Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #323960
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Five years of LibreOffice. |
| Date | 2015-10-03 16:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d7acs3F1brcU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <munebr$51j$6@dont-email.me> <d7a2baFt8hiU3@mid.individual.net> <64f8539a-8817-4443-a16a-67011e1db008@googlegroups.com> <d7a85sFa5sU1@mid.individual.net> <320ba40f-5fd0-4d1e-9d7f-e1ff9b892e28@googlegroups.com> |
On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 08:55:55 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 8:48:33 AM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 07:43:12 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> > On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 7:09:01 AM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons >> > wrote: >> >> On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 02:26:04 +0000, ronb wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 23:03:26 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 10/2/15, 1:40 PM, in article mumq34$5q1$7@dont-email.me, >> >> >>> "ronb" >> >> >>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 07:18:49 -0500, chrisv wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>> Sheesh, what an ignorant, arrogant jackass, "Lloyd" is. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Just a lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy, >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Your name calling shows your lack of confidence in your own >> >> >>> views. >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> who (apparently) has more time on his hands than brains. >> >> >>>> Otherwise, how can you explain his 24/7 bitter drooling in a >> >> >>>> newsgroup dedicated to promoting an OS that he believes is a >> >> >>>> failure and one that he hates. Again, his actions speak louder >> >> >>>> than his lying words. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> He has not shown any hatred toward Linux. You made that up. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Yet another example of your incredibly bad reading comprehension >> >> > >> >> > Yes, "Snit," he loves Linux. That's why he 24/7 froths against it >> >> > in a Linux advocacy newsgroup. >> >> > >> >> Since I don't 'froth' against it and certainly not 24/7, your >> >> premise is bogus as are most of your arguments. >> >> >> >> > We're simply not as stupid as you need us to be for your idiot >> >> > tactics to succeed, "Snit." >> >> >> >> Yes, you are correct. You aren't as stupid as you need to be, >> >> you're well past that when it comes to how to make a product >> >> successful. You 'advocates' get hung up in the tech side of linux >> >> and that doesn't mean diddly squat to marketing/sales and a >> >> successful product. Linux on the desktop could be marketed if the >> >> community would get out of the way. >> > >> > Towards what end and for whom? Are the trolls in COLA worried that >> > Linux is on the verge of disappearing? Logically, aside from >> > trolling, that would be the only genuine concern worth putting in so >> > much time and effort. Now that the obvious is out of the way ;) >> > >> > But let's pretend you're not trolling, that you're actually trying to >> > have a rational discussion. Here's the reality: >> > >> > Linux isn't in danger of disappearing. Why do I say this? >> > >> > Consider your previous position: >> > >> > Marketing? What is that and why is it ever done? >> > >> > One you come up with a functional (and rational) answer you realize >> > that Linux isn't in a 'market', per se, and any attempt to put it >> > there is misplaced. We all know, on some level, if you want your >> > product to stand a sliver of a chance of surviving the rigors of the >> > marketplace you must market it in that space in some way. This is >> > just simple commons sense. Because the collective efforts required to >> > produce and maintain it are given away, Linux will survive no matter >> > what. Linux isn't constrained by the normal 'marketplace' issues that >> > people try to foist upon it. The motivations behind Linux are so >> > drastically different that 'apples to oranges' comparisons are an >> > extreme understatement, 'apples to penguins' >> > is a more apt comparison. >> > >> > Trolling is all well and good but it's pretty silly to pretend you're >> > having a rational discussion in this scenario. If you're really what >> > you claim, you, better than most in COLA, know all of this. >> >> There are two sides to the linux desktop coin. One is the 'community' >> which likes the open and free nature of Linux and doesn't want that >> ever to change. The other is companies like Canonical that would like >> at least a modicum of success in their commercialization efforts. > > This is what I don't get about your claim... Canonical isn't selling > Linux, per se, that they're making use of it to sell what they do sell > shouldn't confuse someone with your background. C'mon... are you being > honest about it? > While Canonical isn't trying to sell their distro in any meaningful way, they are trying to use it to bootstrap their ecosystem. And not being successful at it I might add. Kind of like what many authors are doing these days. Giving away the first 'episode' of their multi-book series to garner sales of the rest of them. The upside for readers is they get to see whether they like it or not, and it has worked well enough that more multi-book sets are out there. >> They are at direct odds because what is good for Linux desktop from a >> commercial/marketing standpoint isn't so good for the open and free >> nature of the Linux community. > > And they don't have to care because of the argument I started with. More > importantly, the rest of the Linux community doesn't have to care for > that same reason. > I have no problem with what the rest of the 'community' cares about. They really aren't potential customers anyway. They are fully invested in the free and open part of the whole deal. If anything, they are a hindrance to any meaningful chance at Linux desktop making serious moves into a commercial product. >> I would like to see Linux desktop evolve to the point that it could be >> marketed and grow. > > It's sorta late in the game for anyone to step up with the funding to > make that happen in a serious way, especially given the environment. > Even Apple, a focused company with resources, couldn't crack this nut, > but it wasn't for lack of trying, they just did far too little, way too > late. This nut belongs, and will probably forever belong, to MS for as > long as desktop OSes are pertinent. Too much has been built around it > for that to change any time soon. But the point is, Linux doesn't need > anything other than what it already has in order to survive... and it > will grow because it survives. Is desktop Linux not better than when it > first began? > It isn't too late as evidenced by Google with both Android and Chromebooks. There is a market there though a fairly small one. Apple has shown that there is an excellent way to make boatloads of money with a small marketshare. The Chromebooks are finding a nice home in the fairly large education markets and a much smaller home so far, in the business community. > People conveniently 'forget' that MS obtained what they did not solely > on the merits of their OS, but far more on the merits of the solutions > they provide to business, many of them that, naturally, only worked with > their OS. This is key... while they make some hardware, MS is a largely > a software company, not just an OS company. Linux is not a company at > all, it's essentially the 'embodiment' of a concept, it's not a > 'product' in a 'market'. There is just no logical comparison to be made > here. There is no singularly focused collective in the 'Linux > community', nor should anyone have any reasonable expectation that there > ever should or will be one. Canonical is about as close as you'll get to > that and it's crazy to believe they're the embodiment of 'the Linux > community'. While they might like to believe so, that's obviously not > the case. > If the rumors of MS getting involved at least financially with Canonical, we might see some changes going forward. >> If the 'community' is happy with a miniscule share of the market, > > LOL! Linux is not in a market, that's the point. > I'm sorry, but they are in a market. Even the loonies that are here say that. Frankly I've felt that a free product really isn't part of the market since 'market' implies money/sales. >> then the open and free nature ensures that will be the case going >> forward. > > A nature which has ensured it for almost a quarter of a century, the > span of time in which Linux has taken over pretty much everything but > the desktop... another reality that is conveniently overlooked. The > desktop arena isn't growing, either... it's being marginalized as we > 'speak' so you'd better get your trolling in while you can. > A long time to remain a miniscule player on the desktop, but yeah, that it has is a plus for Linux desktop. >> No trolling involved... :) > > Of course not ;) Not a bit of it! No smiley involved either! I think the major reason the advocates and I have big differences is that they look at the tech for tech's sake. With my background I look at tech from a marketing/sales standpoint. Unfortunately there is a bit of animosity and misunderstanding between the two and always has been. -- Lloyd
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Five years of LibreOffice. William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-01 23:03 +0100
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 22:28 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-02 00:33 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 22:50 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-02 00:54 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 23:02 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-01 19:07 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-02 07:18 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 12:30 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-02 09:42 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 20:40 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-02 13:55 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-02 23:03 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-02 14:22 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 02:26 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-02 23:32 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 08:12 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 13:08 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 07:43 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 14:48 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 10:54 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 08:55 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 16:08 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-03 16:51 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:20 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-03 23:34 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 18:30 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 00:32 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 18:39 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 00:40 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 02:25 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 19:46 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-03 23:09 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-04 05:20 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-04 00:18 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-04 06:28 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-04 00:31 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-04 06:32 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 23:53 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 15:49 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-03 19:18 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-05 07:35 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-05 14:40 +0100
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-05 09:06 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-05 09:10 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 11:36 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 15:42 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-05 12:33 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 16:43 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 13:40 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-05 15:26 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 18:02 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-05 17:39 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 13:32 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:55 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-05 15:22 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 17:52 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 22:14 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. nom de plume <nomdeplume@stickybit.guru> - 2015-10-05 21:49 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-07 15:21 -0600
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-05 15:20 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-05 13:00 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 19:24 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:52 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-03 17:08 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:19 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 10:29 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 10:02 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-03 23:31 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 21:39 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 14:48 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 00:01 +0200
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 15:20 -0700
Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 00:28 +0200
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 18:41 -0400
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 15:47 -0700
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-03 19:13 -0400
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 10:20 +0200
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-04 09:48 -0700
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-04 18:54 +0200
Re: Snit Michael Glasser admits he as claiming bullshit Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-04 10:03 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 15:51 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-03 14:49 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-05 09:00 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-05 09:05 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-04 08:38 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 12:48 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-04 09:11 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 14:26 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-04 12:05 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-02 22:46 -0500
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 08:32 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 13:06 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 09:50 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 14:16 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 10:47 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 07:46 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 14:53 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:00 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:05 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 16:17 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-03 11:20 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:01 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-03 12:08 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:13 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. onion knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-03 12:29 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 12:57 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 19:20 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 19:37 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-02 11:38 -0400
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 15:41 -0700
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 22:29 +0000
Re: Five years of LibreOffice. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-01 20:43 -0400
csiph-web