Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #680118 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-13 19:35 -0500 |
| Last post | 2024-12-14 13:01 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 131 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 19:35 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 00:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 20:05 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 06:06 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 01:18 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 08:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 08:23 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-15 07:07 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 10:23 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 07:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 15:44 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 12:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-15 07:23 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 10:12 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:27 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 10:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:13 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 08:57 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:30 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 18:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-18 06:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 08:50 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-19 02:04 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 08:45 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-19 19:53 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 14:34 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 17:15 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 18:28 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 20:08 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-20 01:16 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:37 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:31 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:42 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 21:03 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:56 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:58 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:28 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:39 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:39 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:45 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-21 09:45 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2024-12-20 20:37 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 16:51 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2024-12-20 21:57 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 17:43 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-21 07:25 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 22:42 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-21 18:19 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-21 18:26 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-22 00:24 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 07:12 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 06:31 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 11:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 09:49 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 13:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-27 17:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-21 18:46 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-22 05:41 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 07:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 06:44 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 11:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-22 09:24 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 11:19 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-23 06:18 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 12:03 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-23 19:14 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-27 17:16 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 11:08 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-20 01:19 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:54 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 17:14 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:09 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:09 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:03 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 09:00 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:52 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:54 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 19:36 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:05 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 09:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 19:58 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-17 20:22 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:05 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:06 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 08:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:51 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:53 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 19:43 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 20:01 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:02 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 20:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 20:04 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 08:47 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-14 22:16 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 08:49 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-15 22:24 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 20:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:29 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 11:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:19 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 09:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:59 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-17 20:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:03 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 20:17 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 05:33 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 07:57 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 07:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 20:01 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 01:53 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-20 09:29 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:28 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 11:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:15 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 08:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:45 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 18:03 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:20 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-18 16:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 19:46 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2024-12-20 01:35 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:06 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 07:51 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 15:58 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 13:01 -0500
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-18 06:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjtodv$262og$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680650 |
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>. And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-18 08:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sqA8P.78622$oR74.44741@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #680681 |
Le 2024-12-18 à 01:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : > On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > >> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. > > Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that > <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>. > And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too. Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively on ARM and whichever hasn't been converted runs almost as well as the native stuff. The PC side has a ton of promises that it will deliver something better in the future than what Apple sells _today_. Those promises don't produce the hope in me that they did twenty years ago because I've been disappointed a number of times. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 02:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjvv02$2i8ut$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680698 |
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:50:15 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > Le 2024-12-18 à 01:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : > >> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. >> >> Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that >> <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>. >> And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too. > > Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively on > ARM ... Sure, if Apple stuff is sufficient for you. Linux stuff runs natively on ARM and a bunch of other architectures, as well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 08:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <csV8P.8806$62H.425@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #680753 |
Le 2024-12-18 à 21:04, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : > On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:50:15 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > >> Le 2024-12-18 à 01:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : >> >>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> >>>> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. >>> >>> Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that >>> <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>. >>> And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too. >> >> Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively on >> ARM ... > > Sure, if Apple stuff is sufficient for you. Linux stuff runs natively > on ARM and a bunch of other architectures, as well. It does, but Linux's stuff is already hard to sell on x86-64 so you can imagine how alluring it is on ARM. Nevertheless, if I were using an ARM-based PC at the moment, I would be using Linux on it and watching to see if Microsoft _eventually_ gets its act together. I doubt that it ever will which is why I'm pushing people to consider Apple if ARM is what they're looking for. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 19:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk1tk8$30e9m$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680780 |
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 08:45:43 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > Le 2024-12-18 à 21:04, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : > >> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:50:15 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively >>> on ARM ... >> >> Sure, if Apple stuff is sufficient for you. Linux stuff runs natively >> on ARM and a bunch of other architectures, as well. > > It does, but Linux's stuff is already hard to sell on x86-64 so you can > imagine how alluring it is on ARM. Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 14:34 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <cm09mjd03uh4022c3brti79savd0higr5a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #680807 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. -- 'You (the lame Linux "community") have always decided on one "best distro".' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 17:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sW09P.18859$DPl.18645@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #680811 |
Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. > > Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 18:28 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gde9mjtr9m6apqfm14dg9ck2jgmjgu2qtv@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #680822 |
CrudeSausage wrote: >Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >> >> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. > >They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? -- "two shakes of Liarmutt's pee-pee." - "Hadron"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 20:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ur39P.31043$DYF8.12842@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #680830 |
Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : > CrudeSausage wrote: > >> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>> >>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >> >> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. > > So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for such hardware? -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk2ghm$33uu1$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680834 |
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:08:03 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for > such hardware? There are no profits to be made in operating systems any more, for any hardware. You see this in the deteriorating quality of Microsoft Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 08:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Lqe9P.50586$bYV2.46235@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #680837 |
Le 2024-12-19 à 20:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : > On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:08:03 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: > >> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >> such hardware? > > There are no profits to be made in operating systems any more, for any > hardware. You see this in the deteriorating quality of Microsoft Windows. Except that 11 is better than 10 and 10, depending on who you ask, is better than 8.1. No one will say that they preferred 8.1 over 7 but it was an improvement for anyone who had a touchscreen. Similarly, 7 was more stable than Vista. The only Windows versions that are definitely worse than their predecessors are Millennium Edition and Vista, but Vista was actually superior to XP in a number of ways that were ignored by people unsatisfied by its poor performance on modest hardware. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 18:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk4d6i$3ij9h$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680869 |
On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-19 à 20:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : >> On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:08:03 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >>> such hardware? >> >> There are no profits to be made in operating systems any more, for any >> hardware. You see this in the deteriorating quality of Microsoft Windows. > > Except that 11 is better than 10 and 10, depending on who you ask, is > better than 8.1. No one will say that they preferred 8.1 over 7 but it > was an improvement for anyone who had a touchscreen. Similarly, 7 was > more stable than Vista. The only Windows versions that are definitely > worse than their predecessors are Millennium Edition and Vista, but > Vista was actually superior to XP in a number of ways that were ignored > by people unsatisfied by its poor performance on modest hardware. Sure 11 is "better," if you like even more advertising in your OS and AI horse crap. (But I admit it does updates slightly better... only a couple hours instead of four or five.) And you're forgetting Windows 8, which was definitely worse than 7 (and almost completely ignored by Windows users). Windows 8.1 was basically Windows 10. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 13:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nUi9P.59286$%aWb.22337@fx18.iad> |
| In reply to | #680898 |
Le 2024-12-20 à 13:31, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-19 à 20:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : >>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:08:03 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> >>>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >>>> such hardware? >>> >>> There are no profits to be made in operating systems any more, for any >>> hardware. You see this in the deteriorating quality of Microsoft Windows. >> >> Except that 11 is better than 10 and 10, depending on who you ask, is >> better than 8.1. No one will say that they preferred 8.1 over 7 but it >> was an improvement for anyone who had a touchscreen. Similarly, 7 was >> more stable than Vista. The only Windows versions that are definitely >> worse than their predecessors are Millennium Edition and Vista, but >> Vista was actually superior to XP in a number of ways that were ignored >> by people unsatisfied by its poor performance on modest hardware. > > Sure 11 is "better," if you like even more advertising in your OS and AI > horse crap. (But I admit it does updates slightly better... only a couple > hours instead of four or five.) Perhaps there is lots of advertising in Windows 11 if you are in the United States, but I don't see anything but the weather and news items here. > And you're forgetting Windows 8, which was definitely worse than 7 (and > almost completely ignored by Windows users). Windows 8.1 was basically > Windows 10. Windows 8.1 was much snappier than 10 in everyday use but just as bad with updates. 8 only sucked at first if you had no idea where the Start button went and that it was replaced by simply navigating to the bottom-left corner. Once you got that out of the way, it was fine. However, it gave too much importance to the modern apps. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-19 21:03 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <min9mjtq8ommoq5h1pjca0ibip3le65drd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #680834 |
CrudeSausage wrote: >>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>> >>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >> >> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? > >Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >such hardware? Err... It's due to the efficiency of FOSS, that there isn't any. Sheesh.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 05:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk30up$3a4kl$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680834 |
On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : >> CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>> >>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>>> >>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>> >>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >> >> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? > > Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for > such hardware? Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not software. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 08:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <VJe9P.31194$0O61.8363@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #680856 |
Le 2024-12-20 à 00:56, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : >>> CrudeSausage wrote: >>> >>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>>>> >>>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>>> >>>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >>> >>> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? >> >> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >> such hardware? > > Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of > money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not > software. And this is why GNOME is a few months away from going bankrupt as is Mozilla after Google's legal loss. This is also why KDE nags you for donations when you first use the desktop environment. Say what you will about open-source users, but they're pretty bad at giving money to the organizations that produce the software they use. This is also why the most talented programmers working on open-source eventually give up and produce software that they can sell. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 18:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk4d0b$3ij9h$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680876 |
On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-20 à 00:56, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit :
>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit :
>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for
>>>>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS.
>>>>>
>>>>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world
>>>>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form.
>>>>
>>>> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi?
>>>
>>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for
>>> such hardware?
>>
>> Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of
>> money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not
>> software.
>
> And this is why GNOME is a few months away from going bankrupt as is
> Mozilla after Google's legal loss. This is also why KDE nags you for
> donations when you first use the desktop environment. Say what you will
> about open-source users, but they're pretty bad at giving money to the
> organizations that produce the software they use. This is also why the
> most talented programmers working on open-source eventually give up and
> produce software that they can sell.
A quick lookup on the GNOME Foundation (not GNOME's) supposed upcoming
bankruptcy. And exchange from two posters on Reddit...
Who started this fake news saying that GNOME would "go bankrupt"? I'm
really curious. We're talking about a non-profit organization.
Lunduke. It's always f-ing Lunduke.
Hope someone sues his ass one day for this type of shit.
I'm guessing that the Lunduke moron was your "source" (so to speak).
--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 13:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <iRi9P.34274$Uup4.13841@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #680897 |
Le 2024-12-20 à 13:28, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-20 à 00:56, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : >>>>> CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>>>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>>>>> >>>>>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>>>>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >>>>> >>>>> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? >>>> >>>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >>>> such hardware? >>> >>> Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of >>> money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not >>> software. >> >> And this is why GNOME is a few months away from going bankrupt as is >> Mozilla after Google's legal loss. This is also why KDE nags you for >> donations when you first use the desktop environment. Say what you will >> about open-source users, but they're pretty bad at giving money to the >> organizations that produce the software they use. This is also why the >> most talented programmers working on open-source eventually give up and >> produce software that they can sell. > > A quick lookup on the GNOME Foundation (not GNOME's) supposed upcoming > bankruptcy. And exchange from two posters on Reddit... > > Who started this fake news saying that GNOME would "go bankrupt"? I'm > really curious. We're talking about a non-profit organization. > > Lunduke. It's always f-ing Lunduke. > > Hope someone sues his ass one day for this type of shit. > > I'm guessing that the Lunduke moron was your "source" (so to speak). It was indeed Lunduke, but he's basing his report on GNOME's own numbers. I hope that you'll apologize when it indeed goes bankrupt not too long from now. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-21 07:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vk5rbh$3ucu6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680899 |
On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-20 à 13:28, RonB a écrit : >> On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> Le 2024-12-20 à 00:56, RonB a écrit : >>>> On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : >>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>>>>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>>>>>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >>>>>> >>>>>> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? >>>>> >>>>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >>>>> such hardware? >>>> >>>> Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of >>>> money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not >>>> software. >>> >>> And this is why GNOME is a few months away from going bankrupt as is >>> Mozilla after Google's legal loss. This is also why KDE nags you for >>> donations when you first use the desktop environment. Say what you will >>> about open-source users, but they're pretty bad at giving money to the >>> organizations that produce the software they use. This is also why the >>> most talented programmers working on open-source eventually give up and >>> produce software that they can sell. >> >> A quick lookup on the GNOME Foundation (not GNOME's) supposed upcoming >> bankruptcy. And exchange from two posters on Reddit... >> >> Who started this fake news saying that GNOME would "go bankrupt"? I'm >> really curious. We're talking about a non-profit organization. >> >> Lunduke. It's always f-ing Lunduke. >> >> Hope someone sues his ass one day for this type of shit. >> >> I'm guessing that the Lunduke moron was your "source" (so to speak). > > It was indeed Lunduke, but he's basing his report on GNOME's own > numbers. I hope that you'll apologize when it indeed goes bankrupt not > too long from now. I won't be holding my breath. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-20 13:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <s5j9P.23495$DPl.13075@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #680897 |
Le 2024-12-20 à 13:28, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-20 à 00:56, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 19:28, chrisv a écrit : >>>>> CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Le 2024-12-19 à 15:34, chrisv a écrit : >>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Linux is the only platform that offers a full suite of software native for >>>>>>>> both ARM and x86 (both 32- and 64-bit). Nobody else does. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Payware vendors can't compete with the efficiency of FOSS. >>>>>> >>>>>> They can: they eventually implement features that the open-source world >>>>>> will copy and implement later in a more rudimentary form. >>>>> >>>>> So where's the payware OS and software for, say, Raspbarry Pi? >>>> >>>> Where are the profits in producing an operating system and software for >>>> such hardware? >>> >>> Open source is not profit driven. The Raspberry Pi computers make a lot of >>> money for small start-up companies. But they're making hardware, not >>> software. >> >> And this is why GNOME is a few months away from going bankrupt as is >> Mozilla after Google's legal loss. This is also why KDE nags you for >> donations when you first use the desktop environment. Say what you will >> about open-source users, but they're pretty bad at giving money to the >> organizations that produce the software they use. This is also why the >> most talented programmers working on open-source eventually give up and >> produce software that they can sell. > > A quick lookup on the GNOME Foundation (not GNOME's) supposed upcoming > bankruptcy. And exchange from two posters on Reddit... > > Who started this fake news saying that GNOME would "go bankrupt"? I'm > really curious. We're talking about a non-profit organization. > > Lunduke. It's always f-ing Lunduke. > > Hope someone sues his ass one day for this type of shit. > > I'm guessing that the Lunduke moron was your "source" (so to speak). I just want to add that Lunduke is currently hated by the woke idiots running Linux because he tells the truth. He's the one who revealed Red Hat and IBM's discriminatoty practises, he's also the one who revealed how Mozilla is turning into its own woke organization. Everyone is refusing to speak about the elephant in the room but he's pointing it out. Feel free to read his entire article with the numbers GNOME itself has provided and show where he is wrong, especially now that GNOME laid off 33% of its staff. Face it: you're being played by the same bearded men who are telling you they're women. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web