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


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #318616

Re: A challenge for the "advocates"

From owl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject Re: A challenge for the "advocates"
Date 2015-09-02 15:29 +0000
Organization ok by me, so long as it doesn't get out of hand
Message-ID <fsmnvc9.kdfi@rooftop.invalid> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <ms6r89$k73$2@dont-email.me> <ms71du$g74$2@dont-email.me> <D20C58BE.59B15%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <fsmd93.idfo@rooftop.invalid> <D20C5EEB.59B30%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 9/2/15, 8:01 AM, in article fsmd93.idfo@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/2/15, 7:36 AM, in article ms71du$g74$2@dont-email.me, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s>
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On 2015-09-02 8:49 AM, ronb wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 08:20:43 +0000, vallor wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Of course, that's part of the guy's MO:  act in an offensive manner,
>>>>>> then claim that he just wants to "talk about technology".  It's a "gag"
>>>>>> that is so old that it pees rust, farts dust, and gives powdered milk.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hate to say this, but as much as I like your (and Peter's) posts, I'm
>>>>> about ready to put both of you in the killfile for a month. I'm sick of
>>>>> reading "Snit's" constant horseshit, even second hand.
>>>> 
>>>> Oh, the HUMANITY! How will Vallor the Hutt and Peter the Klöwn survive a
>>>> month in your killfile?
>>>> 
>>> Really comes down to I challenged the "advocates" to see if their tool with
>>> so much "choice" could do a few tasks I find easy to do elsewhere.
>> 
>>> And they ran off screaming and leaving insults in their wake.
>> 
>>> The only even close attempt has been from Owl who has to make system wide
>>> scripts tied to system wide hot keys to even attempt to look like he can do
>>> these things in a streamlined way.
>> 
>> Much more streamlined than the System Wide Print Dialog on OSuX.

> Again: you need to make system wide hotkeys tied to scripts to try to
> emulate what I do WITHOUT such scripting made just to try to "win".

> Show your scripts. Show making them.

No.  No more source code.  You have a UNIX system.  Learn how to use it.

> Your workflow is a LOT more time consuming.

No it's not.  It's much more streamlined.

>>> But then he leaves out the part of creating the script! He ignores that the
>>> workflow he uses involves a *LOT* more than what he shows on screen, and
>>> that to do it he needs to use multiple VMs so he can avoid getting his menus
>>> cluttered and having too many hot keys to remember.
>> 
>> Lying dumbass.  I used multipe VMs because the task switched to one
>> involving email, and I needed a way to demonstrated that while maintaining
>> anonymity; so I took the work from my host system to a virtual network.

> I already gave you a list of the tasks you would have to script... came to
> dozens.

Most of that crap could be part of a case statement in a single script.

> Then you lied and said these would all be in OS X's print dialog. Nope. They
> are where you want them - in context.

No they're not.  You have a "Save to Recipes Folder" menu that will show
up in a spreadsheet's view of the System Print Dialog.  LOL.

> You can set most to hot keys (maybe
> all?) but no need to. And no need for a million icons in a launcher.

You can do whatever you like on Linux.  It's OSuX that is limiting.

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


Thread

A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 14:08 -0700
  Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-01 23:42 +0200
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 15:32 -0700
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-09-02 08:20 +0000
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-02 04:52 -0700
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 12:49 +0000
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-02 08:04 -0500
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 10:36 -0400
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:01 +0000
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:29 +0000
              Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 08:48 -0700
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 13:49 -0700
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 17:38 -0700
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-09-02 21:58 -0600
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-09-02 19:41 +0000
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 23:41 +0000
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-03 09:27 -0400
  Snit!  Give it up, YOU degenerate. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 14:43 -0700
    Re: Snit!  Give it up, YOU degenerate. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-09-01 23:55 +0000
      Re: Snit!  Give it up, YOU degenerate. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 18:44 -0700
  Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 14:57 -0700
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-01 22:39 +0000
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 15:44 -0700
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-01 23:10 +0000
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 15:52 -0700
  Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 18:02 -0700
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 08:13 +0200
      Re: Another Snit Circus attempt. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-02 04:50 -0700
  Re: A challenge for the "advocates" owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 14:56 +0000
  Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 00:26 +0000
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 07:33 +0000
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 00:44 -0700
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 00:51 +0000
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 21:01 -0500
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:03 -0500
              Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:52 -0500
                Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:23 -0500
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-04 11:19 -0500
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 09:47 -0700
    Re: A challenge for the "advocates" JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-04 11:15 -0500
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 09:49 -0700
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 21:08 -0500
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 00:54 -0500
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:54 -0500
              Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:23 -0500
      Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 21:06 -0500
        Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 00:57 -0500
          Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:56 -0500
            Re: A challenge for the "advocates" Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:24 -0500

csiph-web