Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #88109 > unrolled thread
| Started by | vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-19 18:42 +0100 |
| Last post | 2026-06-28 00:13 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 121 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) - 2026-06-19 18:42 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> - 2026-06-20 12:30 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) - 2026-06-20 13:10 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-20 14:42 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> - 2026-06-21 07:51 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-21 09:35 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-21 10:29 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 18:10 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-22 10:16 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-22 08:13 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 10:26 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 14:03 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:25 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 20:51 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-23 04:22 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:07 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 20:47 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-23 10:49 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-24 01:30 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-24 12:07 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 11:41 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-24 18:42 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-24 19:42 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-24 13:25 -0700
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:39 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-30 04:10 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 21:53 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-25 01:30 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-24 08:29 -0700
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 16:36 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-24 17:33 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:13 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-25 11:26 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 23:21 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-26 10:55 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-26 10:41 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2026-06-24 21:38 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:12 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) - 2026-06-21 14:21 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-21 17:28 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 18:56 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-21 17:38 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 23:36 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 18:15 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-24 01:24 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-24 17:35 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-24 07:45 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 11:36 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 09:35 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:17 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 18:24 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-25 10:19 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-26 01:59 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:50 +0000
Retroconning closed-source proprietary software, and wiping the rest (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-25 07:12 +0100
Re: Retroconning closed-source proprietary software, and wiping the rest (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 18:32 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 18:27 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 06:50 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 19:41 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-25 11:37 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-25 18:19 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-26 10:01 +0100
"""Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-25 06:55 +0100
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-25 18:34 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-26 01:57 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-26 18:23 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-26 09:37 +0100
Re: """Standard""" software Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-27 11:00 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-28 08:02 +0100
Re: """Standard""" software "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-28 12:51 +0200
Re: """Standard""" software c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:53 -0400
Re: """Standard""" software "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-29 10:53 +0200
Re: """Standard""" software Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-202606.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2026-06-29 19:01 +0200
Re: """Standard""" software "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-29 19:29 +0200
Re: “Standard” software Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-30 02:48 +0000
Re: “Standard” software Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 09:08 +0100
Re: “Standard” software Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-30 18:51 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-26 18:03 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-26 12:23 -0700
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-27 11:09 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-27 18:22 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-27 19:42 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-28 10:46 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-06-28 10:18 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-28 11:26 +0100
Spreadshi^Heet software (was: Re: """Standard""" software) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 08:35 +0100
Re: Spreadshi^Heet software (was: Re: """Standard""" software) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-29 19:51 +1200
Re: Spreadshi^Heet software Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 09:28 +0100
Re: Spreadshi^Heet software Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-29 10:53 +0200
Re: Spreadshi^Heet software The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 12:53 +0100
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-28 18:09 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-29 10:15 +1200
Re: """Standard""" software Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 08:24 +0100
Re: “Standard” software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-27 23:03 +0000
Re: “Standard” software c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-28 04:13 -0400
Re: “Standard” software The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-28 11:04 +0100
Re: “Standard” software c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:42 -0400
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-27 00:10 +0000
Can be trusted... (Was: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and) Linux Mint Cinnamon) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-06-27 12:53 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-27 18:22 +0000
Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-27 19:36 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2026-06-25 15:44 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-24 08:01 -0700
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 16:34 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2026-06-25 15:49 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-24 18:16 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-06-24 17:15 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 01:14 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-06-25 18:32 +0200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-25 23:22 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2026-06-25 23:40 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-26 09:09 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-26 18:03 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-27 00:26 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-27 15:52 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-27 04:12 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-27 09:41 +0100
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-27 18:22 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-27 19:57 +0000
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-06-28 10:35 +1200
Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-28 00:13 +0100
Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-25 18:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvcxxe5yie.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #88395 |
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes: > On 2026-06-25 08:27, Your Name wrote: >> Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\ >> Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which >> technically / legally is Unix. > > Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix. > > Is the graphic layer Unix? What would make a GUI API be ‘Unix’? I think all the popular GUI APIs are cross-platform, at least to an extent. > Do those companies that sell software for macOS expect that particular > graphical layer, or do they run directly on the Unix beneath? Generally both. User interaction via the GUI, network and file IO etc via the Unix syscall API (mediated via application frameworks, language runtimes, etc). It’s not conceptually different to GUI applications on Linux and Windows. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 10:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111lf5b$c7hh$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88395 |
On 2026-06-25, Carlos E. R. wrote: [...] > Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix. > > Is the graphic layer Unix? Do those companies that sell software for > macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly > on the Unix beneath? [ Ariana Richards / Lex enters the room ] -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-25 06:55 +0100 |
| Subject | """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <111ifsc$3hha9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88366 |
On 2026-06-24, Your Name wrote:
> On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:
>> On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:
>>>> Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
>>>>
>>>> Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
>>>> derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
>>>> Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
>>>> Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
>>>> cannot.
>>>
>>> Noone cares about the brand any more.
>>
>> Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well
>> available for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute
>> little mascot.
>>
>> Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)
>
> "PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux
> varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
> Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
> fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
> what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
> system: MacOS X.
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? The utilities
available in UNIX MacOS under GNU/Linux and on BSDs are more "standard
software"[1] than whatever commercial closed-source product Microsoft
comes up with. As for Adobe, if anything they have Postscript and PDF,
but I don't think they've managed to make usable PDF software for UNIX
systems (a heavy acroread certainly won't count as such), and Postscript
has had at least Ghostscript for ages. And, if they did manage to make
something usable, it'd probably be closed-source and with a bunch of
features locked without a paid license.
Were it still in wider use, Shockwave Flash, which they acquired at some
point, could perhaps be better supported by improving Gnash and
Lightspark, as Adobe's own software for it wasn't - IIRC - known for its
quality and performance. Or was the quality part more rumour than
reality?
[1] cf. ISO 9945:2009 / IEEE 1003.1:2008 Vol 1 §3.361, and the whole of
Vol 3.
--
Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-25 18:34 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <111ii4p$3ik55$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88384 |
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
> On 2026-06-24, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:
>>> On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:
>>>>> Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
>>>>> derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
>>>>> Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
>>>>> Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
>>>>> cannot.
>>>>
>>>> Noone cares about the brand any more.
>>>
>>> Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available
>>> for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.
>>>
>>> Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)
>>
>> "PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux
>> varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
>> Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
>> fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
>> what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
>> system: MacOS X.
>
> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
<snip>
Most of the business world did years ago ... believe me, I wish it wasn't so!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 01:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <111km9n$760s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88389 |
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: > On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >> >> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? > <snip> > > Most of the business world did years ago ... Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by Linux?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 18:23 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <111l5s4$atk9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88411 |
On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: > >> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>> >>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >> <snip> >> >> Most of the business world did years ago ... > > Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its > operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by > Linux? I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather than sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\ Another idiot added to the killfile.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 09:37 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <111ldon$c7hh$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88414 |
On 2026-06-26, Your Name wrote: > On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said: > >> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: >> >>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>> >>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >>> <snip> >>> >>> Most of the business world did years ago ... >> >> Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its >> operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by >> Linux? > > I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather > than sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\ > > Another idiot added to the killfile. I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's not even a de facto standard the way you stated it, the business world is not synonymous with reality, and it may also have parts which blur the distinction between reality and beliefs (where corporate decisionmakers put money in what they think reality is, out of some belief). Just for one example: the tech world pretty much has as a sort of guideline, if not "standard", that you don't top-post and you don't destroy threading (by properly maintaining and extending References and In-Reply-To), and that you clearly denote quoted material with a quoting level indicator on the left side. But some on the corporate world think differently, and at least one company (MICROS~1) has tried to push hard their own incompatible and problematic approach to e-mail, possibly arising out of some metaphor with paper documents flowing in an office. That Microsoft chose to go with that doesn't make it a standard, even though the disease (I'd avoid this wording, except this is about top-posting and lack of quoting levels and mangling references, so I'll go with "disease") spreads because of them. Heck, the tech world even has a solution to make plain text e-mails reflowable. The business world also includes companies who know better than using Microsoft products and services (again, I'd use another wording, but Microsoft has actively done so much damage...) What follows is in case somebody thinks I'm exaggerating about Microsoft, and regards the above as, I don't know, "fanboyism"...; Also, in case somebody needs to be aware of these things: Bill Gates wants to introduce hardware incompatibilities using ACPI: <http://web.archive.org/web/1if_/http://www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf> Microsoft's FUD: <https://enwp.org/Halloween_papers#List_of_documents> So you want to do e-mail with Microsoft? If your server doesn't send a lot of e-mail, it might get blocked (yes, you read that right, you may have to spam more, not less). <news://news.gmane.io/YyGtAsSxjpA0Ky4+@lazarescu.org> <http://web.archive.org/web/20210225102644/https://guides.downstate.edu/c.php?g=654922&p=4870487> Some messages will be sent to Quarantine, which users may have not heard about. And I'm not even sure SmartScreen won't possibly just drop messages completely without sending to Quarantine. <http://web.archive.org/web/20210225102644/https://guides.downstate.edu/c.php?g=654922&p=4870487> <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/357214/emails-to-microsoft-365-customers-are-silently-dro> <https://www.nerd-quickies.net/2020/10/20/microsoft-silently-dropping-emails-a-sad-but-true-story/> -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-27 11:00 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <111n0a0$sr2s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88416 |
On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said: > On 2026-06-26, Your Name wrote: >> On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said: >>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: >>>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>>> >>>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>> Most of the business world did years ago ... >>> >>> Is this the same "business world" that has largely moved its operations >>> into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by Linux? >> >> I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather than >> sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\ >> >> Another idiot added to the killfile. > > I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's not > even a de facto standard the way you stated it, The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are* basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly beginning to change. * That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and 11, so doesn't include all those still using older versions. * A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for Microsloth Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google currently has the most users. > the business world is not synonymous with reality, and it may also have > parts which blur the distinction between reality and beliefs (where > corporate decisionmakers put money in what they think reality is, out > of some belief). > > Just for one example: the tech world pretty much has as a sort of > guideline, if not "standard", that you don't top-post and you don't > destroy threading (by properly maintaining and extending References and > In-Reply-To), and that you clearly denote quoted material with a > quoting level indicator on the left side. But some on the corporate > world think differently, and at least one company (MICROS~1) has tried > to push hard their own incompatible and problematic approach to e-mail, > possibly arising out of some metaphor with paper documents flowing in > an office. That Microsoft chose to go with that doesn't make it a > standard, even though the disease (I'd avoid this wording, except this > is about top-posting and lack of quoting levels and mangling > references, so I'll go with "disease") spreads because of them. Microsoloth always tries to push their own stupid ideas as the tech standard. Some "succeed" simply due to the scale of their user base, others fail miserbaly. Probably the best known example was Microsloth Exploiter that pushed its own way of doing things to the point that website makers had to use a variety of techniques try to accomodate two different options, depending on which browser you were using. Those that simply went with Exploiter's way caused compatibility issues for people using other web browsers. This was usually most evident with government websites where they never bothered to test things on any other browser or OS. In fact, one charity company I worked for had to file monthly reports to their main funder via a website system. They used Apple computers and none of the web browsers would work properly with the website report system (including Mac Exploiter). The only option was for them to get a Windoze PC with Exploiter solely to do the monthly reports. Such issues do still come up from time to time, especially with government websites, but mainly if you're still using older versions of web broswers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-28 08:02 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <111qgti$3eh9f$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88441 |
On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote: > On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: >>>>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>>>> >>>>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >>>>> >>>>> Most of the business world did years ago ... [...] >> I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's >> not even a de facto standard the way you stated it, > > The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about > 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are* > basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly > beginning to change. > > * That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and 11, > so doesn't include all those still using older versions. > > * A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for Microsloth > Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include > offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google currently has > the most users. And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels for separate sets of changes. You know what's funny? Even if it misses one feature or another, it has Wordart. (Or at least had last I checked.) Overall, besides WYSIWYG not being my thing, (La)TeX is just much easier to version-control. And can be written using a text editor running on a video terminal. But hey, at least Google Docs isn't Microsoft Office, and at least some of the links to the document have a somewhat parsable form that can be used to create the download/export URL. (So if your browser does not run Google Docs, or the computer is not powerful enough, you can instead download a PDF, if all you need is to read the document, or I guess download a format for editing - although that's not something I've done with that, I think it's possible too.) > Probably the best known example was Microsloth Exploiter that pushed > its own way of doing things to the point that website makers had to > use a variety of techniques try to accomodate two different options, > depending on which browser you were using. Those that simply went with > Exploiter's way caused compatibility issues for people using other web > browsers. This was usually most evident with government websites where > they never bothered to test things on any other browser or OS. > > In fact, one charity company I worked for had to file monthly reports > to their main funder via a website system. They used Apple computers > and none of the web browsers would work properly with the website > report system (including Mac Exploiter). The only option was for them > to get a Windoze PC with Exploiter solely to do the monthly reports. > > Such issues do still come up from time to time, especially with > government websites, but mainly if you're still using older versions > of web broswers. No, these days is "if you're using any but a few select browsers", not "older versions". Be it because of JS or CSS features, be it because they use some service like Cloudflare that should have no place in government websites. (I do wonder if Cloudflare has been intentionally trying to bring along the better reputation of Browser Integrity Check (which, other than coding errors on Cloudflare's behalf, including at least one massive self-DDoS (falling back to step 0 if a subsequent HTTP request lacked Origin:, with no or little timeout), had plenty of fallbacks to support more browsers) to the new verification system based on "Turnstile" (which is designed to support a few listed browsers).) (Google's reCAPTCHA isn't that much better. It still works on SeaMonkey, but not thanks to Google who found it fitting to tell me to ask on StackOverflow for a problem with *Google's* code. That's on top of the Google issue tracker for reCAPTCHA having a not-so-little issue that makes it more difficult to report issues with reCAPTCHA... (guess what the issue is)) -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-28 12:51 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <naccmdFclutU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88478 |
On 2026-06-28 09:02, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote:
>
>> On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
>>>>>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most of the business world did years ago ...
> [...]
>>> I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
>>> not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
>>
>> The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about
>> 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
>> basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly
>> beginning to change.
>>
>> * That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and 11,
>> so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
>>
>> * A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for Microsloth
>> Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include
>> offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google currently has
>> the most users.
>
> And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it
> have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control
> being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to
> bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to
> group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels
> for separate sets of changes.
I have been using Google Calc spread sheet for some years, to track how
much gasoline I buy for the car, and how many kilometres it does.
Well, one day it lost me entries. It said there was some sync problem,
maybe it had stored a local copy that did not match the cloud version.
Now that file is impossible to open in the phone, it stalls. I could
open it on the computer and save to a different name, but one or two
lines are lost.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-29 01:53 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <VaKcnSBYBtTDld_3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88489 |
On 6/28/26 06:51, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-06-28 09:02, Nuno Silva wrote: >> On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote: >> >>> On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: >>>>>>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most of the business world did years ago ... >> [...] >>>> I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's >>>> not even a de facto standard the way you stated it, >>> >>> The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about >>> 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are* >>> basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly >>> beginning to change. >>> >>> * That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and >>> 11, >>> so doesn't include all those still using older versions. >>> >>> * A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for >>> Microsloth >>> Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include >>> offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google >>> currently has >>> the most users. >> >> And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it >> have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control >> being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to >> bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to >> group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels >> for separate sets of changes. > > I have been using Google Calc spread sheet for some years, to track how > much gasoline I buy for the car, and how many kilometres it does. The office gals used to write, then re-write, our entire budget/payroll/expense system as spreadsheets until quite recently. A dozen+ heavily-linked pages at minimum. They were trying to implement an expensive all-in-one miracle office/biz system about the time I retired. Best I could tell it didn't really have the nuance to cope with anyone's Real World reliably. Stuff like QuickBooks can SORT of do it ... but something is ALWAYS different than the designers Vision. > Well, one day it lost me entries. It said there was some sync problem, > maybe it had stored a local copy that did not match the cloud version. > Now that file is impossible to open in the phone, it stalls. I could > open it on the computer and save to a different name, but one or two > lines are lost. Complex sheets are notoriously difficult to diagnose/fix when problems appear. Everything is linked to everything. And like an un-commented 'C' app, even figuring out WHERE the fault is can be a major trial. Meanwhile, how does the crew, the bills, get PAID ? Even small biz took spreadsheets far beyond what they were assumed to be for. Cudos to the writers that they COULD be pushed so far, but the debugging tools quickly lagged behind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-29 10:53 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <naeq4qFp98jU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88504 |
On 2026-06-29 07:53, c186282 wrote:
> On 6/28/26 06:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2026-06-28 09:02, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most of the business world did years ago ...
>>> [...]
>>>>> I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
>>>>> not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
>>>>
>>>> The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about
>>>> 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
>>>> basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly
>>>> beginning to change.
>>>>
>>>> * That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10
>>>> and 11,
>>>> so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
>>>>
>>>> * A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for
>>>> Microsloth
>>>> Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include
>>>> offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google
>>>> currently has
>>>> the most users.
>>>
>>> And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it
>>> have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control
>>> being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to
>>> bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to
>>> group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels
>>> for separate sets of changes.
>>
>> I have been using Google Calc spread sheet for some years, to track
>> how much gasoline I buy for the car, and how many kilometres it does.
>
> The office gals used to write, then re-write, our
> entire budget/payroll/expense system as spreadsheets
> until quite recently. A dozen+ heavily-linked pages
> at minimum.
>
> They were trying to implement an expensive all-in-one
> miracle office/biz system about the time I retired.
> Best I could tell it didn't really have the nuance to
> cope with anyone's Real World reliably. Stuff like
> QuickBooks can SORT of do it ... but something is
> ALWAYS different than the designers Vision.
>
>> Well, one day it lost me entries. It said there was some sync problem,
>> maybe it had stored a local copy that did not match the cloud version.
>> Now that file is impossible to open in the phone, it stalls. I could
>> open it on the computer and save to a different name, but one or two
>> lines are lost.
>
> Complex sheets are notoriously difficult to diagnose/fix
> when problems appear. Everything is linked to everything.
It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred lines
and 15 columns, a table.
And it just failed again. At least this time I kept the paper.
I need another product for the phone.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-202606.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-29 19:01 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <f6b49dfbbddf876ba467eeb5d43d31af@msgid.frell.theremailer.net> |
| In reply to | #88516 |
Carlos E. R. <robin_lis...@es.invalid> [CER]: CER> It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred CER> lines and 15 columns, a table. CER> And it just failed again. CER> CER> I need another product for the phone. Another option to consider: just build a form to collect your data (https://fillout.com) exactly the way you like it (e.g. with dates in european format and day/month names in spanish) and then save your data to (at least) a couple of online db's that have a CRUD REST API. Then build a dashboard/stats galore web page with all the metrics/charts that you need. Both the form and the dashboard pages can be accessed from anywhere and any device. No need to limit yourself just to what a mobile app offers. The fillout.com sister site zite.com lets you build your stats web page as well as store the data to their db (with a generous free tier) just by typing a few prompts to their AI bot. Give it a try, it's definitely more fun than hunting down the right fuel consumption app (mostly by and for americans, with their miles, gallons, mpg units) for your mobile phone. With a custom web form you can do a lot of neat stuff like optimizing it for small screen devices, or changing the default submit button(s) to a thumbnail image of your vehicles/vessels, if you happen to operate more than one of them. Microsites built with AI seem to be all the rage these days. They don't call it SaaSpocalypse for nothing... (No affiliation with the aforementioned web sites, just a happy customer)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-29 19:29 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software |
| Message-ID | <nafoc3Fu7pkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88523 |
On 2026-06-29 19:01, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_lis...@es.invalid> [CER]:
> CER> It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred
> CER> lines and 15 columns, a table.
> CER> And it just failed again.
> CER>
> CER> I need another product for the phone.
>
> Another option to consider: just build a form to collect your data
> (https://fillout.com) exactly the way you like it (e.g. with dates in
> european format and day/month names in spanish) and then save your
> data to (at least) a couple of online db's that have a CRUD REST API.
> Then build a dashboard/stats galore web page with all the
> metrics/charts that you need.
Mmm.
I found an alternative software: Collabora Office. I transferred the
calc sheet. It can be stored in Drive or locally.
Also, clearing the cache and data from the Google Calc app apparently
solves the issue.
>
> Both the form and the dashboard pages can be accessed from anywhere
> and any device. No need to limit yourself just to what a mobile app
> offers.
>
> The fillout.com sister site zite.com lets you build your stats
> web page as well as store the data to their db (with a generous
> free tier) just by typing a few prompts to their AI bot.
> Give it a try, it's definitely more fun than hunting down the right
> fuel consumption app (mostly by and for americans, with their miles,
> gallons, mpg units) for your mobile phone. With a custom web
> form you can do a lot of neat stuff like optimizing it for small
> screen devices, or changing the default submit button(s) to a
> thumbnail image of your vehicles/vessels, if you happen to operate
> more than one of them.
>
> Microsites built with AI seem to be all the rage these days.
> They don't call it SaaSpocalypse for nothing...
>
> (No affiliation with the aforementioned web sites, just a happy
> customer)
>
Stored for another occasion :)
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-30 02:48 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: “Standard” software |
| Message-ID | <111vapl$phcs$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88516 |
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 10:53:46 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred > lines and 15 columns, a table. There is an old engineering adage which says that, in any system, complexity arises, not so much from the numbe of components, as from the number of potential interactions between them. This applies to both hardware and software.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-30 09:08 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: “Standard” software |
| Message-ID | <111vtho$t6u0$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88526 |
On 2026-06-30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 10:53:46 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > >> It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred >> lines and 15 columns, a table. > > There is an old engineering adage which says that, in any system, > complexity arises, not so much from the numbe of components, as from > the number of potential interactions between them. > > This applies to both hardware and software. That's easy to solve, we just need to create a new component to alleviate these interaction issues! (<http://enwp.org/WP:SARC>) -- Nuno Silva (Okay, there may be specific cases where that *is* a viable solution.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-30 18:51 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: “Standard” software |
| Message-ID | <reU0S.2$kfzb.0@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #88530 |
On 2026-06-30, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 2026-06-30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 10:53:46 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> >>> It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred >>> lines and 15 columns, a table. >> >> There is an old engineering adage which says that, in any system, >> complexity arises, not so much from the numbe of components, as from >> the number of potential interactions between them. >> >> This applies to both hardware and software. > > That's easy to solve, we just need to create a new component to > alleviate these interaction issues! > > (<http://enwp.org/WP:SARC>) LOL! Thanks for giving me a whole new area of Wikipedia to explore. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation / \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 18:03 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <A9z%R.9638$f6E1.1190@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #88411 |
On 2026-06-26, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote: > >> On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said: >> >>> And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? >> <snip> >> >> Most of the business world did years ago ... > > Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its > operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated > by Linux? Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-26 12:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <20260626122353.00005191@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #88433 |
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:03:12 GMT Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > > Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its > > operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated > > by Linux? > > Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it. Are you kidding? M$ makes *bank* on Office 365, whether it's running as a bloated Web app or a bloated native executable. *Herds* of CEOs who validate themselves by cutting checks for stuff they'll never have to use have been inflicting this on their workers for like a decade now. Satya could probably not give less of a shit whether he's getting paid $xxx/mo. a head for that on Chromium/Linux or Edge/Win11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-27 11:09 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: """Standard""" software (was: Re: Early-2014 Macbook Air and Linux Mint Cinnamon) |
| Message-ID | <111n0r6$svm3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88435 |
On 2026-06-26 19:23:53 +0000, John Ames said: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:03:12 GMT > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> Is this the same "business world" that has largely moved its >>> operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated >>> by Linux? >> >> Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it. > > Are you kidding? M$ makes *bank* on Office 365, whether it's running as > a bloated Web app or a bloated native executable. *Herds* of CEOs who > validate themselves by cutting checks for stuff they'll never have to > use have been inflicting this on their workers for like a decade now. Microsloth Windoze and Orifice have unfortunately been basically business standards for multiple decades now. Word was first released in 1983 and "Office" (with Excel, etc.) in 1989. Even if people don't use Orifice themselves, almost every document you come across (other than PDFs) is in .doc format because that gives the widest potential compatibility ... as long as it's a simple document. If it's a complex document, then compatibility tends to go out the window. (For example, TextEdit and QuickLook on the Mac can read and write .doc / .docx format files, but even mildly complicated formatting will end up looking a mess, especially in QuickLook.) > Satya could probably not give less of a shit whether he's getting paid > $xxx/mo. a head for that on Chromium/Linux or Edge/Win11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web