Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #320962 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-15 19:04 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-09-16 15:11 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 142 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 19:04 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 19:48 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-15 20:57 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 01:04 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 01:02 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 20:11 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 01:18 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 20:26 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 12:20 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-16 10:12 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 10:43 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:25 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-16 21:50 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 22:16 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-16 22:27 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 22:35 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-16 23:08 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 23:18 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-16 23:35 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-16 18:46 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 00:22 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 00:44 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 18:01 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-17 09:36 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-17 14:06 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:39 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-17 08:08 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:39 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:53 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:41 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-18 07:52 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 07:57 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 17:56 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 09:11 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-18 12:39 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 11:17 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-18 12:46 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 10:26 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 15:24 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-18 08:42 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 16:04 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 08:01 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 08:05 -0700
Peter Köhlmann thinks UNIX did not exist before OS X Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:49 -0700
Snit Michael Glasser lying his ass off (again) Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-17 21:47 +0200
Re: Snit Michael Glasser lying his ass off (again) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:04 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 11:09 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-17 13:13 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:07 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 14:03 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:25 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-17 08:02 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 13:45 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:14 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 17:33 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:17 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 20:50 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-17 09:44 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:52 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-17 21:50 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:04 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 22:49 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 16:05 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 19:25 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 17:33 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:23 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:43 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-17 08:09 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 13:50 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:07 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-17 22:03 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 17:24 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-17 01:40 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-16 18:46 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 00:45 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 00:48 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 23:55 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:36 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:44 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 19:01 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 00:05 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 20:36 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 18:44 -0700
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:55 +0000
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 18:00 +0000
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-18 13:56 -0500
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 19:11 +0000
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 13:13 -0700
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 20:42 +0000
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 13:59 -0700
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 21:07 +0000
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-09-18 15:47 -0600
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-18 17:17 -0700
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 17:40 -0700
Re: An example of how/why bitter iCultists fail! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 17:24 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-18 20:55 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-18 07:49 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 13:09 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-18 09:26 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-18 10:01 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:42 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:58 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 18:02 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 23:21 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:34 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 19:04 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-16 19:44 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-16 18:48 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:32 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 20:53 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-17 08:45 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:51 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 11:04 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:55 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-17 08:40 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:29 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-17 12:35 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-17 18:51 +0200
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:05 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:05 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 17:22 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-17 06:49 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:05 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-17 07:48 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 15:35 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-17 12:32 -0400
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-17 10:42 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 19:54 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:09 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 19:48 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-17 14:59 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 22:15 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 22:19 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-17 22:33 +0000
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 15:54 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 15:55 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-17 19:20 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 15:52 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 19:24 -0500
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:06 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:07 -0700
Re: An example of how/why commercial linux desktop fails! JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-16 15:11 -0500
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 13:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2206AF8.5C397%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #321347 |
On 9/17/15, 12:50 PM, in article mtf5ee$st2$2@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > Snit wrote: > >> On 9/17/15, 12:44 AM, in article mtdqsp$ln8$1@dont-email.me, "Peter >> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >> >> ... >>>> OS X does support case sensitive file systems... it is not the norm for >>>> it, though. Thankfully. I am happy Apple is ahead of other UNIX flavors >>>> there. >>> >>> It does *NOT* work with case sensitive FS. >> >> <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201711> >> >> Well that was easy to prove you wrong! > > Problem is: You did not. Not that you understand. I can accept that. > Try to *install* *OSX* on a case-sensitive volume. Or we can stick to the topic of it working with such a file system in general! ... -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 22:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtfg2k$bem$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #321347 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:50:25 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > Problem is: You did not. > Try to *install* *OSX* on a case-sensitive volume. You will fail > miserably OSX can work with such a volume, but not run from such a > volume. > > Big difference. And it shows again that you can't read at all So "Snit" is as much of an "expert" in OSX as he is in Linux, eh? -- Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 16:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2209539.5C3D4%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #321368 |
On 9/17/15, 3:49 PM, in article mtfg2k$bem$1@dont-email.me, "ronb"
<ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:50:25 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>> Problem is: You did not.
>> Try to *install* *OSX* on a case-sensitive volume. You will fail
>> miserably OSX can work with such a volume, but not run from such a
>> volume.
>>
>> Big difference. And it shows again that you can't read at all
>
> So "Snit" is as much of an "expert" in OSX as he is in Linux, eh?
I *clearly* know more than Peter... who thought that OS X did not support
case sensitive file systems and even claimed it was impossible to use UNIX
before OS X was released.
Peter Köhlmann:
-----
| I am one of the few people who literally started working with
| UNIX, PCs, and Macs all on the same day (sometime in Sept.
| 1987).
Pull the other one. At that time there was no OSX. That came 14
years later So you had no "Unix" to play with...
-----
Peter shows he thought UNIX did not exist before Apple released OS X!
In COLA in 1995 I spoke of my UNIX use: <https://goo.gl/TCRJCd>.
Message-ID: mtdqe5$isu$1@dont-email.me
<https://goo.gl/sXbJLw>
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 19:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mtflm4$3mu$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #321347 |
On 9/17/2015 2:50 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > Snit wrote: > >> On 9/17/15, 12:44 AM, in article mtdqsp$ln8$1@dont-email.me, "Peter >> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >> >> ... >>>> OS X does support case sensitive file systems... it is not the norm for >>>> it, though. Thankfully. I am happy Apple is ahead of other UNIX flavors >>>> there. >>> >>> It does *NOT* work with case sensitive FS. >> >> <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201711> >> >> Well that was easy to prove you wrong! > > Problem is: You did not. > Try to *install* *OSX* on a case-sensitive volume. You will fail miserably > OSX can work with such a volume, but not run from such a volume. > > Big difference. And it shows again that you can't read at all "Lloyd" likes him though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 17:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D220A9FC.5C3FA%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #321391 |
On 9/17/15, 5:25 PM, in article mtflm4$3mu$2@news.albasani.net, "Nobody" <nobody@invalid.com> wrote: > On 9/17/2015 2:50 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >> Snit wrote: >> >>> On 9/17/15, 12:44 AM, in article mtdqsp$ln8$1@dont-email.me, "Peter >>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>>>> OS X does support case sensitive file systems... it is not the norm for >>>>> it, though. Thankfully. I am happy Apple is ahead of other UNIX flavors >>>>> there. >>>> >>>> It does *NOT* work with case sensitive FS. >>> >>> <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201711> >>> >>> Well that was easy to prove you wrong! >> >> Problem is: You did not. >> Try to *install* *OSX* on a case-sensitive volume. You will fail miserably >> OSX can work with such a volume, but not run from such a volume. >> >> Big difference. And it shows again that you can't read at all > > "Lloyd" likes him though. > Ah, that explains his name calling and insults. Thanks for the insight! -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 14:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfnmgj83.sjdfi@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #321221 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 9/16/15, 8:17 PM, in article afp11.903f@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>> On 9/16/15, 5:22 PM, in article adfmn8v.dj@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> >>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>>> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> Are you really that dumb? >>>>>> >>>>>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android and >>>>> Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable about the >>>>> comparisons of the various OS's. >>>> >>>> Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed >>>> of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple >>>> versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows >>>> Server ever made. I've got some old SCO Open Server and BeOS disks lying >>>> around somewhere too. Maybe I'll VM them one day. I am quite familiar >>>> with the different computing environments that are now (and have been) >>>> available. I've used Macs at work and *hated* them, because I like Unix >>>> and OS X just doesn't cut it as a Unix. >> >>> It is a UNIX. >> >> T minus 9 days and counting... >> >>> It does have a different focus than most other flavors of >>> UNIX. If you come to it expecting it to be just like others UNIX systems you >>> will be in for a shock. >> >> Right. OS X doesn't cut it as a Unix. I think I said that. > It does cut it as a UNIX. And even if the new version is never certified it > will still be UNIX-like. It's not Unix-like now. It's Unix-unalike. The trademark is all they can cling to. When that is gone, it's goodnight irene. >>>> I've been using Linux for about 20 years now, and I haven't found a reason >>>> not to like it yet. >>>> >>> Use what you like. >>> >> I do. So nice of you to approve. >> >>>> So if you come from a Windows/Mack environment and dabble with Linux a >>>> little and then all you do is whine about how it's not dumbed down enough >>>> for you, then yeah, you're a Mactard. >>>> >>> First: Mack makes trucks and the like, not computers. >>> >> You could have just said, "Ouch!" > I prefer to stay on topic. Trucks are not the topic. >>> Second, if you are going to claim something is "dumbed down", speak of tasks >>> it does not do as well. There are some for OS X - no doubt... but you show no >>> signs of understanding what they are. >>> >> OS X doesn't do case-sensitive file systems -- pretty much the norm for any >> real Unix -- very well at all. > OS X does support case sensitive file systems... If you want to call broken backups and software installations "support", sure. > it is not the norm for it, > though. Thankfully. I am happy Apple is ahead of other UNIX flavors there. >> It's also apparently horrible with X11 -- > Does not ship with it and no use for most users. Why would any but a tiny > fraction of users care about X11? And X11 is not a part of UNIX. Unix users would expect it to work properly. It does not. Therefore, FAIL. >> again, something expected to work under a Unix just utterly fails on OS X. > Expected by whom? Everybody who uses Unix. > Not the openfoundation, clearly. >> Both of these failures are design decisions made so as not to "confuse" the >> poor dumb Mactard. That is called "dumbing down" the system. > What failures? What tasks are not being done as well. Basically, anything not flyer-related is a massive failure for OS X.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 10:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D22049E0.5C30A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #321287 |
On 9/17/15, 7:23 AM, in article sfnmgj83.sjdfi@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> On 9/16/15, 8:17 PM, in article afp11.903f@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>> On 9/16/15, 5:22 PM, in article adfmn8v.dj@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>>>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> Are you really that dumb? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android and >>>>>> Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable about the >>>>>> comparisons of the various OS's. >>>>> >>>>> Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed >>>>> of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple >>>>> versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows >>>>> Server ever made. I've got some old SCO Open Server and BeOS disks lying >>>>> around somewhere too. Maybe I'll VM them one day. I am quite familiar >>>>> with the different computing environments that are now (and have been) >>>>> available. I've used Macs at work and *hated* them, because I like Unix >>>>> and OS X just doesn't cut it as a Unix. >>> >>>> It is a UNIX. >>> >>> T minus 9 days and counting... >>> >>>> It does have a different focus than most other flavors of >>>> UNIX. If you come to it expecting it to be just like others UNIX systems >>>> you >>>> will be in for a shock. >>> >>> Right. OS X doesn't cut it as a Unix. I think I said that. > >> It does cut it as a UNIX. And even if the new version is never certified it >> will still be UNIX-like. > > It's not Unix-like now. It's Unix-unalike. The trademark is all they > can cling to. When that is gone, it's goodnight irene. > >>>>> I've been using Linux for about 20 years now, and I haven't found a reason >>>>> not to like it yet. >>>>> >>>> Use what you like. >>>> >>> I do. So nice of you to approve. >>> >>>>> So if you come from a Windows/Mack environment and dabble with Linux a >>>>> little and then all you do is whine about how it's not dumbed down enough >>>>> for you, then yeah, you're a Mactard. >>>>> >>>> First: Mack makes trucks and the like, not computers. >>>> >>> You could have just said, "Ouch!" > >> I prefer to stay on topic. > > Trucks are not the topic. > >>>> Second, if you are going to claim something is "dumbed down", speak of >>>> tasks >>>> it does not do as well. There are some for OS X - no doubt... but you show >>>> no >>>> signs of understanding what they are. >>>> >>> OS X doesn't do case-sensitive file systems -- pretty much the norm for any >>> real Unix -- very well at all. > >> OS X does support case sensitive file systems... > > If you want to call broken backups and software installations "support", sure. > >> it is not the norm for it, >> though. Thankfully. I am happy Apple is ahead of other UNIX flavors there. > >>> It's also apparently horrible with X11 -- > >> Does not ship with it and no use for most users. Why would any but a tiny >> fraction of users care about X11? And X11 is not a part of UNIX. > > Unix users would expect it to work properly. It does not. Therefore, FAIL. > >>> again, something expected to work under a Unix just utterly fails on OS X. > >> Expected by whom? > > Everybody who uses Unix. > >> Not the openfoundation, clearly. > >>> Both of these failures are design decisions made so as not to "confuse" the >>> poor dumb Mactard. That is called "dumbing down" the system. > >> What failures? What tasks are not being done as well. > > Basically, anything not flyer-related is a massive failure for OS X. > OS X is a certified UNIX. Even if Apple opts to not certify the next version it will still be UNIX-like. As far as trucks, YOU are the one who brought up Mack: <http://www.macktrucks.com>. As far as the people who use UNIX, the vast majority are using OS X! -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 08:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mteaeo$dn0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #321200 |
On 9/16/2015 8:22 PM, owl wrote: > Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>>> Are you really that dumb? >>> >>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>> >>> >> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android and >> Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable about the >> comparisons of the various OS's. > > Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed > of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple > versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows > Server ever made. geeeekkkkk!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 13:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sdfnmc93.jv@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #321248 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 9/16/2015 8:22 PM, owl wrote: >> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>>>> Are you really that dumb? >>>> >>>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>>> >>>> >>> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android and >>> Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable about the >>> comparisons of the various OS's. >> >> Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed >> of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple >> versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows >> Server ever made. > geeeekkkkk!!!! Look, I usually only have about seven or eight of them running at any given time, so cut me some slack.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 17:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d60aajFga3eU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #321285 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:50:09 +0000, owl wrote: > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> On 9/16/2015 8:22 PM, owl wrote: >>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Are you really that dumb? >>>>> >>>>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android >>>> and Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable >>>> about the comparisons of the various OS's. >>> >>> Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed >>> of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple >>> versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows >>> Server ever made. > > >> geeeekkkkk!!!! > > Look, I usually only have about seven or eight of them running at any > given time, so cut me some slack. And 7 or 8 of them somehow doesn't make you a bit geeky? :) I have a few different ones running myself... -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 22:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtfrb8$67v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #321285 |
On 9/17/2015 9:50 AM, owl wrote: > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> On 9/16/2015 8:22 PM, owl wrote: >>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> wrote: >>>> On 16 Sep 2015 23:35, owl wrote: >>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>>> Are you really that dumb? >>>>> >>>>> That's pretty bold, coming from a Mactard. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> You mean a 'mactard' that uses OSX, Linux, Windows 8/10, iOS, Android and >>>> Windows Phone? I'd say that makes me much more knowledgeable about the >>>> comparisons of the various OS's. >>> >>> Lloyd, I have currently about 70 different virtual machines composed >>> of various OSes including NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, multiple >>> versions of Linux and practically every version of Windows and Windows >>> Server ever made. > > >> geeeekkkkk!!!! > > Look, I usually only have about seven or eight of them running at any given > time, so cut me some slack. Meaning you're probably running 32GB of memory. geeeekkkkk!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 17:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D21F565A.5BC56%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #321192 |
On 9/16/15, 4:35 PM, in article adfnbm.kcv9@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> That's got to be the most ignorant of questions. For Apple to take over >> the desktop market, they would have had to cover all segments. From the >> lowest end to the highest. They specifically chose to take the premium >> computer market, offering no el-cheapos at all. > > All computers are Chinese crap. Apple has a popular logo and some brainwashed > hipster users. That's it. > >> And in that they have >> been highly successful by any metric you choose to apply. > >> Since Apple's goal was NEVER to take the desktop market in full, they >> couldn't fail in doing so. > > Apparently you think Linux has some goal to "take over the desktop" though. > Linux has millions of happy users. Where it fails is when it tries to > expand to include "everybody" at the expense of those happy users. We > don't *want* Linux to be like Windows or Mack. Get it? If not, you're > free to start Lloydix and make your mark on distrowatch. It is a shame more Linux users do not push to have desktop Linux improve in productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. Imagine if they did how great it would be and how it would become true competition to MS and Apple. I advocate for that because I am a true Linux advocate. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 01:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20150917014024.27a4f810@maxa-pc> |
| In reply to | #321188 |
On 16 Sep 2015 23:18:39 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:08:15 +0000, owl wrote: > > > Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:27:51 +0000, owl wrote: > > > >>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:50:50 +0000, owl wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:12:01 -0500, chrisv wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Nobody wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>"Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth also replied > >>>>>>>>matter-of-factly. ÃÂÃÂAs David said, we learned that the > >>>>>>>>Deb based package system > >>>> wasnÃÂÃÂt > >>>>>>>>workable for a store. The work on Ubuntu phone led us to > >>>>>>>>snappy, where we put the developer of a typical app almost > >>>>>>>>completely in control of publication.ÃÂÃÂ" > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It's very puzzling, very cult-like, that assholes like "Lloyd" > >>>>>>> take pleasure in the "failure" of such a small business, an > >>>>>>> alternative product with little apparent significance. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> No pleasure taken, just noting that the failures exist and > >>>>>> that you linux loonies are a big part of that problem. How > >>>>>> many of you bought software in their software center? > >>>>> > >>>>> Never heard of it. What were they selling? > >>>>> > >>>> Software obviously. Try to keep up! :) > >>> > >>> Well there's teh problem right there. Trying to *sell* software. > >>> LOL. What were they thinking? Seriously, what software were they > >>> selling? I've bought software in the past. $thousands and > >>> $thousands worth over the years. I'd say at least two thousand > >>> of that was Linux-related. Hell, I just paid a couple hundred > >>> for vmware 11, and 12 is out now i believe. I'll probably > >>> upgrade in the near future. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>> Hell, how many of you bought and/or donated to > >>>>>> Canonical to help ensure the success of a small business that > >>>>>> is trying to get Linux on the desktop to be a viable and > >>>>>> profitable product? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Unity sucks. Why give those fuckers money? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> I know the answer, ABSOLUTELY NONE OF YOU! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Why should we? > >>> > >>>> Because you are the one wanting some growth in desktop linux > >>>> marketshare. > >>> > >>> I couldn't care less about that. > >>> > >>>> Do you think the tooth fairy is going to help with that? Or is > >>>> it possible that the 'advocates' and 'supporters' should be > >>>> putting up a little cash? > >>> > >>> Linux is not Canonical. Linux is doing fine. Nobody cares if > >>> Canonical dies off. Just another blip on the timeline. > > > >> Slight correction, linux on the desktop is doing fine in the > >> hobbyist/ developer market and is finding some much smaller > >> acceptance beyond that. And that will not change until attitudes > >> change no matter how good linux on the desktop is or gets to be. > > > >> Canonical and others have tried to monetize linux desktop and have > >> found no market. > > > > No market for their crap. What were they selling again? Unity? > > Support? > > Peace on Earth and goodwill toward man? > > > Application software, which you probably already knew. But the tone > of your comments speaks to the larger issue. And that is the > extremely piss poor attitude of the linux community as a group. "I > don't like it so it must suck" is not a valid complaint, it is just > bitching. A possible future linux desktop user would be totally put > off by comments like that. > > Add it to the long list of why linux desktop is such an abject > failure despite being a pretty good OS overall. > > >> And with the 'free and open' nature of linux it never will > >> happen. Couple that with the really piss poor attitudes of some > >> very vociferous 'advocates' and 'supporters' and you have the sure > >> fire formula for commercial failure. > > > > What's the explanation for Apple's massive failure to capture the > > desktop after all these years and billions? > > That's got to be the most ignorant of questions. For Apple to take > over the desktop market, they would have had to cover all segments. Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <d5udbkF2463U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #321193 |
On 17 Sep 2015 01:40, Melzzzzz wrote: > On 16 Sep 2015 23:18:39 GMT > Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:08:15 +0000, owl wrote: >> >> > Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:27:51 +0000, owl wrote: >> > >> >>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:50:50 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>> >> >>>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:12:01 -0500, chrisv wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>>> Nobody wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>"Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth also replied >> >>>>>>>>matter-of-factly. “As David said, we learned that the >> >>>>>>>>Deb based package system >> >>>> wasn’t >> >>>>>>>>workable for a store. The work on Ubuntu phone led us to >> >>>>>>>>snappy, where we put the developer of a typical app almost >> >>>>>>>>completely in control of publication.”" >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> It's very puzzling, very cult-like, that assholes like "Lloyd" >> >>>>>>> take pleasure in the "failure" of such a small business, an >> >>>>>>> alternative product with little apparent significance. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> No pleasure taken, just noting that the failures exist and >> >>>>>> that you linux loonies are a big part of that problem. How >> >>>>>> many of you bought software in their software center? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Never heard of it. What were they selling? >> >>>>> >> >>>> Software obviously. Try to keep up! :) >> >>> >> >>> Well there's teh problem right there. Trying to *sell* software. >> >>> LOL. What were they thinking? Seriously, what software were they >> >>> selling? I've bought software in the past. $thousands and >> >>> $thousands worth over the years. I'd say at least two thousand >> >>> of that was Linux-related. Hell, I just paid a couple hundred >> >>> for vmware 11, and 12 is out now i believe. I'll probably >> >>> upgrade in the near future. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>>>> Hell, how many of you bought and/or donated to >> >>>>>> Canonical to help ensure the success of a small business that >> >>>>>> is trying to get Linux on the desktop to be a viable and >> >>>>>> profitable product? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Unity sucks. Why give those fuckers money? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> I know the answer, ABSOLUTELY NONE OF YOU! >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> Why should we? >> >>> >> >>>> Because you are the one wanting some growth in desktop linux >> >>>> marketshare. >> >>> >> >>> I couldn't care less about that. >> >>> >> >>>> Do you think the tooth fairy is going to help with that? Or is >> >>>> it possible that the 'advocates' and 'supporters' should be >> >>>> putting up a little cash? >> >>> >> >>> Linux is not Canonical. Linux is doing fine. Nobody cares if >> >>> Canonical dies off. Just another blip on the timeline. >> > >> >> Slight correction, linux on the desktop is doing fine in the >> >> hobbyist/ developer market and is finding some much smaller >> >> acceptance beyond that. And that will not change until attitudes >> >> change no matter how good linux on the desktop is or gets to be. >> > >> >> Canonical and others have tried to monetize linux desktop and have >> >> found no market. >> > >> > No market for their crap. What were they selling again? Unity? >> > Support? >> > Peace on Earth and goodwill toward man? >> > >> Application software, which you probably already knew. But the tone >> of your comments speaks to the larger issue. And that is the >> extremely piss poor attitude of the linux community as a group. "I >> don't like it so it must suck" is not a valid complaint, it is just >> bitching. A possible future linux desktop user would be totally put >> off by comments like that. >> >> Add it to the long list of why linux desktop is such an abject >> failure despite being a pretty good OS overall. >> >> >> And with the 'free and open' nature of linux it never will >> >> happen. Couple that with the really piss poor attitudes of some >> >> very vociferous 'advocates' and 'supporters' and you have the sure >> >> fire formula for commercial failure. >> > >> > What's the explanation for Apple's massive failure to capture the >> > desktop after all these years and billions? >> >> That's got to be the most ignorant of questions. For Apple to take >> over the desktop market, they would have had to cover all segments. > > Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware > market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in > the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... > > Bullshit! -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 00:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtd2fd$n4h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #321193 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: > Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware > market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in the > wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen because Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for huge their profit margins. -- Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 00:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d5ugvgF2om4U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #321204 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:45:33 +0000, ronb wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: > >> Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware >> market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in >> the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... > > I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' > monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen because > Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for huge their > profit margins. Those grapes are really sour huh, wRonG? -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 23:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mtdh4d$s1u$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #321205 |
On 9/16/2015 7:48 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:45:33 +0000, ronb wrote: > >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: >> >>> Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware >>> market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in >>> the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... >> >> I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' >> monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen because >> Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for huge their >> profit margins. > > Those grapes are really sour huh, wRonG? False analogy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 12:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtec4d$imu$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #321226 |
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:55:42 -0500, Nobody wrote: > On 9/16/2015 7:48 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:45:33 +0000, ronb wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: >>> >>>> Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware >>>> market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in >>>> the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... >>> >>> I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' >>> monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen >>> because Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for >>> huge their profit margins. >> >> Those grapes are really sour huh, wRonG? > > False analogy. I'm beginning to think the members of the Lemon Sucking Bitter Old Biddy Committee (take your bows, "Lloyd" and "-hh") are beginning to get upset at being called the bitter old biddies that they are. -- Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 12:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d5vqt1FbvdqU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #321264 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:36:29 +0000, ronb wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:55:42 -0500, Nobody wrote: > >> On 9/16/2015 7:48 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:45:33 +0000, ronb wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>> >>>>> Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware >>>>> market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in >>>>> the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... >>>> >>>> I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' >>>> monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen >>>> because Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for >>>> huge their profit margins. >>> >>> Those grapes are really sour huh, wRonG? >> >> False analogy. > > I'm beginning to think the members of the Lemon Sucking Bitter Old Biddy > Committee (take your bows, "Lloyd" and "-hh") are beginning to get upset > at being called the bitter old biddies that they are. Upset by your constant lack of business knowledge? You haven't the ability to really upset me. Your response to the supposed 'killfile' posting aside... -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 19:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mtfk8t$bcd$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #321264 |
On 9/17/2015 7:36 AM, ronb wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:55:42 -0500, Nobody wrote: > >> On 9/16/2015 7:48 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:45:33 +0000, ronb wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40:24 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>> >>>>> Apple does not compete in OS market at all. They compete in hardware >>>>> market and that is completely different category. If they let OSX in >>>>> the wild it would take over OS desktop market in no time... >>>> >>>> I don't think so. But they would definitely cut into the Windows' >>>> monopoly. Unfortunately for iCultists it's never going to happen >>>> because Apple likes to gouge their suckers ... err ... customers for >>>> huge their profit margins. >>> >>> Those grapes are really sour huh, wRonG? >> >> False analogy. > > I'm beginning to think the members of the Lemon Sucking Bitter Old Biddy > Committee (take your bows, "Lloyd" and "-hh") are beginning to get upset > at being called the bitter old biddies that they are. They're angry they can't get to you, as evidenced by you not using harsher terms to describe them...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web