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


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #351415 > unrolled thread

A short take on my view of Linux / OSS

Started bySnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
First post2016-04-22 23:02 -0700
Last post2016-04-25 10:21 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 62 — 14 participants

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


Contents

  A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-22 23:02 -0700
    WPF? 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-23 07:58 +0000
    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 12:33 +0200
      Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:07 -0700
    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 13:05 +0000
    Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 07:50 -0700
      Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-23 10:52 -0400
        Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 16:53 +0200
          Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:08 -0700
          Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 08:14 -0700
            Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 08:10 -0700
          Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:57 -0500
            Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:14 -0700
              Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 10:53 -0700
              Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-25 22:28 +0200
                Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-26 07:31 -0500
                  Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:09 -0700
    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 15:10 +0000
      Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 09:24 -0700
        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 20:37 +0000
          Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 14:00 -0700
            Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 23:01 +0000
              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 23:10 +0000
                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2016-04-24 23:34 +0000
                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 00:50 +0000
                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 01:54 +0000
                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 04:17 +0000
                    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 21:33 -0700
                      Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 09:01 +0000
                        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:18 -0700
                          Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 22:29 +0000
                            Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 16:28 -0700
                            Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 21:27 -0400
                              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 18:34 -0700
                                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 09:20 +0000
                                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:05 -0700
                                    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0700
                                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 13:24 -0400
                                    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 22:30 +0000
                                    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 22:45 +0000
                                      Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 20:53 -0400
                                        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 18:06 -0700
                                        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-27 03:21 +0200
                                          Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-27 10:44 +0000
                                            Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 12:49 +0200
                                              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-27 22:14 +0000
                                                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-28 00:27 +0200
                                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:52 -0700
              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 18:00 -0700
                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 01:41 +0000
                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 19:18 -0700
                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 10:32 +0000
                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:49 -0700
            Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 10:26 +0000
              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 09:07 -0400
                Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 22:31 +0000
                  Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 21:41 -0400
                    Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0700
                      Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 00:39 +0200
                        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 18:15 -0700
                        Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 02:42 +0000
              Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:21 -0700

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


#351663

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-24 14:00 -0700
Message-ID<D3428208.70CF9%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351661
On 4/24/16, 1:37 PM, in article nfjaqg115ph@news6.newsguy.com, "Fabian
Russell" <fb@zen.info> wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 09:24:19 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> 
>> But my point is about what *IS*, not what *COULD* be.
>> 
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> After a tiresome spiel about the possibility of various desktop groups
> working together to produce a better GUI, you then quickly wave off
> my assertion of software vendor incompetence with this ridiculous
> excuse.

Oh, BOTH are issues:

* The UI is not done well... not created as a system.
* Failure to entice developers.

We can point fingers all we want, but the reality is both of these are
significant issues and limit choice on Desktop Linux.

>> I noted that Linux could group to be this! It could lead to more
>> choice and flexibility.
> 
> I must remind you that Linux is a particular brand of the Unix operating
> system, and Unix was initially created to service computer scientists
> and other knowledgeable professionals.  The market for Unix is NOT
> a market of dummies.

One: it is Unix-like, not a UNIX. But whatever your excuse the fact is it
does not compete well.

> I do not perceive the faults with Linux which you imply, most probably
> because such faults do not exist.

I do not doubt you fail to see these things... but even if you did would you
admit it? In general though Desktop Linux users do not know much about UI
issues and fail to see how the failures on Linux impact their productivity,
efficiency, and error-reduction.

I would love to see you show some tasks you do... some relatively common
desktop tasks, though they need not be mundane. We can compare these with
how these same tasks are done on the competition... and hopefully find
examples where Linux shines.

If you are looking for some tasks you can take on some of the ones I (and
Owl in one case) suggested. His is not actually that common, but it was an
interesting exercise.... so I dove in and did it. It was fun for me. :)

* 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>.

* Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl
is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one:
<https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had
selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the
like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he
and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.

> But your perspective is that of a person devoid of education and
> training into computer fundamentals.  You simply do not understand
> what is happening inside a computer and therefore you cannot effect
> any great productivity.  Therefore you require some tremendous layer
> of abstraction to assist you in what you merely believe is the correct
> approach.

This has literally NOTHING to do with my view. Actually, a well designed UI
helps an experienced person more than it helps a new user (though it helps
them as well).

> My view is that the purpose of GNU/Linux is NOT to provide such
> a useless layer, and my advice is to go elsewhere if you seek one.

Again: NOTHING to do with what I am talking about. I am speaking of ways to
improve productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction... for experienced
users and new.

>> And yet Desktop Linux is failing to attack any but a tiny sliver of users.
> 
> There are many commercial packages that have been ported to Linux,
> but such packages are almost always highly specialized software for
> sophisticated scientific and engineering applications.  That was,
> and remains, the traditional Unix market.
> 
> Junk applications, like word processors, spreadsheets, and
> image organizers tend to stay in the Microshit Windows world
> and that's exactly where they belong.

Ah, so you are not saying desktop Linux competes well with other desktop
solutions. OK. You think it works well elsewhere - which I agree with.

> The bottom line is this:
> 
> I know what I am doing, and I can make my GNU/Linux system beat
> the living fuck out of any commercial competitor in any realistic
> computing scenario -- and I don't mean transplanting heads from
> beautiful women to ugly bimbos using Photoshop.

Would love to see you show it. Keep in mind, as I prove above, I am happy to
do so. And I do so well. But maybe you can take on one or more of those
tasks and show how Linux handles them better. That would be GREAT!



-- 
* 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]


#351675

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-24 23:01 +0000
Message-ID<nfjj7t01cgv@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#351663
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:00:40 -0700, Snit wrote:

> 
> We can point fingers all we want, but the reality is both of these are
> significant issues and limit choice on Desktop Linux.
> 

There is one way to completely solve all the supposed Linux
problems and that is for people like you to get the fuck out.

Go away.  You don't belong here.  No GNU/Linux user wants to
hear your nonsense.  Get out.  Stay out.  Don't come back.


==============

My next project with GNU/Linux is to digitize some of my
paper books.

I am not going shopping for suitable software.  I am going
to employ basic GNU/Linux tools to build a scanning and
possible OCR translation system.

I will just feed paper into my scanner and the pages will
be assembled into a digital PDF either as images or as
translated text or possibly both.

When I am finished, no commercial package will be able
to compete with the quality.

Yes, quality.  I've encountered plenty of digitized books
and the quality is terrible.

But not my system.

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


#351676

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-04-24 23:10 +0000
Message-ID<ghjdow03.aefa@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#351675
Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:00:40 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> 
>> We can point fingers all we want, but the reality is both of these are
>> significant issues and limit choice on Desktop Linux.
>> 
> 
> There is one way to completely solve all the supposed Linux
> problems and that is for people like you to get the fuck out.
> 
> Go away.  You don't belong here.  No GNU/Linux user wants to
> hear your nonsense.  Get out.  Stay out.  Don't come back.
> 
> 
> ==============
> 
> My next project with GNU/Linux is to digitize some of my
> paper books.
> 
> I am not going shopping for suitable software.  I am going
> to employ basic GNU/Linux tools to build a scanning and
> possible OCR translation system.
> 
> I will just feed paper into my scanner and the pages will
> be assembled into a digital PDF either as images or as
> translated text or possibly both.
> 
> When I am finished, no commercial package will be able
> to compete with the quality.
> 
> Yes, quality.  I've encountered plenty of digitized books
> and the quality is terrible.
> 
> But not my system.
> 

Hopefully this is a flatbed scanner and you are not literally
going to "feed the pages into" your scanner.  Still, sounds
like a moronic waste of time even if you aren't destroying
your books in the process.

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


#351681

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-24 23:34 +0000
Message-ID<do53ffFcfe4U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#351676
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:10:32 +0000, owl wrote:

> Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:00:40 -0700, Snit wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> We can point fingers all we want, but the reality is both of these are
>>> significant issues and limit choice on Desktop Linux.
>>> 
>>> 
>> There is one way to completely solve all the supposed Linux problems
>> and that is for people like you to get the fuck out.
>> 
>> Go away.  You don't belong here.  No GNU/Linux user wants to hear your
>> nonsense.  Get out.  Stay out.  Don't come back.
>> 
>> 
>> ==============
>> 
>> My next project with GNU/Linux is to digitize some of my paper books.
>> 
>> I am not going shopping for suitable software.  I am going to employ
>> basic GNU/Linux tools to build a scanning and possible OCR translation
>> system.
>> 
>> I will just feed paper into my scanner and the pages will be assembled
>> into a digital PDF either as images or as translated text or possibly
>> both.
>> 
>> When I am finished, no commercial package will be able to compete with
>> the quality.
>> 
>> Yes, quality.  I've encountered plenty of digitized books and the
>> quality is terrible.
>> 
>> But not my system.
>> 
>> 
> Hopefully this is a flatbed scanner and you are not literally going to
> "feed the pages into" your scanner.  Still, sounds like a moronic waste
> of time even if you aren't destroying your books in the process.

You would expect something non-moronic from Fabian?  :)



-- 
Lloyd

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


#351688

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-04-25 00:50 +0000
Message-ID<ghjdi003af.3@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#351681
Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:10:32 +0000, owl wrote:
> 
>> Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:00:40 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> We can point fingers all we want, but the reality is both of these are
>>>> significant issues and limit choice on Desktop Linux.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> There is one way to completely solve all the supposed Linux problems
>>> and that is for people like you to get the fuck out.
>>> 
>>> Go away.  You don't belong here.  No GNU/Linux user wants to hear your
>>> nonsense.  Get out.  Stay out.  Don't come back.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ==============
>>> 
>>> My next project with GNU/Linux is to digitize some of my paper books.
>>> 
>>> I am not going shopping for suitable software.  I am going to employ
>>> basic GNU/Linux tools to build a scanning and possible OCR translation
>>> system.
>>> 
>>> I will just feed paper into my scanner and the pages will be assembled
>>> into a digital PDF either as images or as translated text or possibly
>>> both.
>>> 
>>> When I am finished, no commercial package will be able to compete with
>>> the quality.
>>> 
>>> Yes, quality.  I've encountered plenty of digitized books and the
>>> quality is terrible.
>>> 
>>> But not my system.
>>> 
>>> 
>> Hopefully this is a flatbed scanner and you are not literally going to
>> "feed the pages into" your scanner.  Still, sounds like a moronic waste
>> of time even if you aren't destroying your books in the process.
> 
> You would expect something non-moronic from Fabian?  :)
> 

A more sensible approach...
http://www.diybookscanner.org/
 

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


#351697

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-25 01:54 +0000
Message-ID<nfjtdj11hjg@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#351676
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:10:32 +0000, owl wrote:

>  Still, sounds
> like a moronic waste of time even if you aren't destroying
> your books in the process.
>

To a fucking moron everything sounds moronic.

These are old and yellowing paperbacks that are slowly
being destroyed anyway.  The best way to preserve these
irreplaceable volumes is to digitize them.

I can scan six pages at a time and then slice up the 
files into six separate pages.  What scanner could
do that?  None.

Also, my GNU/Linux descreening and other image processing tools
beat anything that is commercially available.

Now go back to listening to a moronic world, moron.

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


#351705

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-04-25 04:17 +0000
Message-ID<fhja03.af4@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#351697
Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:10:32 +0000, owl wrote:
> 
>>  Still, sounds
>> like a moronic waste of time even if you aren't destroying
>> your books in the process.
>>
> 
> To a fucking moron everything sounds moronic.
> 
> These are old and yellowing paperbacks that are slowly
> being destroyed anyway.  The best way to preserve these
> irreplaceable volumes is to digitize them.
> 

If they're irreplaceable, why are you destroying them?
Why not just observe proper book preservation protocols?
Or are you just a hoarder running out of space?

> I can scan six pages at a time and then slice up the 
> files into six separate pages.  What scanner could
> do that?  None.
> 

So you're scanning them without a scanner?  How does that
work exactly?


> Also, my GNU/Linux descreening and other image processing tools
> beat anything that is commercially available.
> 
> Now go back to listening to a moronic world, moron.
> 

Get back in the attic.  You've got tons of work to do.

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


#351706

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-24 21:33 -0700
Message-ID<D342EC23.70D57%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351705
On 4/24/16, 9:17 PM, in article fhja03.af4@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

... 
>> I can scan six pages at a time and then slice up the
>> files into six separate pages.  What scanner could
>> do that?  None.
> 
> So you're scanning them without a scanner?  How does that
> work exactly?

Yeah, I had that question, too. What the hell is he even trying to say?

Seems he wants to be able to combine PDFs and thinks this is something
amazingly awesome. When it was noted how mundane this is he started making
things up.

But if he has something cool to show, even just a cool workflow, I would
love to see it.

...


-- 
* 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]


#351715

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-25 09:01 +0000
Message-ID<nfkmdd01ubd@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#351706
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 21:33:23 -0700, Snit wrote:

> 
> But if he has something cool to show, even just a cool workflow, I would
> love to see it.
> 

That's your primary motivation for computing.  It has to be "cool"
or it is not worthwhile.

That's why you find fault with GNU/Linux, because the available GUIs
are just not "cool" enough.

Well, fuck you.

There is NO problem with GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

So get the fuck out of here and take your raging incompetence back
to your fop Apple universe where everything has that acceptable
"coolness."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a lame fucking loser!

Cool?  I'd say it's more like intellectual frigidity.

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

Get out.  Beat it.  Scram.  Vamoose.  Hit the road.  Go far away.
Don't come back.  No one wants your meaningless criticisms.
You are a mental cripple.

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


#351781

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-25 10:18 -0700
Message-ID<D3439F7D.70DE0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351715
On 4/25/16, 2:01 AM, in article nfkmdd01ubd@news1.newsguy.com, "Fabian
Russell" <fb@zen.info> wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 21:33:23 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> 
>> But if he has something cool to show, even just a cool workflow, I would
>> love to see it.
>> 
> 
> That's your primary motivation for computing.  It has to be "cool"
> or it is not worthwhile.

Cool as in promoting productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. I
suppose.

Yes, if you can show something that promotes productivity, efficiency, and
error-reduction I would love to see it.

> That's why you find fault with GNU/Linux, because the available GUIs
> are just not "cool" enough.

They do not promote productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. Agreed.

> Well, fuck you.
> 
> There is NO problem with GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

If you think there is no problem, then show where it promotes productivity,
efficiency, and error-reduction. Would love to see it!
 
> So get the fuck out of here and take your raging incompetence back
> to your fop Apple universe where everything has that acceptable
> "coolness."
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a lame fucking loser!
> 
> Cool?  I'd say it's more like intellectual frigidity.

So to you promoting productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction is somehow
a sign of "intellectual frigidity"? WTF?
 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> Get out.  Beat it.  Scram.  Vamoose.  Hit the road.  Go far away.
> Don't come back.  No one wants your meaningless criticisms.
> You are a mental cripple.

Comes down to you were challenged to show where Linux promotes productivity,
efficiency, and error-reduction... and you failed.



-- 
* 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]


#351839

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-25 22:29 +0000
Message-ID<nfm5or02bpl@news3.newsguy.com>
In reply to#351781
On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 10:18:37 -0700, Snit wrote:

>
> {...] promotes productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction
>
> (repeated SIX fucking times)
>

Any problems within GNU/Linux are only the false perceptions of feeble-minded
cretins.

YOU are a feeble-minded cretin.

You blame GNU/Linux for your inability to be productive and efficient.
Ha, ha, ha!  You are but a very poor craftsman who places the blame
for his poor craftsmanship on his tools.

I'm so sorry, but tools have nothing whatsoever to do with competency.

I can be extremely productive and efficient with Microshit Windows and
I can be extremely productive and efficient with GNU/Linux.  The system
makes no difference whatsoever to my productivity and efficiency.

But for you it DOES make a difference, because you are unproductive and
inefficient in spite of ANY system.

I can be extremely productuctive and efficient anywhere but I choose
GNU/Linux exclusively because GNU/Linux is a system that is made
from the ground up for skilled programmers.

You employ Microshit/Apple and you merely BELIEVE that you are productive
and efficient, but a close inspection of your output, and your overall
understanding, would likely reveal otherwise.

You fool no one but yourself.

There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.

THERE ARE _NO_ FUCKING PROBLEMS WITH GNU/LINUX!!!  THE ONLY FUCKING
PROBLEM IS _YOU_!!!

Fucking incompetent cretin.

Now watch as this pathetic fool tries to save face.

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


#351858

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-25 16:28 -0700
Message-ID<D343F629.70E9C%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351839
On 4/25/16, 3:29 PM, in article nfm5or02bpl@news3.newsguy.com, "Fabian
Russell" <fb@zen.info> wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 10:18:37 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>>> That's your primary motivation for computing.  It has to be "cool" or it is
>>> not worthwhile.
>>> 
>> Cool as in promoting productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. I
>> suppose.
>> 
>> Yes, if you can show something that promotes productivity, efficiency, and
>> error-reduction I would love to see it.
>> 
>>> That's why you find fault with GNU/Linux, because the available GUIs are
>>> just not "cool" enough.
>>> 
>> They do not promote productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. Agreed.
>> 
>>> Well, fuck you.
>>> 
>>> There is NO problem with GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.
>>> 
>> If you think there is no problem, then show where it promotes productivity,
>> efficiency, and error-reduction. Would love to see it!
>> 
>>> So get the fuck out of here and take your raging incompetence back to your
>>> fop Apple universe where everything has that acceptable "coolness."
>>> 
>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a lame fucking loser!
>>> 
>>> Cool?  I'd say it's more like intellectual frigidity.
>>> 
>> So to you promoting productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction is somehow
>> a sign of "intellectual frigidity"? WTF?
>> 
>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>> 
>>> Get out.  Beat it.  Scram.  Vamoose.  Hit the road.  Go far away. Don't come
>>> back.  No one wants your meaningless criticisms. You are a mental cripple.
>>> 
>> Comes down to you were challenged to show where Linux promotes productivity,
>> efficiency, and error-reduction... and you failed.
> 
> Any problems within GNU/Linux are only the false perceptions of feeble-minded
> cretins.

If this was true then you would show how it promotes productivity,
efficiency, and error-reduction. Instead you claim, above, that such a
thing, which I note is "cool", is not something you are interested or find
valuable.

And that is, really, where desktop Linux fails - it is made by and for
people who do not care much about productivity, efficiency, and
error-reduction. Until and unless that changes it will never gain much of a
user base.

Below you go off on how you feel bad about yourself and thus have the need
to lash out. Not interested.

> YOU are a feeble-minded cretin.
> 
> You blame GNU/Linux for your inability to be productive and efficient.
> Ha, ha, ha!  You are but a very poor craftsman who places the blame
> for his poor craftsmanship on his tools.
> 
> I'm so sorry, but tools have nothing whatsoever to do with competency.
> 
> I can be extremely productive and efficient with Microshit Windows and
> I can be extremely productive and efficient with GNU/Linux.  The system
> makes no difference whatsoever to my productivity and efficiency.
> 
> But for you it DOES make a difference, because you are unproductive and
> inefficient in spite of ANY system.
> 
> I can be extremely productuctive and efficient anywhere but I choose
> GNU/Linux exclusively because GNU/Linux is a system that is made
> from the ground up for skilled programmers.
> 
> You employ Microshit/Apple and you merely BELIEVE that you are productive
> and efficient, but a close inspection of your output, and your overall
> understanding, would likely reveal otherwise.
> 
> You fool no one but yourself.
> 
> There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.
> 
> There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.
> 
> There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.
> 
> There are NO problems within GNU/Linux.  The only problem is YOU.
> 
> THERE ARE _NO_ FUCKING PROBLEMS WITH GNU/LINUX!!!  THE ONLY FUCKING
> PROBLEM IS _YOU_!!!
> 
> Fucking incompetent cretin.
> 
> Now watch as this pathetic fool tries to save face.
> 



-- 
* 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]


#351869

FromDFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Date2016-04-25 21:27 -0400
Message-ID<nfmfvd$1sn$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#351839
On 4/25/2016 6:29 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:


> I can be extremely productive and efficient with Microshit Windows and
> I can be extremely productive and efficient with GNU/Linux.  The system
> makes no difference whatsoever to my productivity and efficiency.


Lying clown.  You're lost and ignorant on Windows.


Fabian Russell on image compression: "On MS Windows, I wouldn't know 
where to fucking start"

Fabian Russell on text manipulation: "If I had to do this in MS Windows, 
I couldn't do it... couldn't fucking do it...I ain't got no tools"

Fabian Russell on music production: "this is impossible to duplicate on 
MS Windows because that shit system can't handle microtonality."



In fact, Windows can handle ALL such tasks superbly, usually with the 
best software in the world employed.

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


#351871

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-25 18:34 -0700
Message-ID<D34413CE.70EC6%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351869
On 4/25/16, 6:27 PM, in article nfmfvd$1sn$2@dont-email.me, "DFS"
<nospam@dfs.com> wrote:

> On 4/25/2016 6:29 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> 
> 
>> I can be extremely productive and efficient with Microshit Windows and
>> I can be extremely productive and efficient with GNU/Linux.  The system
>> makes no difference whatsoever to my productivity and efficiency.
> 
> 
> Lying clown.  You're lost and ignorant on Windows.
> 
> 
> Fabian Russell on image compression: "On MS Windows, I wouldn't know
> where to fucking start"
> 
> Fabian Russell on text manipulation: "If I had to do this in MS Windows,
> I couldn't do it... couldn't fucking do it...I ain't got no tools"
> 
> Fabian Russell on music production: "this is impossible to duplicate on
> MS Windows because that shit system can't handle microtonality."
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Windows can handle ALL such tasks superbly, usually with the
> best software in the world employed.

He claims to be efficient but has yet to show any evidence.

I, on the other hand, have been happy to.

* 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>.

* Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl
is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one:
<https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had
selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the
like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he
and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.

So far no other OS / environment has been shown to be able to do comparable
work.


-- 
* 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]


#351921

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-26 09:20 +0000
Message-ID<nfnbt61tba@news7.newsguy.com>
In reply to#351871
On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:34:54 -0700, Snit wrote:

> 
> He claims to be efficient but has yet to show any evidence.
> 
> I, on the other hand, have been happy to.
> 
> [snip hackneyed and demented crap]
>

Whew!  This motherfucker is seriously demented!

He requires that crutch, no, that wheelchair known as Dreamweaver
in order to make web sites.  If he didn't have Dreamweaver
he couldn't do a damned fucking thing.

Then, because GNU/Linux doesn't have Dreamweaver, he castigates
GNU/Linux for being an inferior desktop environment.

This guy is seriously INCOMPETENT.

On those infrequent occasions when I am called upon to build
a web site I will code the whole thing by hand.  That's right,
I do it all with hand-crafted HTML.

I could use a plain text editor but I choose to use the best
tag editor and that is Bluefish:

http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/index.html

The point is that this motherfucking dumb fuck could NEVER
use Bluefish because THAT would require COMPETENCE.  He'd
just sit and stare at the screen and invent excuses about
why he is not stupid, and those excuses would all blame
GNU/Linux for not providing an efficient desktop.

Fuck you, loser.

The fucking cretin needs MAJOR HELP or he can do nothing,
and because GNU/Linux fails to provide that MAJOR HELP
he moans and whimpers like a lost child while casting
meaningless aspersions about desktop inefficiency.

Fuck you, cretin.

You can only blame your pathetic self for your SERIOUS
INCOMPETENCE.







> * 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>.
> 
> * Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl
> is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one:
> <https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had
> selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the
> like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he
> and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.
> 
> So far no other OS / environment has been shown to be able to do comparable
> work.

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


#351945

FromMarek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com>
Date2016-04-26 07:05 -0700
Message-ID<l8CdnYiXd65Z6ILKnZ2dnUU7-budnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#351921
On 2016-04-26, Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
> He requires that crutch, no, that wheelchair known as Dreamweaver
> in order to make web sites.  If he didn't have Dreamweaver
> he couldn't do a damned fucking thing.
>
> Then, because GNU/Linux doesn't have Dreamweaver, he castigates
> GNU/Linux for being an inferior desktop environment.
>
> This guy is seriously INCOMPETENT.

Just look at his site. I wouldn't be hiring him at all. You'd think his
own site would show off his skills. Oh wait... That's the problem. His
site does show off the extent of his skills. I think the 90s called,
they want their design back. Looks like something someone used to do in
PageMill 1.0. 

Yeah, he does need DreamWeaver. Your comment hits the nail right on the
head, five by five. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

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


#352008

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-04-26 11:54 -0700
Message-ID<D3450759.70FFC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#351945
On 4/26/16, 7:05 AM, in article
l8CdnYiXd65Z6ILKnZ2dnUU7-budnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny"
<marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:

> On 2016-04-26, Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> wrote:
>> He requires that crutch, no, that wheelchair known as Dreamweaver
>> in order to make web sites.  If he didn't have Dreamweaver
>> he couldn't do a damned fucking thing.
>> 
>> Then, because GNU/Linux doesn't have Dreamweaver, he castigates
>> GNU/Linux for being an inferior desktop environment.
>> 
>> This guy is seriously INCOMPETENT.
> 
> Just look at his site. I wouldn't be hiring him at all. You'd think his
> own site would show off his skills. Oh wait... That's the problem. His
> site does show off the extent of his skills. I think the 90s called,
> they want their design back. Looks like something someone used to do in
> PageMill 1.0. 

Irrelevant and unsupported accusation... with a focus on my personal /
professional life to avoid speaking of Linux and technology.
 
> Yeah, he does need DreamWeaver. Your comment hits the nail right on the
> head, five by five.

Unsupported accusation.

-- 
* 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]


#352000

FromDFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Date2016-04-26 13:24 -0400
Message-ID<nfo82o$m95$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#351921
On 4/26/2016 5:20 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:34:54 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>>
>> He claims to be efficient but has yet to show any evidence.
>>
>> I, on the other hand, have been happy to.
>>
>> [snip hackneyed and demented crap]
>>
>
> Whew!  This motherfucker is seriously demented!
>
> This guy is seriously INCOMPETENT.
>
> Fuck you, loser.
>
> Fuck you, cretin.
>
> You can only blame your pathetic self for your SERIOUS
> INCOMPETENCE.


JHC!  You are a sick SOB who clearly has no woman in his life.

Does nobody get credit for anything unless it's the language/app/code 
you approve of?

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


#352051

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-26 22:30 +0000
Message-ID<nfoq6k0qok@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#352000
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 13:24:53 -0400, DFS wrote:

> 
> Does nobody get credit for anything unless it's the language/app/code 
> you approve of?
>

That statement is completely non sequitur (as expected from a dumb-fuck idiot).

Also, it is very bad grammar to terminate a sentence with a fucking preposition
(but, again, completely expected from a dumb-fuck idiot).

But that motherfucker makes me sick.  He tries to blame his own inborn incompetence
on some illusory shortcomings of GNU/Linux.

HE can't be productive.  HE can't be efficient.  HE can't be error-free.
Therefore, according to his fucked up perceptions, it must be GNU/Linux that
is responsible for HIS failures.  

Oh yeah.  If were not for the poorly designed and inadequate GNU/Linux
he could be doing wonderful, incredible, and magnificent things.

Pfffffffft!  What a retarded jerk!  Who does he think he can convince?

But the significance is that he speaks for a lot of people who 
sub-consciously all share the same twisted belief.

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


#352059

FromFabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Date2016-04-26 22:45 +0000
Message-ID<nfor1l1qok@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#352000
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 13:24:53 -0400, DFS wrote:

> 
> Does nobody get credit for anything unless it's the language/app/code 
> you approve of?
>

In the beginning there was C, and it was good.  There was absolutely
no need for anything else.

Then some lazy ass dumb fucks had the "brilliant" idea of creating
languages composed of abbreviations and condensations and other things
that would take the toil and drudgery out of C programming.

The consequence is the hodgepodge of scripting languages that confronts
us today, and which attract hordes of lazy ass dumb-fuck incompetent 
"programmers" that aren't really programmers but like to see themselves
as programmers.

Ironically, all such languages employ a C engine.  Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

They should have just kept it C.

It is C alone that separates the REAL MEN from the lazy ass dumb fucks.

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


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

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


csiph-web