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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #355451

Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior

Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
From Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com>
Subject Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior
References (5 earlier) <sandman-7c943cb5affbf9b20c8be2bae7706ffb@individual.net> <Gpidnftmqox6oarKnZ2dnUU7-LXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sandman-48c7966cb699517d5423c3f28193d909@individual.net> <FfmdnZHmZtS0z6rKnZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sandman-c111521579dbaac1061fdc6875984097@individual.net>
Organization The Linux Foundation
Date 2016-05-15 05:23 -0700
Message-ID <a66dne9EsIve96XKnZ2dnUU7-RfNnZ2d@giganews.com> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 2016-05-15, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote:
> In article <FfmdnZHmZtS0z6rKnZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@giganews.com>, Marek Novotny 
> wrote:

// snip

> Uh, not sure what your claim is here - that Apple hasn't got a road map and 
> is thus a poor business or that they don't share it publicly and thus they're 
> a poor choice for businesses? Well the latter choice is a bit what I was 
> alluding to in the entire "consumer-directed" approach Apple has. Consumers 
> couldn't care less about a "roadmap".

Yes, they should share a public roadmap as is common with the enterprise
sales operations. You can't just say one day that we threw out the tower
with slots and now you're getting this garbage can with no expandability
other than external and expect it to fly. 

>> They think we're just going to open our wallets every time they get
>> on stage and intro the new shiny. Which as we saw with Final Cut
>> doesn't work.
>
> And apparently has worked flawlessly in numerous other occasions. Since the 
> "wallets" are those of the generic consumer, who seems to think Apple 
> produces some good products.

It has for the iPhone. While they sell expensive computers with high
gross margins they don't see a lot of them compared to the HP, Dell,
etc. Not even sure they are in the top five world wide. 

> Again, FCP was a professional tool and my entire claim was that Apple is 
> ignoring professionals more and more.

Yes I understand your claim. I'm simply stating that ignoring the
professional and the enterprise to solely focus on the consumer market
is not the best strategy. Again, all they are selling are chocolate
donuts. 

// snip

>> Why? They can't do both?
>
> "can" is not en operative word here. They obviously made the decision that it 
> didn't make business sense to continue with that line of products. I.e. 
> probably the server division cost X amount of dollars and the revenue wasn't 
> enough to sustain that. Had the server side thrived then they wouldn't have 
> shut it down. 

Yes, obviously. And again I'm opining that is a poor choice and in poor
character. They are always after the low hanging fruit. I would not want
to base my business around such a volatile roadmap.

> The Xserve was released in a time where in-house hosting was still a viable 
> and common choice for many businesses, cloud hosting wasn't as widespread as 
> it is today. In 2010, cloud hosting was some 99% of the server market (made 
> up number) and few business bought servers (including Linux servers) and the 
> big hosting companies went (naturally) with a cheaper option - PC hardware 
> and fre Linux. 

Jails on BSD has existed since before that. If Apple wanted to attack
the hosting markets they could have implemented Jails on the Mac more
than a decade ago. Yes, web services was part of the thinking but so
were many other ideas. 

In fact, what Jobs said in 2002 when he was releasing the XServe was
that it was customer driven and that customers wanted the following
things from Apple:

Software: 

- File and Prinnt
- Web and Email
- Database
- QuickTime Streaming (100's of streams)
- Computational Services (example - Blast)

Hardware requirements:

- Dedicated Server platform
- Rack Mounted
- Lot of storage flexibility
- Serviceability
- Remote Management

>> See all the want is the low hanging fruit. They have the money to do
>> both and not leave their customers stranded. But they don't care.
>
> As far as I can tell - they didn't "care" about the small minority that still 
> used their Xserves and Xserve RAID in 2009-2010 to sustain that as a 
> profitable division inside the company. Regardless of how much money you have 
> or make it's dumb to keep a division alive that is losing money.

It's short sighted. They simply needed to innovate in the enterprise
which they were not doing, so they didn't do well. 

> Mind you, for those that were still interested in running OS X as a server 
> platform, they can do that today, only they can't use rack-optimized hardware 
> to do so.

Yes, I used to run it. It sucked ass. As I said previously, just go look
at the reviews on Apple's own AppStore. More people rated it one star
than any other rating. 

> Just as a small visual example, not based on actual raw data, but rather a 
> "hunch" since I am in this business and has been since 1994. Back in 2002 the 
> server market was probably divided more or less as such:
>
> [---|------------|--]
> |   |            |
> |   |            `- Cloud-based hosting
> |   ` Large businesses with in-house hosting 
>  `- Small business with in-house hosting

And again, according to Apple Most of what they talked about had nothing
to do with the hosting business. Yes, they have Apache, but they were
pushing WebObjects at the time. Not business that sell hosting services
to individual clients. 

They wanted to do basic file and print and other tasks which I listed
above. 

> And when 2009 came around, the landscape was probably more like this: 
>
> [-|--|--------------]
> | |  |
> | |  `- Cloud-based hosting
> | ` Large businesses with in-house hosting 
>  `- Small business with in-house hosting

Since this is what you do professionally, this is how you look at their
server. But that's not what this was about. 

> And, since the middle segment are the ones that pour the most money into 
> servers, losing them to cloud servers meant a lot of revenue just vanished. 
> Also, when the Xserve was launched, it came bundled with the Quicktime Media 
> Server which made it easy to stream multiplex video streams to hundreds or 
> thousands of clients, back in a day and age where Macromedia Flash Server 
> cost a fortune and work like crap. Then Youtube came around in 2005 and 
> changed all that, so suddenly few people had a reason to use the USP's of the 
> Xserve - *except* the small businesses that just want to run a small mail 
> server or DNS or whatever. And those people don't care all that much about 
> redundancy and rack mounting, and they still can run the server add-on for OS 
> X to do just that.

// snip

> Enterprise has never been a focus for Apple. When I say "professionals" I am 
> in reference to individuals within a company that has a specific task that 
> Macs has or did have better solutions for. Final Cut Pro was such an example. 
> Apple didn't sell "enterprise licenses" of Final Cut Pro for 3,000+ seats 
> like Microsoft does with Office. They sold a very expensive (and capable) 
> software suite for those few in companies that needed it. Enterprise has 
> never interested Apple.

Well that contradicts your theory on the hosting business doesn't it? 

> The Xserve is a prime example of this - it was a server mean for in-house 
> servers of small and medium companies that already had a Mac presence and 
> Mac-knowledgable IT staff. For very large companies and later hosting 
> companies, OS X was never even an option. 

Agree with this statement entirely. 

// snip

>> No, that's not true. That's how Apple computers work these days. I
>> can buy a Dell tower or build a tower and in both cases I can crack
>> it open and service it or replace the video, add ethernet, and 10GB
>> eithernet, etc. I have choices.
>
> Right, but people don't buy Dell Workstations any longer. Companies do to put 
> on the desks of their employees. But when someone wants a computer at home, 
> they get a Macbook Air or some more or less stylish PC laptop. And those 
> people don't *care* that they can't open it up and add a new graphics card.

Put the crack pipe away. Dell Sells Precision workstations and customers
do buy them. They sell lots of towers and have several options for
these. 

> The only ones that are still buying towers at home are gamers, and I am one 
> of them! My gaming PC is 100% self built and I can do whatever I like in it, 
> and there's a reason for me to be able to swap out for a new graphics card 
> etc. But for the normal generic user - they don't care.

You need to get out more. The world isn't run on laptops. 

> Sure, some years down the line with a few upgrades to OSX/Windows, the laptop 
> will start to feel sluggish and they'll ask someone "who knows about 
> computers" what they can do about it, and when that person lets them know 
> that Apple has soldered the RAM to the mob they may think it's a bummer that 
> they can't upgrade it. But with today's hardware, most computers doesn't need 
> to be replaced as much as they used to be. Both OS X and Windows has great 
> backwards compatibility (often 5-6 years for OS X) and most computers will 
> fail for other reasons before that (cracked screen, keys falling of the 
> keyboard, etc)

This is an Apple apologist speaking. There is simply no excuse for
soldering the ram directly on the motherboard. It's cheap-shit
engineering plain and simple. It is designed to cut cost and lowers the
quality of the hardware. You've essentially made a BIC lighter. 

>> > Sandman:
>> > Indeed, I am currently having severe problems with my gaming PC,
>> > which crashes now and then for unknown reasons, likely hardware,
>> > and even though I've bult and modified hundreds of PCs in my days,
>> > I'm less inclined to do so now, I just want the damn thing to
>> > work.
>> 
>> I'm somewhat like that now. I build less and buy more but I still
>> want to be able to open it. I still want to be able to replace
>> easily the video, ethernet or whatever I want. If that was an iMac,
>> what would you do? Just buy another one or hope Apple can resolve
>> whatever is wrong?
>
> Well, I can't upgrade the graphics in my iMac, which is ok, since I don't 
> game on it - but I've already upgraded to a SSD and tons of RAM in it so I 
> guess that's my answer - I would add it :)

For a computer that expensive you can't even upgrade the video. The only
people lining up to buy iMacs are iSheep. 

// snip

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

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-13 22:37 +0000
  Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-13 18:44 -0400
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-13 20:55 -0400
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior CrimsonIdol <CrimsonIdol@invalid.com> - 2016-05-14 09:19 -0400
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:05 -0400
  Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-13 16:27 -0700
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 01:52 +0200
  Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 17:29 -0700
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:09 -0700
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 03:13 +0200
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:25 -0700
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:36 -0700
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-14 13:55 +0000
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 16:02 +0200
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:19 -0700
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 18:30 -0700
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 18:55 -0700
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 19:18 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-13 21:28 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 23:53 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 06:41 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:34 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior sbd <sbd.pambu@safe-mail.net> - 2016-05-15 08:33 -0300
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 08:01 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 13:45 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 09:39 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 10:42 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:02 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 05:07 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-13 23:53 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 13:18 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:43 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-14 22:44 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 22:25 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 00:57 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 18:08 -0700
                Ronb needs to get what is left of his mind out of the gutter. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 18:55 -0700
                Another inebriated evening in Richmond Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-05-14 22:06 -0400
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 04:25 +0200
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 05:01 +0000
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 13:20 +0100
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 06:44 -0700
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-14 15:10 +0100
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 07:26 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:12 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:34 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:43 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:50 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 10:31 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 12:05 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:42 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 12:34 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 12:02 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 13:08 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 21:35 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 18:48 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 18:55 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 02:03 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 19:17 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:05 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:06 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:05 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-15 22:32 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-18 09:14 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-18 16:49 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-18 16:59 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-18 23:23 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-18 14:49 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-18 22:52 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-18 16:27 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-06-07 13:43 -0500
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-18 23:08 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 22:39 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 20:17 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 21:08 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:27 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:32 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:37 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:40 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:42 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-15 22:32 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-16 07:14 -0500
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-25 17:23 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-25 23:36 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-25 17:49 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 00:00 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-26 19:26 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 18:33 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 16:49 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:19 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-25 21:21 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:23 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 08:24 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 21:22 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 10:17 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 09:54 -0700
                Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-26 19:37 +0200
                Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Jack Sperm Whale Whalen <jackspermwhalepacific@noemail9.org> - 2016-05-26 17:38 +0000
                Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 10:43 -0700
                Re: Lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser misquoting again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-26 10:42 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Jack Sperm Whale Whalen <jackspermwhalepacific@noemail9.org> - 2016-05-26 17:41 +0000
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:37 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Meat Puppet <up@yourfat.ass> - 2016-05-14 17:20 -0400
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 14:32 +0000
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-14 16:36 +0200
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 15:17 +0000
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 14:44 +0000
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 07:57 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 15:36 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-14 15:52 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:07 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-14 17:05 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 10:09 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 08:20 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:26 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 13:32 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:24 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 15:14 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:24 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 16:26 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:23 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 05:28 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 12:00 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 21:20 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 14:21 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 05:31 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 09:51 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-16 19:49 -0600
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:30 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-16 19:45 -0600
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-17 05:52 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-05-17 19:26 -0600
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 09:28 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 12:41 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 08:18 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:23 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 06:23 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 06:52 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 07:24 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:30 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 06:58 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:33 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 07:59 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:06 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:12 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-15 08:44 -0700
                Re: I paid $293 for my TeraByte SSD, a Samsung 850 EVO. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 20:04 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 09:27 -0700
                Re: If you know nothing about computers, or you're really poor... benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-05-16 00:33 -0400
                Re: If you know nothing about computers, or you're really poor... "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-15 22:49 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 13:23 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 07:21 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 16:07 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 08:22 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 16:48 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:03 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:47 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:55 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:15 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:19 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:22 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:24 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-15 18:08 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTLY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:10 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 16:24 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 09:36 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:16 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-15 21:20 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:28 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 11:33 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 15:12 +0000
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-16 16:27 +0000
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 23:00 -0400
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-14 22:56 -0400
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 20:09 -0700
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-14 20:20 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 21:16 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 09:49 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 05:29 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 12:07 -0400
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:04 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 10:28 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 13:55 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:15 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:40 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-15 11:43 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:44 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-15 14:47 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-15 22:59 +0100
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-15 12:44 -0700
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-05-16 11:27 +0100
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-16 13:27 +0200
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-16 12:46 +0100
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-05-16 13:07 +0100
            Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:03 -0700
              Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-16 19:12 +0200
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-16 12:29 -0500
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-16 15:19 -0400
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:32 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 10:51 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:02 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 11:23 -0700
                Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 12:17 -0700
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-16 10:04 -0700
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-14 13:58 +0000
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-14 11:35 -0700
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-14 21:16 +0000
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 14:51 -0700
          Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 00:59 +0000
        Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-05-15 00:27 +0000
  GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-05-13 17:59 -0700
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior Mick Maelstrom <mickmael@tehsaurus.invalid> - 2016-05-14 01:26 +0000
      Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-05-16 12:31 +0000
    Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 09:35 -0700
  Re: GNU/Linux Is VASTY [sic] Superior John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-05-14 06:52 -0700

csiph-web