Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #686701
| From | "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.comp.os.windows-11 |
| Subject | Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms |
| Date | 2025-02-26 20:29 +0000 |
| Organization | Dis |
| Message-ID | <20250226202907.08ea39d14565e8eb4ebfa5a1@127.0.0.1> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <vp7omv$2uddf$1@dont-email.me> <vp86er$30t4b$1@dont-email.me> <vpa7h6$3f44v$1@dont-email.me> <20250221181022.dd62ce9eff0892f05bfd8868@127.0.0.1> <vpb5gc$3kquu$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 19:24:41 -0500 Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote: > On Fri, 2/21/2025 1:10 PM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 10:53:10 -0500 > > Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 2/20/2025 4:22 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >>> On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 12:27:56 -0500, Paul wrote: > >>> > >>>> The original offering was "bash shell". > >>> > >>> “Bash” stands for “Bourne-Again SHell”. So what you have there is the > >>> “bourne-again shell shell”. > >>> > >> > >> I didn't pick the name for this thing. > >> > >> I'm forced to use terminology that other > >> people in the group might recognize. > >> > >> That's the shorthand for the "we don't know why they are doing Linux" project. > >> The original justification for doing it, was pretty lame. > >> > >> There is probably only one other person than myself using it. > >> The audience here isn't really interested. > >> > >> But if you want to have XEyes on your Windows desktop, you can. > >> > >> [Picture] > >> > >> https://i.postimg.cc/s2sSnJS9/xeyes-are-watching.gif > >> > > As Anton has said, that's not a picture, it's a web page with stuff that > > might show you a picture. > > > > Do you know why that caption is there ? > > It's for a blind person!!!!!!! > > Blind people use web browsers too. They use a screen reader. > If there is text on the web page, they can partake of whatever > is being discussed. > > When I would post a picture, I was kindly asked if I might caption > the item, so it could be avoided entirely if the content was > just an image and no other information a blind person could > use was present. > > THAT is why the caption is there. > That wasn't my objection; it's this: The link isn't a direct url to a picture, the hosting company wraps it in some unnecessary scripting. -- Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:04 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 08:53 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Johnny LaRue <xxxxxx@yyyyyy.zzz> - 2025-02-16 19:18 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 16:23 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Adison Vohn Caterson <Adison@Caterson.invalid> - 2025-02-16 21:31 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 18:49 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:27 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 21:38 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 18:49 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 05:08 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 06:56 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-17 19:34 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 18:38 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:16 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-20 12:56 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-20 19:58 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:14 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-20 20:42 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 21:24 +1100
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 08:26 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-24 22:37 +1100
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-21 16:45 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-17 19:06 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:11 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-20 12:51 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 17:18 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:13 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 21:40 +1100
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 08:23 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 07:15 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 17:50 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 14:35 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 00:19 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-20 19:32 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 01:29 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-21 08:35 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 13:11 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:46 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 17:32 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 21:33 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-22 05:49 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 08:10 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:56 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:15 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-02-21 14:42 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-03-10 18:20 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:23 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-17 19:40 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-17 18:59 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 14:59 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-02-20 07:18 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:25 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-21 02:11 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-21 07:48 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 21:35 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-22 10:26 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:23 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-20 17:04 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:13 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-02-16 08:02 -0600
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:15 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-16 12:40 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-17 05:28 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:22 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-17 15:11 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:19 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-20 09:00 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 17:29 +0300
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-20 12:27 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-20 19:50 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:22 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 10:53 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-21 18:10 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 19:24 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-26 20:29 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 18:31 +1100
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2025-02-20 15:38 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 11:23 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 20:10 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:24 -0500
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 18:52 +0000
Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-02-21 08:13 +0000
csiph-web