek Novotny wrote: > I have nothing but contempt for the company [Apple] They'll never get over that one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-14 22:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nh8ob7$tp8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #355277 |
On 5/14/2016 9:44 AM, Marek Novotny wrote: > Yeah, fun fact, Pixar uses Linux to render their movies. Edits the movie > with Avid, not Final Cut. LOL. So? Pixar NEVER had anything to do with Apple. In fact, Pixar made it's own hardware and software, long before Linux was around. I remember well the first Pixar short film - a little desk lamp hopping around. Used to see it before art house movies. > Like I always say, we eat our own dogfood. You shouldn't always say that - Linux Format magazine is produced on Macs. > Apple, and Pixar by extension of the former owner Steve Jobs, > does not. Jan 2014 "See How Pixar Uses Apple's $3,000 Mac To Make Beautiful Movies" http://www.businessinsider.com/pixar-uses-apples-mac-pro-to-make-films-2014-1 > I would be parading my OS around the most advanced if I wasn't even > willing to use it in the data center or as a rendering farm. I wouldn't > be advertising my Non-Linear Editor as the best if I myself was using > Avid. It's pretty darn hypocritical if you ask me. And if there's one thing you Linux "advocates" know, it's hypocrites...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-14 20:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D35D3672.72FA1%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #355420 |
On 5/14/16, 7:56 PM, in article nh8ob7$tp8$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 5/14/2016 9:44 AM, Marek Novotny wrote: > > >> Yeah, fun fact, Pixar uses Linux to render their movies. Edits the movie >> with Avid, not Final Cut. LOL. > > So? Pixar NEVER had anything to do with Apple. In fact, Pixar made > it's own hardware and software, long before Linux was around. > > I remember well the first Pixar short film - a little desk lamp hopping > around. Used to see it before art house movies. Just re-watched Up with the kids. They make great movies. >> Like I always say, we eat our own dogfood. > > You shouldn't always say that - Linux Format magazine is produced on Macs. Pixar is not Apple... so why would anyone be surprised to see them use something other than Macs? A better "attack" would be to note Apple uses Linux for their servers... but so what? Is Apple pushing that their machines are the right tool for that job? They also drive cars - but not Apple made ones... and work in a building not made by Apple... and use pens and pencils not made by Apple. They need not make EVERYTHING to be a good business. >> Apple, and Pixar by extension of the former owner Steve Jobs, >> does not. > > Jan 2014 > "See How Pixar Uses Apple's $3,000 Mac To Make Beautiful Movies" > http://www.businessinsider.com/pixar-uses-apples-mac-pro-to-make-films-2014-1 > > > >> I would be parading my OS around the most advanced if I wasn't even >> willing to use it in the data center or as a rendering farm. I wouldn't >> be advertising my Non-Linear Editor as the best if I myself was using >> Avid. It's pretty darn hypocritical if you ask me. > > And if there's one thing you Linux "advocates" know, it's hypocrites... > > > > -- * 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]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-14 20:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sMidnaZ6SM6WdqrKnZ2dnUU7-UGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #355420 |
On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 5/14/2016 9:44 AM, Marek Novotny wrote: > > >> Yeah, fun fact, Pixar uses Linux to render their movies. Edits the movie >> with Avid, not Final Cut. LOL. > > So? Pixar NEVER had anything to do with Apple. In fact, Pixar made > it's own hardware and software, long before Linux was around. > > > I remember well the first Pixar short film - a little desk lamp hopping > around. Used to see it before art house movies. > > >> Like I always say, we eat our own dogfood. > > You shouldn't always say that - Linux Format magazine is produced on Macs. I don't read Linux Format. Magazine. And I don't even think it is here in America. You're in the UK right? I'm in North America. And hostly, if we're going to include the back end of the magazine then you use Linux. Unless that's not you on the internet. >> Apple, and Pixar by extension of the former owner Steve Jobs, >> does not. > > Jan 2014 > "See How Pixar Uses Apple's $3,000 Mac To Make Beautiful Movies" > http://www.businessinsider.com/pixar-uses-apples-mac-pro-to-make-films-2014-1 > > > >> I would be parading my OS around the most advanced if I wasn't even >> willing to use it in the data center or as a rendering farm. I wouldn't >> be advertising my Non-Linear Editor as the best if I myself was using >> Avid. It's pretty darn hypocritical if you ask me. > > And if there's one thing you Linux "advocates" know, it's hypocrites... I don't know you, so not yet. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-14 21:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D35D4620.72FAF%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #355427 |
On 5/14/16, 8:20 PM, in article
sMidnaZ6SM6WdqrKnZ2dnUU7-UGdnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny"
<marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
> On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 5/14/2016 9:44 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Yeah, fun fact, Pixar uses Linux to render their movies. Edits the movie
>>> with Avid, not Final Cut. LOL.
>>
>> So? Pixar NEVER had anything to do with Apple. In fact, Pixar made
>> it's own hardware and software, long before Linux was around.
>>
>>
>> I remember well the first Pixar short film - a little desk lamp hopping
>> around. Used to see it before art house movies.
>>
>>
>>> Like I always say, we eat our own dogfood.
>>
>> You shouldn't always say that - Linux Format magazine is produced on Macs.
>
> I don't read Linux Format. Magazine. And I don't even think it is here
> in America. You're in the UK right? I'm in North America. And hostly, if
> we're going to include the back end of the magazine then you use Linux.
> Unless that's not you on the internet.
I tend to go with these ideas... use what works for you and look to
understand the good and bad in different solutions. Here are some who seem
to largely agree with me (though, of course, not fully):
Linus Torvalds:
-----
Any program is only as good as it is useful.
-----
I'm generally a very pragmatic person: that which works,
works.
-----
Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not
open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested. 99% of that
I run tends to be open source, but that's my choice, dammit.
-----
Mark Shuttleworth:
-----
I think we don't yet deliver a good enough user experience. I
think we deliver a user experience for people that have a
reason to want to be on the Linux platform, either because of
price or because of freedom. If that was your primary reason,
Linux is the right answer.
But if you are somebody who is not too concerned about price,
who is not too concerned about freedom, I don't think we can
say the Linux desktop offers the very best experience. And
that's something we have to change, that's something I'm
committed to work on, focusing increasing amounts of
resources of Canonical on figuring out on how we actually
move the desktop experience forward to compete with Mac OS X.
...
Second thing is, we just can't do this only on GNOME or just
on KDE, we need to figure out on how to move the whole Linux
desktop platform forward. I suspect if we hire a bunch of
upstream developers they will be across both GNOME and KDE.
I think the Apple guys have a very good point when they say
we should let designers lead the definition of the user
experience.
-----
Jim Zemlin:
-----
Yeah, their stuff's pretty good. [points at a MacBook Air]
That's a pretty sweet laptop there. That's the difference. I
get asked a lot, "Why does Apple get a bye?" from the open
source guys. When you're downstairs I'm sure you'll see a lot
more Macs. The reason why they get a bit more of a bye is
because the stuff is really innovative. It's not the stuff
where you say "Not only is it crap but..."
-----
I'll tell you who's great with the desktop market, it's those
guys, Apple, with I think more than 20 per cent share. But if
you look at things like the Kindle Fire, Android, the
ChromeBook, at all the alternative means of accessing what's
important and what you probably spend 90 per cent of your
time doing, accessing the internet through a web browser,
then I think there's plenty of room for a Linux desktop
there.
-----
Open source is a development methodology, and choice is not
guaranteed by a development methodology."
-----
One of the big things that's difficult is consistency, and
that's Window's biggest strength.
-----
[The new LSB desktop group will be dealing with more than
just KDE and GNOME issues though. It will be dealing with]
all issues dealing with interoperability, ... everyone at the
table, and motivated to make the Linux desktop a success,
everyone will be seeking a consensus. This may not [mean]
making developers choose between KDE and GNOME, but instead
finding a way to make it easier for ISVs to create
applications that can easily work with both.
-----
What gets me is how many people in COLA think sharing similar views somehow
makes you anti-Linux.
...
--
* 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]
| From | William Poaster <wp@dev.null> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 09:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <hqpl0d-jeb.ln1@user-1842.linux.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #355427 |
Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2016-05-15, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 5/14/2016 9:44 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Yeah, fun fact, Pixar uses Linux to render their movies. Edits the movie
>>> with Avid, not Final Cut. LOL.
>>
>> So? Pixar NEVER had anything to do with Apple. In fact, Pixar made
>> it's own hardware and software, long before Linux was around.
>>
>>
>> I remember well the first Pixar short film - a little desk lamp hopping
>> around. Used to see it before art house movies.
>>
>>
>>> Like I always say, we eat our own dogfood.
>>
>> You shouldn't always say that - Linux Format magazine is produced on Macs.
>
> I don't read Linux Format. Magazine. And I don't even think it is here
> in America. You're in the UK right? I'm in North America. And hostly, if
> we're going to include the back end of the magazine then you use Linux.
> Unless that's not you on the internet.
DooFuS is in, or near, Atlanta, Ga.
As for LinuxFormat magazine being produced on Macs, they stated that
that was the policy of the Future Publishing Group (Future Plc), & *all*
magazines were produced on Macs *including* their M$ Windows mag.
>>> Apple, and Pixar by extension of the former owner Steve Jobs,
>>> does not.
>>
>> Jan 2014
>> "See How Pixar Uses Apple's $3,000 Mac To Make Beautiful Movies"
>> http://www.businessinsider.com/pixar-uses-apples-mac-pro-to-make-films-2014-1
>>
>>
>>
>>> I would be parading my OS around the most advanced if I wasn't even
>>> willing to use it in the data center or as a rendering farm. I wouldn't
>>> be advertising my Non-Linear Editor as the best if I myself was using
>>> Avid. It's pretty darn hypocritical if you ask me.
>>
>> And if there's one thing you Linux "advocates" know, it's hypocrites...
>
> I don't know you, so not yet.
Well he's not called DooFuS for nothing!
He's a M$ fanboi, & come out with some real howlers in the past.
Here's one:
"If it weren't for Windows, you wouldn't be posting anything
right now."
DFS <nos...@nospam.com>
Message-ID: <10dhshhno9ha938@corp.supernews.com>
--------------------------------------
DFS, the Linux "expert":
I did a hard disk install of RedHat 4.2 in 1997, and used it
off and on for a couple weeks.
Message-ID: <AxTal.3051$Jn4.2222@bignews7.bellsouth.net>
DFS - Tue, 13 Jan 2009
Q: How long did your trial last?
DFS: RedHat 4.2 (back whenever, like 6 or 8 years ago I think) and SUSE Pro 7.1 a
couple of years ago. Used each for no more than a week. I'm gonna try it
again soon, and see what's improved.
Message-ID: <10cao2dpk0m5q4c@corp.supernews.com>
Actually, I used RedHat 4.2 and SUSE 7.1 Pro for a few days each.
Message-ID: <10c47tejsqtqu39@corp.supernews.com>
---------------------------------------------
--
Linux vs. Windows is a no-Win situation.
Without open source projects like Apache, Nginx, OpenSSL, OpenSSH and others
(to say nothing of GNU/Linux, which does get some attention), the latest hot
new thing would likely not exist. More fundamentally, the web as we know it
would not exist.
There is a kind of myth that has grown around this lack of attention. It's the
myth of the lone developer creating powerful magic. It's a myth the open-source
community likes to tell itself: that open source software is created by
individuals working on labours of love in their spare time.
However, the myth ignores the fact that much of the money going into open source
software is directly and indirectly (in the form of employing developers who
contribute to open source projects) coming from corporations.
So much for tagging it "hobbyware".
-- Scott Gilbertson - May 13th 2016 --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 05:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a66dnelEsIsF9qXKnZ2dnUU7-RednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #355441 |
On 2016-05-15, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote: // snip > Well he's not called DooFuS for nothing! > He's a M$ fanboi, & come out with some real howlers in the past. > > Here's one: > "If it weren't for Windows, you wouldn't be posting anything > right now." > DFS <nos...@nospam.com> > Message-ID: <10dhshhno9ha938@corp.supernews.com> Yeah, he thinks every one of those 300 million Windows 10 users specifically wanted Windows 10. I mentioned that a large portion of those users got Windows 10 as a patch, which he doesn't believe. This guy must live under a rock or something. Not the brightest bulb. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 12:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nha6lv$9re$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #355453 |
On 5/15/2016 8:29 AM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-05-15, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote: > > // snip > >> Well he's not called DooFuS for nothing! >> He's a M$ fanboi, & come out with some real howlers in the past. >> >> Here's one: >> "If it weren't for Windows, you wouldn't be posting anything >> right now." >> DFS <nos...@nospam.com> >> Message-ID: <10dhshhno9ha938@corp.supernews.com> > > Yeah, he thinks every one of those 300 million Windows 10 users > specifically wanted Windows 10. I mentioned that a large portion of > those users got Windows 10 as a patch, which he doesn't believe. And every single one who 'got Windows as a patch' (a bullshit lie) willingly kept it - that's how they got counted in the 300 million. > This guy must live under a rock or something. Not the brightest bulb. Idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web