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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #339337 > unrolled thread

Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes

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

Contents

  Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 23:50 +0000
    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 05:07 -0800
      Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 09:51 -0500
        Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Vile Strong <vs@zen.info> - 2016-01-03 15:53 +0000
          Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-03 11:20 -0500
            Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 11:35 -0500
              Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Vile Strong <vs@zen.info> - 2016-01-03 17:33 +0000
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 12:35 -0500
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:48 +0000
                  Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 15:54 -0500
              Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-03 14:03 -0500
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 14:35 -0500
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-04 08:18 -0600
                  STOP responding to Snotface. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 07:44 -0800
              Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-01-03 14:49 -0600
            Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Vile Strong <vs@zen.info> - 2016-01-03 16:48 +0000
              Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-03 13:58 -0500
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-01-03 14:52 -0600
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes linuxiac <linuxiac@usa.com> - 2016-01-03 21:22 +0000
                Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-03 23:51 +0000
                  Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 19:34 -0500
                  Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-04 01:17 +0000
                    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-03 20:23 -0500
                    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-03 20:40 -0500
                      Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> - 2016-01-03 20:49 -0500
                      Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-04 05:00 +0000
                        Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-04 14:40 -0500
                          Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-05 07:13 +0000
                            Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-05 14:38 -0500
                      Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes "Dr. John Grubor" <grubor@grubor.org.invalid> - 2016-01-04 13:01 +0000
                    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-04 01:49 +0000
              Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:45 +0000
          Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:52 +0000
            Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:56 +0000
            Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-04 15:12 -0500
    one of the strongest points of Linux Mint is that it supports the Ubuntu/Linux DE Standards John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 08:03 -0800
    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes Vile Strong <vs@zen.info> - 2016-01-04 02:17 +0000
      STOP lying Putz! John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 04:00 -0800
    Re: Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-01-04 16:21 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#339337 — Linux Mint Mate 17.3 in 27 minutes

I decided to reinstall Linux on my inherited 7-8 year-old Inspiron 1720. 
It took 27 minutes from booting from DVD to completely updated with 
flash, java and all codecs necessary for using it on the Internet. (I 
spent another 15 minutes -- or so -- tweaking the desktop.) Try to this 
with the Malware Magnet Hobbyware/Spyware/Crapware OS from Redmond.

And "Barry" keeps telling us we don't _constantly_ show why Linux is 
superior to Windows on the desktop.

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#339378

On Saturday, January 2, 2016 at 6:53:37 PM UTC-5, ronb wrote:
> I decided to reinstall Linux on my inherited 7-8 year-old Inspiron 1720. 
> It took 27 minutes from booting from DVD to completely updated with 
> flash, java and all codecs necessary for using it on the Internet. (I 
> spent another 15 minutes -- or so -- tweaking the desktop.) Try to this 
> with the Malware Magnet Hobbyware/Spyware/Crapware OS from Redmond.
> 
> And "Barry" keeps telling us we don't _constantly_ show why Linux is 
> superior to Windows on the desktop.


Ooooh!  Moi is so proud of you.
--
Je suis Moi, Ubuntu/Linux DE
Have you been deceived by the American bully, Richard Stallman? Are you just a gnu/Linux Putz?
Main GNU spiel: http://tinyurl.com/qzxnnoj
Preplacing GNU with Ubuntu spiel: http://tinyurl.com/h9x4u8y
Ubuntu 14.04 shipped musl/libc as an optional package: http://tinyurl.com/jkthv6b
the smallest statically linked C program being 1.8K with musl/libc vs 662K with glibc: http://tinyurl.com/3rswng5
My Linux position spiel: http://tinyurl.com/zesmq9g

Sorry, but Moi is much smarter than a Stupid person bragging about how little they really know about Linux.

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

#339390

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 05:07:11 -0800 (PST), John Gohde wrote:

> On Saturday, January 2, 2016 at 6:53:37 PM UTC-5, ronb wrote:
>> I decided to reinstall Linux on my inherited 7-8 year-old Inspiron 1720. 
>> It took 27 minutes from booting from DVD to completely updated with 
>> flash, java and all codecs necessary for using it on the Internet. (I 
>> spent another 15 minutes -- or so -- tweaking the desktop.) Try to this 
>> with the Malware Magnet Hobbyware/Spyware/Crapware OS from Redmond.
>> 
>> And "Barry" keeps telling us we don't _constantly_ show why Linux is 
>> superior to Windows on the desktop.
> 
> 
> Ooooh!  Moi is so proud of you.

Problem is once the install is completed the user is left with Linux and
it's crude applications.

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

#339400

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 09:51:59 -0500, Barry H wrote:

> 
> Problem is once the install is completed the user is left with Linux and
> it's crude applications.
>

Once an install of Microsoft Windows is complete, the user is
left with the flimsy Notepad text editor and a stale media player
that reports back to MSFT every file that is opened -- not to mention
a vast horde of unnecessary background services that consume inordinate
amounts of system resources.
 
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Furthermore, Linux applications are only as crude as the person
who uses them.  Need I say more?

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

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

#339404

Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 09:51:59 -0500, Barry H wrote:
>
>> Problem is once the install is completed the user is left with Linux and
>> it's crude applications.
>
> Once an install of Microsoft Windows is complete, the user is
> left with the flimsy Notepad text editor and a stale media player
> that reports back to MSFT every file that is opened -- not to mention
> a vast horde of unnecessary background services that consume inordinate
> amounts of system resources.
>  
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Furthermore, Linux applications are only as crude as the person
> who uses them.  Need I say more?

The really funny thing is what a stupid-ass troll named "Hadron" said,
something like:

   "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."

He means GIMP, LibreOffice, Wireshark, the vast and powerful suite of GNU
software, Ardour, the large suite of software available at Apache.org, and a
whole lot more.  There's even a lot of great cross-platform proprietary
software you can get for Linux, such as Bitwig.

"Crude"?  No, the only thing crude is the "brain" of "Barry H".  He should
be "Barry M" as in "enema".

-- 
This life is yours.  Some of it was given to you; the rest, you made yourself.

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

#339406

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 09:51:59 -0500, Barry H wrote:
>>
>>> Problem is once the install is completed the user is left with Linux and
>>> it's crude applications.
>>
>> Once an install of Microsoft Windows is complete, the user is
>> left with the flimsy Notepad text editor and a stale media player
>> that reports back to MSFT every file that is opened -- not to mention
>> a vast horde of unnecessary background services that consume inordinate
>> amounts of system resources.
>>  
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>
>> Furthermore, Linux applications are only as crude as the person
>> who uses them.  Need I say more?
> 
> The really funny thing is what a stupid-ass troll named "Hadron" said,
> something like:
> 
>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
> 
> He means GIMP, LibreOffice, Wireshark, the vast and powerful suite of GNU
> software, Ardour, the large suite of software available at Apache.org, and a
> whole lot more.  There's even a lot of great cross-platform proprietary
> software you can get for Linux, such as Bitwig.

Hadron is correct.
The BEST OSS DOES run on Windows and Mac.
And has better support on those platforms as well.

So in that regard, Windows actually has MORE choice than Linux does because
a Windows user can choose from say MSOffice or Libreoffice. Or from
Photoshop or Gimp. A Linux user can't do that.

Great self nuke there Ahlstrom.

 
> "Crude"?  No, the only thing crude is the "brain" of "Barry H".  He should
> be "Barry M" as in "enema".

Potty jokes?
Grow up.

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

#339416

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:35:09 -0500, Barry H wrote:

> 
>  A Linux user can't do that.
> 

Correction: A Linux user wouldn't WANT to do that.

Ever try making mailing labels with MS Office vs. LibreOffice?

For that job, and most others, I'll take LO.

Read it and weep.

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

#339417

On 3 Jan 2016 17:33:28 GMT, Vile Strong wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:35:09 -0500, Barry H wrote:
> 
>> 
>>  A Linux user can't do that.
>> 
> 
> Correction: A Linux user wouldn't WANT to do that.
> 
> Ever try making mailing labels with MS Office vs. LibreOffice?
> 
> For that job, and most others, I'll take LO.
> 
> Read it and weep.

Snipping and changing the context when cornered like the rat you are.
You lose.

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

#339447

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:33:28 +0000, Vile Strong wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:35:09 -0500, Barry H wrote:
> 
> 
>>  A Linux user can't do that.
>> 
>> 
> Correction: A Linux user wouldn't WANT to do that.
> 
> Ever try making mailing labels with MS Office vs. LibreOffice?
> 
> For that job, and most others, I'll take LO.
> 
> Read it and weep.

Microsoft Office has alway been a non-starter on my personal computers. 
Pure bloatware and intrusive "we know better than you you do what you 
want to do with your applications." 

Microsoft Office sucks. 

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

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

#339450

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 20:48:22 -0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:33:28 +0000, Vile Strong wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:35:09 -0500, Barry H wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>  A Linux user can't do that.
>>> 
>>> 
>> Correction: A Linux user wouldn't WANT to do that.
>> 
>> Ever try making mailing labels with MS Office vs. LibreOffice?
>> 
>> For that job, and most others, I'll take LO.
>> 
>> Read it and weep.
> 
> Microsoft Office has alway been a non-starter on my personal computers. 
> Pure bloatware and intrusive "we know better than you you do what you 
> want to do with your applications." 
> 
> Microsoft Office sucks.

Them is some real sour apples you are sucking on son.
Linux users like to aim for the lowest level. They are born like that.

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

#339427

Barry H wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> 
>> The really funny thing is what a stupid-ass troll named "Hadron" said,
>> something like:
>> 
>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>> 
>> He means GIMP, LibreOffice, Wireshark, the vast and powerful suite of GNU
>> software, Ardour, the large suite of software available at Apache.org, and a
>> whole lot more.  There's even a lot of great cross-platform proprietary
>> software you can get for Linux, such as Bitwig.
>
> Hadron is correct.
> The BEST OSS DOES run on Windows and Mac.
> And has better support on those platforms as well.
>
> So in that regard, Windows actually has MORE choice than Linux does because
> a Windows user can choose from say MSOffice or Libreoffice. Or from
> Photoshop or Gimp. A Linux user can't do that.

So what?  I have my choice of products to do what I want.
I should want more than that?

> Great self nuke there Ahlstrom.

Sure.  Whatever you say, "Barry".

What you said goes for Mac as well, "Barry".

Having the most software is not the point.  Even having the
"best" software (whatever that means) is not the point.

The point is to be able to satisfy one's goals with software and
to be able to do it without undue restrictions, undue insecurity,
and without an undue outlay of cash.

I enjoy that satisfaction with Linux, and have for years.

You don't like it?  Too bad.  Go use your software and quit trolling
people.

>> "Crude"?  No, the only thing crude is the "brain" of "Barry H".  He should
>> be "Barry M" as in "enema".
>
> Potty jokes?
> Grow up.

You first, child.

-- 
The secret source of humor is not joy but sorrow; there is no humor in Heaven.
		-- Mark Twain

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

#339434

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:03:13 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Barry H wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> 
>>> The really funny thing is what a stupid-ass troll named "Hadron" said,
>>> something like:
>>> 
>>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>>> 
>>> He means GIMP, LibreOffice, Wireshark, the vast and powerful suite of GNU
>>> software, Ardour, the large suite of software available at Apache.org, and a
>>> whole lot more.  There's even a lot of great cross-platform proprietary
>>> software you can get for Linux, such as Bitwig.
>>
>> Hadron is correct.
>> The BEST OSS DOES run on Windows and Mac.
>> And has better support on those platforms as well.
>>
>> So in that regard, Windows actually has MORE choice than Linux does because
>> a Windows user can choose from say MSOffice or Libreoffice. Or from
>> Photoshop or Gimp. A Linux user can't do that.
> 
> So what?  I have my choice of products to do what I want.
> I should want more than that?

You made the statement regarding what Hadron said. I just showed you how
wrong you are and how right he is.

If you are satisfied with less choice that's fine with me.
 
>> Great self nuke there Ahlstrom.
> 
> Sure.  Whatever you say, "Barry".

It's true.
Anyone can see how you shot yourself in the foot and are now squirming like
a little worm on the end of a hook.


> What you said goes for Mac as well, "Barry".

Except that the Mac has a very good commercial base of programs. And
despite being expensive is killing Linux as a desktop system.


> Having the most software is not the point.  Even having the
> "best" software (whatever that means) is not the point.

Well I can see why you use Linux. If not having the most choice or more
importantly the best software availible is not important to you then Linux
is a great choice for you.

Why do Linux users settle for inferior software?
They have no choice.

 
> The point is to be able to satisfy one's goals with software and
> to be able to do it without undue restrictions, undue insecurity,
> and without an undue outlay of cash.

So you're cheap and you hate Microsoft, Apple etc.
Got it.
 
> I enjoy that satisfaction with Linux, and have for years.

You stated that watching a kernel compile is fun.
That says it all.

 
> You don't like it?  Too bad.  Go use your software and quit trolling
> people.

Trolling?
Who is trolling?

I'm just pointing out how ridiculous you and your herd are.
I'd rather you discuss and demonstrate why Linux is superior but you never
will. You prefer to make baseless claims with zero evidence to prove your
points. 


>>> "Crude"?  No, the only thing crude is the "brain" of "Barry H".  He should
>>> be "Barry M" as in "enema".
>>
>> Potty jokes?
>> Grow up.
> 
> You first, child.

I'm not the person making potty jokes, who thinks a dongle plugged into a
laptop looks like a penis, desires to wipe other men's dicks. That would be
you Chris Ahlstrom and it's quite juvenile IMHO.

You need to grow up.

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

#339614

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Barry H wrote:
>>
>> So in that regard, Windows actually has MORE choice than Linux does because
>> a Windows user can choose from say MSOffice or Libreoffice. Or from
>> Photoshop or Gimp. A Linux user can't do that.

Does the H stand for "Hadron"?

>So what?  I have my choice of products to do what I want.
>I should want more than that?
>
>> Great self nuke there Ahlstrom.
>
>Sure.  Whatever you say, "Barry".

Well, don't you know that it's absurd to like choice, but to choose
Linux?  

Windows has more apps, you see, so by definition offers "more choice"
than does GNU/Linux.

(rolling eyes)

>What you said goes for Mac as well, "Barry".
>
>Having the most software is not the point.  Even having the
>"best" software (whatever that means) is not the point.
>
>The point is to be able to satisfy one's goals with software and
>to be able to do it without undue restrictions, undue insecurity,
>and without an undue outlay of cash.
>
>I enjoy that satisfaction with Linux, and have for years.
>
>You don't like it?  Too bad.  Go use your software and quit trolling
>people.

They are mentally-ill dumbshits.

-- 
"Half say its easier than Windows and the other (more truthful) half
maintain that they are GLAD Linux is buggy and error prone because it
puts off the great unwashed that would otherwise pollute the Linux
gene pool."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

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

#339631 — STOP responding to Snotface.

On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 9:18:27 AM UTC-5, chrisv wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> > Barry H wrote:
> >>
> >> So in that regard, Windows actually has MORE choice than Linux does because
> >> a Windows user can choose from say MSOffice or Libreoffice. Or from
> >> Photoshop or Gimp. A Linux user can't do that.
> 
> Does the H stand for "Hadron"?


Barry H stands for Snot, you Putz!

STOP responding to Snotface.  On COLA, everybody is Snot until proven otherwise.

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

#339460

On 2016-01-03, Barry H <barryum@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 09:51:59 -0500, Barry H wrote:
>>>
>>>> Problem is once the install is completed the user is left with Linux and
>>>> it's crude applications.
>>>
>>> Once an install of Microsoft Windows is complete, the user is
>>> left with the flimsy Notepad text editor and a stale media player
>>> that reports back to MSFT every file that is opened -- not to mention
>>> a vast horde of unnecessary background services that consume inordinate
>>> amounts of system resources.
>>>  
>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>
>>> Furthermore, Linux applications are only as crude as the person
>>> who uses them.  Need I say more?
>> 
>> The really funny thing is what a stupid-ass troll named "Hadron" said,
>> something like:
>> 
>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>> 
>> He means GIMP, LibreOffice, Wireshark, the vast and powerful suite of GNU
>> software, Ardour, the large suite of software available at Apache.org, and a
>> whole lot more.  There's even a lot of great cross-platform proprietary
>> software you can get for Linux, such as Bitwig.
>
> Hadron is correct.
> The BEST OSS DOES run on Windows and Mac.

   Perhaps... kind of sort of after a fashion.

[deletia]

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

#339409

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> 
>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
> 

Technically, they do not run on MS Windows because they use
the OSS toolkit GTK+.  The native (to MS) winforms toolkit
is bypassed.

But graphical toolkits, like appearances and superficialities
in general, are what appeal most to brain-dead MS Windows
users.

They'd live in a hovel, if the walls were painted gold.

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

#339426

Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>
> Technically, they do not run on MS Windows because they use
> the OSS toolkit GTK+.  The native (to MS) winforms toolkit
> is bypassed.

A nonsensical statement, in my opinion.

> But graphical toolkits, like appearances and superficialities
> in general, are what appeal most to brain-dead MS Windows
> users.

Actually, to consumers in general.  They're lucky if they can
learn enough of a GUI to get by.  Something goes wrong,
they'll <laughing> flounder.

> They'd live in a hovel, if the walls were painted gold.

You be frontin'.

-- 
You will be run over by a bus.

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

#339459

On 2016-01-03, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>>
>> Technically, they do not run on MS Windows because they use
>> the OSS toolkit GTK+.  The native (to MS) winforms toolkit
>> is bypassed.
>
> A nonsensical statement, in my opinion.

   Not really. These trolling ninnes value "consistency".

   So as soon as you apply an underlying OSS toolkit you've immediately run off
the rails. This is especially true of MacOS where foolish consistency is a 
religion.

>
>> But graphical toolkits, like appearances and superficialities
>> in general, are what appeal most to brain-dead MS Windows
>> users.
>
> Actually, to consumers in general.  They're lucky if they can
> learn enough of a GUI to get by.  Something goes wrong,
> they'll <laughing> flounder.

    There's that. "Real people" don't care about a differnt GUI toolkit.

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

#339469

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:58:27 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:20:50 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>>    "All the best OSS runs on Windows [and Mac] as well."
>>
>> Technically, they do not run on MS Windows because they use the OSS
>> toolkit GTK+.  The native (to MS) winforms toolkit is bypassed.
> 
> A nonsensical statement, in my opinion.
> 
>> But graphical toolkits, like appearances and superficialities in
>> general, are what appeal most to brain-dead MS Windows users.
> 
> Actually, to consumers in general.  They're lucky if they can learn
> enough of a GUI to get by.  Something goes wrong,
> they'll <laughing> flounder.
> 
>> They'd live in a hovel, if the walls were painted gold.
> 
> You be frontin'.

A white guy trying to talk ghetto is like an Asian with an accent trying 
to sing "Deck The Halls".
It just doesn't work.

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

#339525

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> Vile Strong wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
...
> 
>> They'd live in a hovel, if the walls were painted gold.
> 
> You be frontin'.
> 

Again with the ebonics from the racist Chris Ahlstrom.
Take it to Stormfront, Little Beaver.

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web