Money in the software business is never an issue for the customer. If
they do what they're supposed to do, and nothing more than that, openly
or subterraneanly, the money paid is well, well, well worth it. So this "FOSS" thing everybody here is pro or con about, should really be just
"OSS". The issue, always, is the _abuse_ that the user experiences in
using them.
As far as the OS is concerned, Windows OS is an abusive product. It is
not so because you have to pay for it. It is certainly so because it
abuses the users in multiple, different ways. Furthermore, it does so deliberately. Therefore, this is not just the nuisance involved. Yes,
forced lengthy and time-consuming updates are bothersome, but that's not
the big problem. Problem is that (for instance) they _deliberately_
remove all your modifications and adjustments that you had spent time to create, each time such updates are made, if any of them prevents them to subject the user to commercials.
Say, this "Edge" thingy. They force it on you certainly for a reason :)
I have no doubt, the Edge running in the background without even your knowledge is collecting and selling your behavior to a myriad of
commercial companies.
They're crooks.
Using the users' paid-for equipment to make money by selling user
information without permission, and without sharing the revenue thus
made with them, is simply theft. So it is abuse.
Microsoft owes each user millions of dollars, for ruining their time,
and using their equipments without their permission, to make money.
They're crooks!
So what is this Linux then.
Linux, for me, and perhaps only in my imagination, gives the promise
that if I'm careful with it, it won't abuse me. But I'd be damned if I
trust that :)
Haven't started it yet, but after I seriously begin using Linux, if it
turns out relatively non-abusive, I may even pay a reasonable price for
using it (donation or something). But if it pans out to be abusive to
me, which it might, then there's really no difference between Windows
and Linux.
Who's certain these Linux OS's of yours aren't selling information about
you to commercial companies? They certainly do so for the NSA, this much
is proven. So why not to commercial companies as well?
On 12.03.24 01:00, Physfitfreak wrote:
Who's certain these Linux OS's of yours aren't selling information about
you to commercial companies? They certainly do so for the NSA, this much
is proven.
Care to share a link where I could read about Linux OS as a whole or a
Linux distro (which are not the same thing) sharing data with the NSA?
So why not to commercial companies as well?
You can check it yourself: there are plenty of traffic monitors around.
Run them and see where the traffic goes.
Money in the software business is never an issue for the customer. If
they do what they're supposed to do, and nothing more than that, openly
or subterraneanly, the money paid is well, well, well worth it. So this "FOSS" thing everybody here is pro or con about, should really be just
"OSS". The issue, always, is the _abuse_ that the user experiences in
using them.
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 07:19:57 -0400, Joel wrote:
Get some real drugs, fairy.
Stick a cherry bomb up your fuckin' ass and have your ladyboy
light the fuse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_bomb
That'll be a REAL hot foot.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
Get some real drugs, fairy.
I use FOSS products exclusively,
both for my extensive avocational projects and
for my equally extensive business ($$$$$) purposes (for which I make
BIG BUCKS).
Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:
Say, this "Edge" thingy. They force it on you certainly for a reason :)
I have no doubt, the Edge running in the background without even your
knowledge is collecting and selling your behavior to a myriad of
commercial companies.
I use Edge as a third browser under Linux, actually, it's not like I
care about M$ software, having some philosophical need to purge it,
it's specifically what is currently Win11, the bloat. But Edge under
Linux is what I view my Hotmail/Outlook email with, and serves as a
third browser with regard to logging in to a site on behalf of someone
who visits me.
What we've seen with some Linux fanboy braggarts
is that one can write
very speedy code if one optimistically assumes that there's no on ever
doing anything malicious to hack into a system,
so there's zero overhead
to validate/sandbox the inputs.
Fortunately, CPU power now easily exceeds the 80% use case demands,
What we've seen with some Linux fanboy braggarts ...
On 3/11/24 7:25 PM, Joel wrote:
I use Edge as a third browser under Linux, actually, it's not like I
care about M$ software, having some philosophical need to purge it,
it's specifically what is currently Win11, the bloat. But Edge under
Linux is what I view my Hotmail/Outlook email with, and serves as a
third browser with regard to logging in to a site on behalf of someone
who visits me.
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Fortunately, CPU power now easily exceeds the 80% use case demands, plus storage has become quite cheap, which means that it isn't anywhere near
as important to have all code be so strongly optimized for performance through minimized size to have a good (& good enough) UI.
I can state, not optimistically but with absolute certainty, that there is/has/will no one ever doing anything malicious to hack into my system.
Nope. Never has. Never will.
Quality issues were a luxury that came later. We got by with whatever we
had, and none were abusive. The abuse began much later as Americans
turned more and more into Sheep.
This is after I had done everything to get rid of Edge. I even delete
every "Edge" folder on my computer every time they appear by themselves.
This is abuse.
favask wrote:
the burden of proof is always with the person who claims something
Not always
and he and all of you missed that
chance. And that's how sometimes it is.
On 3/12/2024 7:35 PM, rbowman wrote:
Then came Swing which turned Java into a bloated, slow, piece of crap.
So that's why Java lost popularity.
On 3/12/2024 9:15 AM, % wrote:
Nuxxie wrote:
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 07:19:57 -0400, Joel wrote:https://postimg.cc/kVvpnGqh
Get some real drugs, fairy.
Stick a cherry bomb up your fuckin' ass and have your ladyboy
light the fuse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_bomb
That'll be a REAL hot foot.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
The role of Photoshop is obvious in this. We don't know how Joel looks.
Yeah, sometimes kooks make ridiculous claims and run away when asked
for evidence.
And sometimes sorry asses still cry about losing the chance.
Learn to behave when asking for help. Otherwise fuck off, of course.
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:35:08 -0500, Physfitfreak wrote:
This is after I had done everything to get rid of Edge. I even delete
every "Edge" folder on my computer every time they appear by themselves.
This is abuse.
What you have to do is gain the privilige of either the "System" user
or the "Trusted Installer" user, both of which are higher than "Adminstrator."
There is software available (search for it) that allows one to run
as "System" or "Trusted Installer." Then just delete or disable everything that you want. I always disable Updates, Defender, and a whole slew of
other things. After that, my Microslop belongs to me.
It takes a bit of time, however. To properly "de-shitify" a Microslop
system can require a few hours but it's well worth it.
Also consider replacing the Microslop network junk with a program called "Treewalk." It is a caching nameserver. Just search for "treewalk DNS."
On 3/12/2024 7:35 PM, rbowman wrote:
Then came Swing
which turned Java into a bloated, slow, piece of crap.
So that's why Java lost popularity.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/11/24 7:25 PM, Joel wrote:
I use Edge as a third browser under Linux, actually, it's not like I
care about M$ software, having some philosophical need to purge it,
it's specifically what is currently Win11, the bloat. But Edge under
Linux is what I view my Hotmail/Outlook email with, and serves as a
third browser with regard to logging in to a site on behalf of someone
who visits me.
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well, there's bloat due to good practise and there's bloat due to bad practise... Cue Windows.
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it
is that time just to know that your click worked.
Yeah, the only super notable thing I can think of that uses it is
Minecraft. Of course, I'm sure there are plenty of apps that do, but
they don't usually advertise being written in Java. C(++/#) and Rust, on
the other hand..
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 21:29 this Tuesday (GMT):
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/11/24 7:25 PM, Joel wrote:
I use Edge as a third browser under Linux, actually, it's not like I
care about M$ software, having some philosophical need to purge it,
it's specifically what is currently Win11, the bloat. But Edge under
Linux is what I view my Hotmail/Outlook email with, and serves as a
third browser with regard to logging in to a site on behalf of someone >>>> who visits me.
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well, there's bloat due to good practise and there's bloat due to bad
practise... Cue Windows.
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it
is that time just to know that your click worked.
Timed it on my computer, and it took about 25s to open the main window.
Then again, most of that time was setting up extensions according to the progress bar.
Timed it on my computer, and it took about 25s to open the main window.
Then again, most of that time was setting up extensions according to the progress bar.
There is software available (search for it) that allows one to run as
"System" or "Trusted Installer." Then just delete or disable
everything that you want.
It really is a shame that you have to rely on external tools to control
your system like that.
Also consider replacing the Microslop network junk with a program
called "Treewalk." It is a caching nameserver. Just search for
"treewalk DNS."
Never heard of it, cool!
chrisv wrote:
If kooks making ridiculous claims made me cry, I wouldn't read cola,
kook. I spank them then move on.
(snipped, unread)
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 21:50:03 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:
There is software available (search for it) that allows one to run as
"System" or "Trusted Installer." Then just delete or disable
everything that you want.
It really is a shame that you have to rely on external tools to control
your system like that.
There must be a big demand for such control otherwise those tools wouldn't exist.
Many web sites provide scripts to automate the process of gutting Microslop but since Microslop changes the OS so frequently the user usually must do
the gutting manually.
Also consider replacing the Microslop network junk with a program
called "Treewalk." It is a caching nameserver. Just search for
"treewalk DNS."
Never heard of it, cool!
Actually, AFAIK Treewalk has been orphaned and unmaintained for many years, but I kept the original copy and it still functions on Winblows 10/11.
chrisv wrote:
Physfitfreak wrote:
chrisv wrote:
If kooks making ridiculous claims made me cry, I wouldn't read cola,
kook. I spank them then move on.
(snipped, unread)
Run away, kook!
(snipped, unread)
I thought it was you who were claiming that Linux
shares data with the NSA...
But the commander _knew_ something about his troops when he ordered them
to walk.
And about Germans and the Irish, those two people are just the ones that
are hard for an Iranian to study, because they've shared same enemy with
Iran for a long time (the Brits). So it's not clear what their inner
motives would have been if they didn't share an enemy with Iranians.
<brevsnip>
Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
I think if you want a secure system you have let them have some
control of it. It's a good reason to use Linux, avoiding the pitfalls
of Winblows.
have to* let them [M$] have some control of it
The fledgling US fought a was to secede from Britain in 1776 and then had >another go around in 1812. Britain half-heatedly supported the Confederacy >during the Civil War. Both the Germans and Irish have axes to grind with
the Brits. Still fools like Wilson and Roosevelt support Britain.
The kook can now make these ridiculous claims forever and have the
excuse of never providing evidence, because I was once "mean" to him.
What a pussy. What a loon.
rbowman wrote:
The fledgling US fought a was to secede from Britain in 1776 and then
had another go around in 1812. Britain half-heatedly supported the >>Confederacy during the Civil War. Both the Germans and Irish have axes
to grind with the Brits. Still fools like Wilson and Roosevelt support >>Britain.
You think they were fools for supporting Britain?
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Torvalds himself said Linux allows that.
His father said so too!
He is a government official.
But it doesn't seem that NSA _generally_ can, if the OS doesn't allow
it.
There are indirect proof of that as well.
On 3/11/2024 11:54 PM, favask wrote:
You can check it yourself: there are plenty of traffic monitors around.
Run them and see where the traffic goes.
The culprit is not there for you to see anytime you want.
For instance, this Edge, I have had two occasions which I ran task
manager to make sure it wasn't running, but almost right after, when I
ran the Ccleaner garbage cleaner it told me "Edge needs to be closed
before it could run". Then right away, I'd go back to task manager and
would see Edge running there! Two times.
And tens and tens of other times I got the same message from Ccleaner
but didn't check the task manager to see Edge was running. Just had
Cleaner itself close the Edge.
This is after I had done everything to get rid of Edge.
I even delete
every "Edge" folder on my computer every time they appear by themselves.
This is abuse.
This is what "America Online" was doing to computers.
You couldn't get rid of it.
I had collected three links to information online to prove that,
then the above gentleman asked me for proof of it exactly as if he was
my boss and I owed him a million dollars that he knew I will never pay
him back.
So I told him to dig for it himself.
Not you, and not anyone else here, will ever get those three links from
me.
You'd have to go to ChrisV for that.
Le 13-03-2024, Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> a écrit :
On 3/11/2024 11:54 PM, favask wrote:
You can check it yourself: there are plenty of traffic monitors
around.
Run them and see where the traffic goes.
The culprit is not there for you to see anytime you want.
It is. You just have to learn how to do it.
For instance, this Edge, I have had two occasions which I ran task
manager to make sure it wasn't running, but almost right after, when I
ran the Ccleaner garbage cleaner it told me "Edge needs to be closed
before it could run". Then right away, I'd go back to task manager and
would see Edge running there! Two times.
So you have a way to see it. Now, you have to learn how to stop starting
it on your computer.
And tens and tens of other times I got the same message from Ccleaner
but didn't check the task manager to see Edge was running. Just had
Cleaner itself close the Edge.
Once again, you see it, you close it. You just have to prevent it to be launched again.
This is after I had done everything to get rid of Edge.
Evidently, you didn't. Or it wouldn't run on your computer.
I even delete every "Edge" folder on my computer every time they appear
by themselves.
It looks it's not enough.
This is abuse.
This is Windows. You get what you want. On my computer there is nothing
I don't want.
This is what "America Online" was doing to computers.
You choose to use it, you get it.
You couldn't get rid of it.
YOU can't get rid of Edge. I can. It's not about general possibilities,
it's about your personal way of doing things.
chrisv wrote:
You think they were fools for supporting Britain?
Yes. Germany got a late start on the industrial revolution due to being a >fragmented mess. After the unification they were quickly coming up to
speed and challenging Britain for the markets. This was very similar to
Japan and China's rise. Britain couldn't abide by the competition. France
was still butt hurt from losing the Franco-Prussian war. Again it was all >about European hegemony.
The US should have let them sort it out by themselves. Without US materiel >and eventually troops Britain and France would have come to terms with the >new world order.
Wilson was an idealist and when he went to Versailles the Brits and French >played him like a fiddle. Versailles set the stage for WWII.
Roosevelt wanted a war and went to great lengths to get it. 'Neutrality'
was a sham. Without the support it's hard to say what would have happened. >Hitler saw Britain as a kindred spirit and some Brits were impressed by
his leadership. He recognized Germany is in a very poor location to be a >naval power and would have been happy to let Britannia continue to rule
the sea.
There have been some interesting fictional accounts of a world where
Germany won. As is, Britain won the war and lost the Empire.
I have an in-depth knowledge of digital computation
It takes a bit of time, however. To properly "de-shitify" a Microslop
system can require a few hours but it's well worth it.
On 3/12/2024 3:20 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
Apphole is strongly preferred by most brain-dead females
and sodomites (a.k.a. homosexuals).
Hahhahahh :-))
I kind of think so too. For 45 fucking years I haven't understood what
it is about it that attracts some people. The higher price of it? Then
you ought to add masochists to your list as well.
I think it works a bit like lipstick for its fans too :)
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 13:43:52 -0400, -hh wrote:
What we've seen with some Linux fanboy braggarts
Why thank you. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
is that one can write
very speedy code if one optimistically assumes that there's no on ever
doing anything malicious to hack into a system,
I can state, not optimistically but with absolute certainty, that there is/has/will no one ever doing anything malicious to hack into my system.
Nope. Never has. Never will.
so there's zero overhead
to validate/sandbox the inputs.
It's not just valdating the inputs but a plethora of other things that
the distros enforct that really, truly, and unequivocally degrade the performance of system.
Distro lackeys, like you, are using deliberately crippled systems.
Fortunately, CPU power now easily exceeds the 80% use case demands,
Not MY use case.
But then that's just more excuse mongering from an idiot that is forced
to use a crippled system and is helplessly trapped therein.
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work, if you consider
your time to do such things to not count as anything other than "free",
well I've got a lawn for you to mow...
On 3/12/24 2:16 PM, Nuxxie wrote:
I can state, not optimistically but with absolute certainty, that there
is/has/will no one ever doing anything malicious to hack into my system.
Nope. Never has. Never will.
That you know of. Unfortunately, when your system is absent of security crosschecks, you basically have no way of knowing.
It's not just valdating the inputs but a plethora of other things that
the distros enforct that really, truly, and unequivocally degrade the
performance of system.
Sure, but one needs only but one simple example for simple minds.
Distro lackeys, like you, are using deliberately crippled systems.
Where what "crippled" means is, of course, left conveniently vague.
On 3/12/24 11:55 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
On 3/12/2024 3:20 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
Apphole is strongly preferred by most brain-dead females
and sodomites (a.k.a. homosexuals).
Hahhahahh :-))
I kind of think so too. For 45 fucking years I haven't understood what
it is about it that attracts some people. The higher price of it? Then
you ought to add masochists to your list as well.
I think it works a bit like lipstick for its fans too :)
Choosing Apple was a deliberate informed decision, illustrated by the
old saying "Life is like a bullshit sandwich: the more bread you have,
the less bullshit you have to eat."
In the big scheme of things, I've found that the price premium is
actually favorable as its lifecycle costs are more favorable and thus,
it ends up being actually cheaper in the long run. Of course, unlike
many Linux fanboys (and Feeb in particular), this is because I actually
place a non-zero value on my time spent in upkeep of my IT systems.
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work, if you consider
your time to do such things to not count as anything other than "free",
well I've got a lawn for you to mow...
Le 13-03-2024, Nuxxie <nuxxie@linux.rocks> a écrit :
It takes a bit of time, however. To properly "de-shitify" a Microslop
system can require a few hours but it's well worth it.
« format C: » fast, simple and easy.
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work,
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:49:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <ut4t4o$32464$1@dont-email.me>:
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work,
So who is doing that?
Yes I see you want my dick's attention.
My answer is no, it's too good for you.
On 3/16/2024 5:15 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 13-03-2024, Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> a écrit :
Torvalds himself said Linux allows that.
Source?
ChrisV.
Choosing Apple was a deliberate informed decision, illustrated by the
old saying "Life is like a bullshit sandwich: the more bread you have,
the less bullshit you have to eat."
Of course, unlike
many Linux fanboys (and Feeb in particular), this is because I actually
place a non-zero value on my time spent in upkeep of my IT systems.
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work,
Le 13-03-2024, Nuxxie <nuxxie@linux.rocks> a écrit :
It takes a bit of time, however. To properly "de-shitify" a Microslop
system can require a few hours but it's well worth it.
« format C: » fast, simple and easy.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/11/24 7:25 PM, Joel wrote:
I use Edge as a third browser under Linux, actually, it's not like I
care about M$ software, having some philosophical need to purge it,
it's specifically what is currently Win11, the bloat. But Edge under
Linux is what I view my Hotmail/Outlook email with, and serves as a
third browser with regard to logging in to a site on behalf of someone
who visits me.
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well, there's bloat due to good practise and there's bloat due to bad practise... Cue Windows.
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it
is that time just to know that your click worked.
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:12:16 -0400, -hh wrote:
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet
This is known as "just in time" compilation and is standard
practice on thst junk Microslop Winblows. Instead of distributing
binaries, like on GNU/Linux,they will package byte code and then
compile all or portions of it on demand.
Naked inefficiency and bloat is Microslop.
Only the deranged run Microslop.
On 3/12/24 5:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it
is that time just to know that your click worked.
Except for when it isn't. Launch time really doesn't mean all that much anymore IMO, as its not an all that frequently repeated of an activity (especially with adequate RAM), ...
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet - YMMV as to how much this design decision is manipulating user perceptions.
So all/most Windows apps are secretly Java?
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:40:08 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:
So all/most Windows apps are secretly Java?
It's no secret.
Microslop, as they have done with many other things, stole Java
snd turned it into their own language called .NET.
Microslop doesn't want to embrace and use standards. They want
to steal the ideas of standards and then make new standards which
they then own, control, and license.
I'm surprised that Microslop hasn't tried to "invent" it's
own Internet, called MicroNet or something.
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:
Nuxxie <nuxxie@linux.rocks> wrote at 15:28 this Monday (GMT):
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:12:16 -0400, -hh wrote:
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet
This is known as "just in time" compilation and is standard
practice on thst junk Microslop Winblows. Instead of distributing
binaries, like on GNU/Linux,they will package byte code and then
compile all or portions of it on demand.
Naked inefficiency and bloat is Microslop.
Only the deranged run Microslop.
So all/most Windows apps are secretly Java?
I'm pretty sure Russell is just plain wrong, on this one.
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:40:08 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:
So all/most Windows apps are secretly Java?
It's no secret.
Microslop, as they have done with many other things, stole Java
snd turned it into their own language called .NET.
Microslop doesn't want to embrace and use standards. They want
to steal the ideas of standards and then make new standards which
they then own, control, and license.
I'm surprised that Microslop hasn't tried to "invent" it's
own Internet, called MicroNet or something.
Doesn't it have a network of its own for Microsoft users? You can instant-message anyone in the world who has a hotmail account. "MSN"
stands for "Microsoft Network"
its too big
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 14:56:58 -0500, Physfitfreak wrote:
Doesn't it have a network of its own for Microsoft users? You can
instant-message anyone in the world who has a hotmail account. "MSN"
stands for "Microsoft Network"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSN_Dial-up
It had a long and strange history and I don't think much of it exists anymore. They were late to the game. MSDN (Microsoft Developers Network)
had been hosted on CompuServe, which was a rather expensive subscription.
AOL sucked and was used by the plebs. I used Delphi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_(online_service)
You got to know Archie, Veronica and Jughead really well.
On 3/18/2024 11:51 AM, Nuxxie wrote:
I'm surprised that Microslop hasn't tried to "invent" it's
own Internet, called MicroNet or something.
Doesn't it have a network of its own for Microsoft users? You can instant-message anyone in the world who has a hotmail account. "MSN"
stands for "Microsoft Network".
Nuxxie wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:40:08 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:
So all/most Windows apps are secretly Java?
It's no secret.
Microslop, as they have done with many other things, stole Java
snd turned it into their own language called .NET.
Microslop doesn't want to embrace and use standards. They want
to steal the ideas of standards and then make new standards which
they then own, control, and license.
I'm surprised that Microslop hasn't tried to "invent" it's
own Internet, called MicroNet or something.
From 1996:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/0716microsoft.html
Lately, there has been much publicity for Microsoft's new-found focus on
the Internet, starting with a celebrated speech last December in which
Gates said his company would cooperatively "embrace and extend"
industrywide Internet technical standards.
. . .
Rather than merely embrace and extend the Internet, the company's critics
now fear, Microsoft intends to engulf it.
Microsoft executives insist that the company intends to cooperate with
Internet standards groups. But according to industry executives who have
observed Microsoft's activities in these standards sessions, there is
evidence that the company is attempting to employ the same sort of business
practices that helped it rise to dominance in the personal computing
industry -- and that have repeatedly drawn the scrutiny of federal
antitrust investigators.
Crimosoft had some success, and some failures. They tried the same thing
with "word processor" standards, with perhaps more success. Microsoft Office si
embedded like a tick in the corporate world. Along with their pals Cisco and Adobe.
candycanearter07 wrote:
its too big
That's what she said.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/12/24 11:55 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
On 3/12/2024 3:20 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
Apphole is strongly preferred by most brain-dead females
and sodomites (a.k.a. homosexuals).
Hahhahahh :-))
I kind of think so too. For 45 fucking years I haven't understood what
it is about it that attracts some people. The higher price of it? Then
you ought to add masochists to your list as well.
I think it works a bit like lipstick for its fans too :)
Choosing Apple was a deliberate informed decision, illustrated by the
old saying "Life is like a bullshit sandwich: the more bread you have,
the less bullshit you have to eat."
In the big scheme of things, I've found that the price premium is
actually favorable as its lifecycle costs are more favorable and thus,
it ends up being actually cheaper in the long run. Of course, unlike
many Linux fanboys (and Feeb in particular), this is because I actually
place a non-zero value on my time spent in upkeep of my IT systems.
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work, if you consider
your time to do such things to not count as anything other than "free",
well I've got a lawn for you to mow...
Linux distros cover the full spectrum of maintenance time. Choose
your sweet spot.
You like Apple? And its hardware silo? Kool.
Le 17-03-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:49:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote in <ut4t4o$32464$1@dont-email.me>:
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work,
So who is doing that?
FR/LP/NV/DG/whatever. He's the only one. He's not a representative Linux user. He's a Windows advocate trying to make Linux users passing for
fools. It looks like some take the bait.
Le 16-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work, if you consider
your time to do such things to not count as anything other than "free",
well I've got a lawn for you to mow...
You really miss a lot of points.
First, if you don't want to spend hours
to configure Linux, you just don't. You can use it out of the box.
Then,
unlike Mac which needs to be done in Apple's way, with Linux you can, if
you want, change its behaviour to make it work as you want.
It doesn't
require hours and hours of constant modifications but minutes from time
to time. And each minute invested is used times and times again, so I
really value my time and instead of keeping loosing time because of bad design by others, I win time with having something that suits me.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration effortlessly.
So yes, I value my time and my confort. And you didn't gave me anything
to mow because your way would make me lost a lot of time and comfort.
When I do something it's useful for a really long time. For example,
When I started to learn about tilling Windows Managers, it was with
wmii. Then I was able to use a lot of its configuration to switch to
i3wm. And then, it was the same with swaywm. So with the lot of
similarities between the WM, I used the same shortcuts and I didn't need
to learn anything new. For a very few time invested during the years.
Unlike Windows, which changed everything with each upgrade and I needed
a few months to find my way out each time.
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:36:53 -0400, -hh wrote:
Like many, I'm fine 95% of the time with the Apple / Microsoft defaults
on my systems.
Well good. I am happy for you.
Now get the fuck out. This is GNU/Linux group.
Why are you trying to mix oil an water (or, more properly,
dog shit and pizza pie)?
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:49:44 -0400, -hh wrote:
Choosing Apple was a deliberate informed decision, illustrated by the
old saying "Life is like a bullshit sandwich: the more bread you have,
the less bullshit you have to eat."
But the truly discerning connoisseur can always taste it.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/12/24 5:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it
is that time just to know that your click worked.
Except for when it isn't. Launch time really doesn't mean all that much
anymore IMO, as its not an all that frequently repeated of an activity
(especially with adequate RAM), ...
I prefer a faster launch time when I am eager to edit a PNG.
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet - YMMV as to how much this design
decision is manipulating user perceptions.
The thing about GIMP on Windows is that, until I got used to how slow it was to
even make something appear, I would end up with two copies of GIMP running. And maybe get an error like: "Error renaming temporary file: Permission denied".
For using, using Windows is like being pecked to death by ducks.
Nuxxie <nuxxie@linux.rocks> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:12:16 -0400, -hh wrote:
plus also because some software vendors
have manipulated their code to put the UI up quickly so that it looks
ready while it technically isn't yet
This is known as "just in time" compilation and is standard
practice on thst junk Microslop Winblows. Instead of distributing
binaries, like on GNU/Linux,they will package byte code and then
compile all or portions of it on demand.
Naked inefficiency and bloat is Microslop.
Only the deranged run Microslop.
You seem to have completely missed what -hh was referring to.
Le 12-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
It is. By definition. If it's a bloated application, it means it has
useless complexities. For some tasks you need complexity. It's not
bloated in those cases.
They are two issues with the bloated applications. First they waste resources. Second, they are more difficult to maintain than necessary.
Like many, I'm fine 95% of the time with the Apple / Microsoft defaults
on my systems.
Now get the fuck out. This is GNU/Linux group.
Nope.
First, I do use Linux on some of my mundane appliances. Check the archives.
Second, you can't make me.
Physfitfreak wrote:
Do you know what I mean by "Bozo"? I mean individuals like you here init looks like you'll never be one
COLA. Especially that "true American" one. That's a Bozo right there.
On 3/16/24 5:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Linux distros cover the full spectrum of maintenance time. Choose
your sweet spot.
Which ones are as low for setup & maintenance as Apple? Name names.
From what I've seen, that's going to be a damn short list, because
there's few turnkey providers of hardware with Linux OS & software preinstalled out of the box.
You like Apple? And its hardware silo? Kool.
The logical fallacy here is that every hardware supplier will have a
"silo" of finite products, because no one supplier can offer more
diversity than the entire market because logically they must always be a subset of the total market. The more important and relevant question is
if they offer _adequate_ product variation to be viable in the market.
I've not used GIMP for awhile, so I just got a screen recorder running
and launched it. It went to go search everywhere for fonts, so after a minute or two, I killed the recording and let it just continue to run in
the background. Checked back a short while later and it was done; what really needs to be done to benchmark its launch time is to reboot the
system to start relatively 'clean'. We'll see if I bother...
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
I've not used GIMP for awhile, so I just got a screen recorder running
and launched it. It went to go search everywhere for fonts, so after a
minute or two, I killed the recording and let it just continue to run in
the background. Checked back a short while later and it was done; what
really needs to be done to benchmark its launch time is to reboot the
system to start relatively 'clean'. We'll see if I bother...
Clean boot on this Lenovo, starting GIMP and killing it as soon as I saw it was
ready:
$ time gimp
real 0m4.752s
user 0m2.089s
sys 0m0.325s
The "real" time includes loading a shitload of plugins and my reaction time for
seeing the app was completely load and hitting the key to kill gimp.
What kind of slopware are you running git on? MacOS? Windows?
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box? That
alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more touch
labor time spent.
Stphane CARPENTIER wrote:
You really miss a lot of points.
Miss?
Nah, just more that they were being ignored as largely irrelevant.
First, if you don't want to spend hours
to configure Linux, you just don't. You can use it out of the box.
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box?
That alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more
touch labor time spent.
Then,
unlike Mac which needs to be done in Apple's way, with Linux you can, if
you want, change its behaviour to make it work as you want.
Like many, I'm fine 95% of the time with the Apple / Microsoft defaults
on my systems.
It doesn't
require hours and hours of constant modifications but minutes from time
to time. And each minute invested is used times and times again, so I
really value my time and instead of keeping loosing time because of bad
design by others, I win time with having something that suits me.
Because those minutes & minutes of tweaking never add up? Nope.
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is
bad ... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration
effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak.
So yes, I value my time and my confort. And you didn't gave me anything
to mow because your way would make me lost a lot of time and comfort.
Precisely the reason to trust professionals to be closer to offering a
more optimal UI.
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:51:16 -0400, -hh wrote:
Now get the fuck out. This is GNU/Linux group.
Nope.
First, I do use Linux on some of my mundane appliances. Check the archives. >>
Then restrict your worthless babble to GNU/Linux.
Second, you can't make me.
A civilized and sophisticated human being does not need
to be "made." He will recognize propriety without external
assistance.
Thus, you have proven that you are neither -- and that
you are a fitting example for Microslop/Apphople supporters.
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:36:53 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <utcpgl$10gjc$1@dont-email.me>:
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box? That
alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more touch
labor time spent.
If only there were some kind of global database that
one could query for such information...
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something
running ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
(Not to mention the offerings by System76, as well as Dell.)
Oh, you'd better go to a Linux vendor, though -- otherwise, you'll
spend "hours and hours" to "make it work".
Right? Anybody else have that experience? "hours and hours"?
BTW, this Linux workstation (bought "turnkey") blows the doors
off Mrs. vallor's new Mac Studio.
My benchmark: running Foocus,
which uses pytorch, which is apparently not well-supported
on the Mac Studio. Maybe someday...
Compare & contrast is a useful method for analyzing various tools: when
Linux doesn't perform well in certain solution segments, an honest Linux advocate will be willing to admit that...and point out just what is the "better mousetrap".
To that end, a 'civilized and sophisticated' human readily recognizes
that "Jack of All Trades" is followed by "...and Master of None".
So use Linux where its strengths make it a better choice,
I am heavily involved in virtually ALL AREAS of contemporary computing
I'm just showing off what Linux can do relative to
Windows,
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
On 3/20/2024 1:43 PM, Lyin' Larry Piet drooled again:
I am heavily involved in virtually ALL AREAS of contemporary computing
LMFAO!
I can only imagine what you've twisted that vague claim to mean in your
deluded, self-important mind.
Russell talks a good game but shows little to nothing that
demonstrates great prowess.
At least I'm not even attempting to be
super-techie, I'm just showing off what Linux can do relative to
Windows,
he's showing how to obsess and waste effort on having some
control he can't live without on his spinning disk-based PC.
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...
think it was part of the "more choices are always better"
which backfired on chrisv
due to it being a clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something
running ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
-hh wrote:
Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
You really miss a lot of points.
Miss?
Nah, just more that they were being ignored as largely irrelevant.
To you. Not to many.
First, if you don't want to spend hours
to configure Linux, you just don't. You can use it out of the box.
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box?
Goal post shift.
That alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more
touch labor time spent.
Gosh, you might have to google.
Then,
unlike Mac which needs to be done in Apple's way, with Linux you can, if >>> you want, change its behaviour to make it work as you want.
Like many, I'm fine 95% of the time with the Apple / Microsoft defaults
on my systems.
Good for you.
It doesn't
require hours and hours of constant modifications but minutes from time
to time. And each minute invested is used times and times again, so I
really value my time and instead of keeping loosing time because of bad
design by others, I win time with having something that suits me.
Because those minutes & minutes of tweaking never add up? Nope.
Missing the point that optimizations save time in the long run? Yeap.
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is
bad ... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
One-size-fits-all designs can be optimal for all users, from toddlers
to experts... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
Bad logic. We've all seen how wrong that can go.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration
effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak.
Still denying the point that "tweaks" SAVE time.
So yes, I value my time and my confort. And you didn't gave me anything
to mow because your way would make me lost a lot of time and comfort.
Precisely the reason to trust professionals to be closer to offering a
more optimal UI.
Idiot. See above.
Response to be deleted, unread.
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...
Dishonest characterization of the issue, which was the effort required
to explain or document the process in detail, especially with an
obtuse asshole like DumFSck as the audience.
think it was part of the "more choices are always better"
Dishonest characterization of my position, which is that there can
never be too much choice in a free market.
which backfired on chrisv
Good God. He thinks he won that debate!
Only an idiot would have concluded that anything "backfired" on me. I
was correct in the points made. Correct in the economic theory.
Correct in the observed reality.
due to it being a clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
It was not an example of any such thing. It was an example of
-highhorse idiotically supporting a ridiculous argument. It was an
example of -highhorse being too stupid to realize that he's wrong, and
that he's *always* been wrong, on the choice issue.
Will he *ever* learn?
DumFSck has made the point that choosing all of the components in a PC
build would be cumbersome and unpleasant, a "big hassle", if every
detail and decision needed to be explained and justified to an obtuse
asshole like himself.
Well, so the fsck what? No one is doing that!
Only brain-dead
morons, like -highhorse and DumFSck, would argue that because such a requirement would turn the process into a "big hassle" it means that
there's "too much choice".
Does it need to be explained again? Outside of such a ridiculous
scenario, the process can be fun and rewarding! Done either alone or
with like-minded people, it can be a _lot_ of fun!
With his "clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" idiocy,
-highhorse, once again displays his propensity to make assertions that
fly in the face of observed reality. I do what I say. I research and specify each component of my PC's.
Does -highhorse expect us to believe that I say that the myriad
details and decisions need to explained to an obtuse asshole who can
nit-pick every point, every dollar spent?
Or, at least, documented in
detail to justify each decision as cost/performance optimal, right
down to latency of the DRAM? Obviously, I say no such thing.
The fact that something _can be_ a hassle does not mean that it should
never be done, any more than the fact that something _can be_ fun and rewarding means that it should always be done. It takes a genuine
idiot to point only to a worst-case (indeed, completely unrealistic)
scenario and claim that it proves that there is "too much" to deal
with.
This should have been understood the last time I explained it to these morons, but their skulls are just too thick.
chrisv wrote:
--
'Had I been there looking over your shoulder making you explain why
you chose each particular component over all the others in that
category, it would be hours and hours and a big hassle for you. All
thanks to "choice!".' - some dumb fsck, arguing that there's "too
much choice" in computer hardware
(snipped, unread)
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/16/24 5:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Linux distros cover the full spectrum of maintenance time. Choose
your sweet spot.
Which ones are as low for setup & maintenance as Apple? Name names.
Debian. Ubuntu. Arch.
That's just the ones I've used. I left out Gentoo because it takes a bit more effort at setup time.
All Linux distros are great at maintenance.
From what I've seen, that's going to be a damn short list, because
there's few turnkey providers of hardware with Linux OS & software
preinstalled out of the box.
Lol. You said "turnkey".
Are you perchance in Marketing?
You like Apple? And its hardware silo? Kool.
The logical fallacy here is that every hardware supplier will have a
"silo" of finite products, because no one supplier can offer more
diversity than the entire market because logically they must always be a
subset of the total market. The more important and relevant question is
if they offer _adequate_ product variation to be viable in the market.
Yeah. You marketing. :-D
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
I've not used GIMP for awhile, so I just got a screen recorder running
and launched it. It went to go search everywhere for fonts, so after a
minute or two, I killed the recording and let it just continue to run in
the background. Checked back a short while later and it was done; what
really needs to be done to benchmark its launch time is to reboot the
system to start relatively 'clean'. We'll see if I bother...
Clean boot on this Lenovo, starting GIMP and killing it as soon as I saw it was
ready:
$ time gimp
real 0m4.752s
user 0m2.089s
sys 0m0.325s
The "real" time includes loading a shitload of plugins and my reaction time for
seeing the app was completely load and hitting the key to kill gimp.
What kind of slopware are you running git on? MacOS? Windows?
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...
Dishonest characterization of the issue, which was the effort required
to explain or document the process in detail, especially with an
obtuse asshole like DumFSck as the audience.
think it was part of the "more choices are always better"
Dishonest characterization of my position, which is that there can
never be too much choice in a free market.
Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
which backfired on chrisv
Good God. He thinks he won that debate!
Only an idiot would have concluded that anything "backfired" on me. I
was correct in the points made. Correct in the economic theory.
Correct in the observed reality.
due to it being a clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
It was not an example of any such thing. It was an example of
-highhorse idiotically supporting a ridiculous argument. It was an
example of -highhorse being too stupid to realize that he's wrong, and
that he's *always* been wrong, on the choice issue.
Will he *ever* learn?
DumFSck has made the point that choosing all of the components in a PC
build would be cumbersome and unpleasant, a "big hassle", if every
detail and decision needed to be explained and justified to an obtuse
asshole like himself.
Well, so the fsck what? No one is doing that! Only brain-dead
morons, like -highhorse and DumFSck, would argue that because such a requirement would turn the process into a "big hassle" it means that
there's "too much choice".
Does it need to be explained again? Outside of such a ridiculous
scenario, the process can be fun and rewarding! Done either alone or
with like-minded people, it can be a _lot_ of fun!
With his "clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" idiocy,
-highhorse, once again displays his propensity to make assertions that
fly in the face of observed reality. I do what I say. I research and specify each component of my PC's.
Does -highhorse expect us to believe that I say that the myriad
details and decisions need to explained to an obtuse asshole who can
nit-pick every point, every dollar spent? Or, at least, documented in
detail to justify each decision as cost/performance optimal, right
down to latency of the DRAM? Obviously, I say no such thing.
The fact that something _can be_ a hassle does not mean that it should
never be done, any more than the fact that something _can be_ fun and rewarding means that it should always be done. It takes a genuine
idiot to point only to a worst-case (indeed, completely unrealistic)
scenario and claim that it proves that there is "too much" to deal
with.
This should have been understood the last time I explained it to these morons, but their skulls are just too thick.
On 3/20/24 5:46 AM, vallor wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:36:53 -0400, -hh
<recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote in <utcpgl$10gjc$1@dont-email.me>:
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box? That
alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more
touch labor time spent.
If only there were some kind of global database that one could query
for such information...
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something running
ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
I've found that the off-the-box ChromeOS solutions have been pretty lightweight on hardware specifications.
(Not to mention the offerings by System76, as well as Dell.)
And HP. They've offered some decent towers with Ubuntu, but there's
still then the DIY search for Apps.
Oh, you'd better go to a Linux vendor, though -- otherwise, you'll
spend "hours and hours" to "make it work".
Right? Anybody else have that experience? "hours and hours"?
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
BTW, this Linux workstation (bought "turnkey") blows the doors off Mrs.
vallor's new Mac Studio.
And this turnkey is ... what?
And what came pre-installed and are you
still using the same?
My benchmark: running Foocus,
which uses pytorch, which is apparently not well-supported on the Mac
Studio. Maybe someday...
Different tools for different jobs...
...and yet quite ironic that even Mrs. Vallor chose to buy Apple,
despite having an in-house Linux IT family member expert support.
I am heavily involved in virtually ALL AREAS of contemporary computing
and I know of no such "segment."
And MacOS and Windows isn't? They've also had "auto-update" for years
now.
Oh, you'd better go to a Linux vendor, though -- otherwise, you'll spend "hours and hours" to "make it work".
Right? Anybody else have that experience? "hours and hours"?
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:56:52 -0400, DFS wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
some dumb fsck wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:56:52 -0400, DFS wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
On 3/19/24 4:39 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/16/24 5:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Linux distros cover the full spectrum of maintenance time. Choose
your sweet spot.
Which ones are as low for setup & maintenance as Apple? Name names.
Debian. Ubuntu. Arch.
That's just the ones I've used. I left out Gentoo because it takes a bit more
effort at setup time.
So what websites can I go buy these distro's preinstalled on the hardware?
All Linux distros are great at maintenance.
And MacOS and Windows isn't? They've also had "auto-update" for years now.
One needs to experience just how well integrated the various 'ecosystem' pieces are to appreciate them.
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:43:43 +0000, Nuxxie wrote:
I am heavily involved in virtually ALL AREAS of contemporary computing
and I know of no such "segment."
I should collect your pithy sayings to add to the fortune database.
$ fortune | cowsay
________________________________________
/ When you are about to die, a wombat is \
| better than no company at all. |
| |
| -- Roger Zelazny, "Doorways in the |
\ Sand" /
----------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
For the Pythonistas, yes there is a cowsay module.
"1/2 of all Linux sheeple users immediately run to Ubuntu." -
DumFSck, lying shamelessly
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
--
'Had I been there looking over your shoulder making you explain why
you chose each particular component over all the others in that
category, it would be hours and hours and a big hassle for you. All
thanks to "choice!".' - some dumb fsck, arguing that there's "too
much choice" in computer hardware
(snipped, unread)
Of course, -highhorse battles on, *refusing* to admit defeat.
Imagine being so *stupid* as DumFSck to believe that the above is a
"winning argument". And -highhorse supported it!
*Astonishing* idiocy.
Too *stupid* to figure-out that their argument is easily turned-around
with "If I was doing it with other decent, like-minded people (as
opposed to obtuse assholes who are looking to ridicule and attack) it
would be hours and hours of fun!"
Does that make me right?
In the paragraph that I responded-to in my previous post, -highhorse dishonestly frames the argument, he claims that a reasonable and
correct argument "backfired", and he conjures-up and attacks with shit
which is clearly untrue, like his "clear example of
do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" nonsense.
IOW, nothing but garbage. That's classic -highhorse, when he's
defeated, butthurt, and has got nothing *but* garbage to respond with.
chrisv wrote:
In the paragraph that I responded-to in my previous post, -highhorse >>dishonestly frames the argument, he claims that a reasonable and
correct argument "backfired", and he conjures-up and attacks with shit >>which is clearly untrue, like his "clear example of >>do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" nonsense.
IOW, nothing but garbage. That's classic -highhorse, when he's
defeated, butthurt, and has got nothing *but* garbage to respond with.
(snipped, unread)
rbowman wrote:
some dumb fsck wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
Why update code when you can simply update the configuration?
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Induction doesn't prove anything except in mathematics. It might indicate that >something is probable.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
I'm not sure what triumph there is in DFS's claim above.
Why don't you install "sl"? ;->
That was 2010, and it was based on the data found on this site, which at
the time indicated 50% of Linux users ran Ubuntu.
On 21 Mar 2024 07:00:34 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in <l6248iFn16lU12@mid.individual.net>:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:56:52 -0400, DFS wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
It took me weeks and weeks to get my spinny desktop cube running!
That will almost
certainly be Linux, depending on how important MS Flight Simulator ends
up in the equation.
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:37:02 -0400, DFS wrote:
That was 2010, and it was based on the data found on this site, which
at the time indicated 50% of Linux users ran Ubuntu.
You spend too much time in Marty McFly's Delorean. Back in 1993 50% of
all Linux users ran Slackware.*
Another statistic pulled from my butt which is as good as any.
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:15:29 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
On 21 Mar 2024 07:00:34 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in
<l6248iFn16lU12@mid.individual.net>:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:56:52 -0400, DFS wrote:
"Theory" says Linux users update the code to make their apps and
desktops look and behave the way they want.
"Observed reality" PROVES they don't.
Speaking personally I have to agree. Unless it's something hideous like
dark mode I use whatever comes out of the box.
It took me weeks and weeks to get my spinny desktop cube running!
Spinny desktop cubes give me vertigo as do shaky windows and all the rest
of that crap. I had a friend who would spend hours messing with the
special effects. otoh I've spent hours trying to figure out how to prevent
a window from suddenly resizing itself when it gets too close to an edge.
Maybe not hours but it did take me longer than it should have to figure
out what the hell I was doing that would suddenly display all the active
apps on the desktop and drive a stake through its heart.
Several distros became dead to me when they insisted on following
Microsoft down the Aero rabbit hole. Truth is some days I'd like to go
back to a 100 column amber monitor.
rbowman wrote:
some dumb fsck wrote:
That was 2010, and it was based on the data found on this site, which
at the time indicated 50% of Linux users ran Ubuntu.
You spend too much time in Marty McFly's Delorean. Back in 1993 50% of
all Linux users ran Slackware.*
Another statistic pulled from my butt which is as good as any.
The reason so many people are running Ubuntu is that was most
vendors install, such as Dell.
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
In the paragraph that I responded-to in my previous post, -highhorse
dishonestly frames the argument, he claims that a reasonable and
correct argument "backfired", and he conjures-up and attacks with shit
which is clearly untrue, like his "clear example of
do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" nonsense.
IOW, nothing but garbage. That's classic -highhorse, when he's
defeated, butthurt, and has got nothing *but* garbage to respond with.
(snipped, unread)
Is anyone fooled by -highhorse's garbage, when it goes unrebutted?
All of us long-timers have seen his MO. When he's wrong, he makes
assertions that are clearly false. He denies things which are clearly
true. He trots-out atrocious "logic".
What kind of fool thinks that humping an obviously *stupid* DumFSck
attack is the path to "victory"? Does anyone here think that
DumFSck's argument, which -highhorse supported, was good?
When will he learn? There's not "too much choice" in *any* market,
and no amount of idiocy from fools who think that they know better
than the market is going to change that.
vallor wrote:
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
Well, it was "proven" that there can be "too much choice", you see.
(rolling eyes)
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:13:02 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 3/20/24 5:46 AM, vallor wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:36:53 -0400, -hh wrote
And who sells hardware with Linux OS preinstalled out of the box? That >>>> alone takes some searching for the retailers, so that's even more
touch labor time spent.
If only there were some kind of global database that one could query
for such information...
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something running
ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
I've found that the off-the-box ChromeOS solutions have been pretty
lightweight on hardware specifications.
(Not to mention the offerings by System76, as well as Dell.)
And HP. They've offered some decent towers with Ubuntu, but there's
still then the DIY search for Apps.
Oh, you'd better go to a Linux vendor, though -- otherwise, you'll
spend "hours and hours" to "make it work".
Right? Anybody else have that experience? "hours and hours"?
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
BTW, this Linux workstation (bought "turnkey") blows the doors off Mrs.
vallor's new Mac Studio.
And this turnkey is ... what?
I've only mentioned it half-a-dozen times. System76 Thelio.
And what came pre-installed and are you
still using the same?
No, and I didn't spend "hours and hours" to switch
it over to Linux Mint.
[[ There _is_ a problem with Linux, but it isn't what
you say it is. I will post that under separate cover. ]]
My benchmark: running Foocus,
which uses pytorch, which is apparently not well-supported on the Mac
Studio. Maybe someday...
Different tools for different jobs...
Can you elaborate? Why would you expect a system that touts
having a "neural engine" to utterly fail against the Thelio
when it comes to generative AI?
...and yet quite ironic that even Mrs. Vallor chose to buy Apple,
despite having an in-house Linux IT family member expert support.
Beats the pants off of using Windows. MacOS is Unix, and I do know
Unix, which is one reason why this is a Unix household.
I'm the one that got her the system. Her iMac was too
weak, and don't get me started about "Mac minis". Almost got her
a Mac Pro, but she thought that would be too extravagant. So
a Mac Studio splits the difference if one wants to throw money
at the problem that Apple performance sucks.
She also wants another system to run games on, since Apple has a blind
spot when it comes to modern immersive entertainment. That will almost certainly be Linux, depending on how important MS Flight
Simulator ends up in the equation. And, will be potentially using
the same Studio monitor if Apple hasn't walled people off
of that with their "stupid connector tricks": in other words,
the only "hours and hours" to be spent would be to make it work
with Apple hardware.
Actually, scratch that, my time isn't worth the effort to fight with
Apple hardware, when I can find her a nice, standard, 4K monitor
for less. So there you go, Hugh -- no "hours and hours", problem
solved.
Now for my other post...
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/19/24 4:39 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/16/24 5:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Linux distros cover the full spectrum of maintenance time. Choose
your sweet spot.
Which ones are as low for setup & maintenance as Apple? Name names.
Debian. Ubuntu. Arch.
That's just the ones I've used. I left out Gentoo because it takes a bit more
effort at setup time.
So what websites can I go buy these distro's preinstalled on the hardware?
I believe you've already been told. But,...
Starting with bare metal, tell me how to install MacOS on an "Apple".
All Linux distros are great at maintenance.
And MacOS and Windows isn't? They've also had "auto-update" for years now.
LOL at Windows "auto-update". Slow, and often requiring reboots. And no real choice about it these days.
One needs to experience just how well integrated the various 'ecosystem'
pieces are to appreciate them.
:-D
When I hear the word "integrated", my mind translates it as "vendor lock-in". Rampant in the domain in which I work.
vallor wrote:
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something
running ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
Obviously, a Chromebook is also far from optimal for most people,
despite the "larger marketshare" that gives the "full time UI
professionals" the "greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize
from".
-highhorse's anti-choice idiocy continues to astonish me.
You only have to look around you, to see that he's wrong. Pick a
market. Any healthy, competitive market will do.
On 3/21/24 7:52 AM, shitv wrote:
vallor wrote:
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv >>>> had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a >>>> clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
Well, it was "proven" that there can be "too much choice", you see.
(rolling eyes)
Because eye-rolling is a reliable indicator of chronic butthurt! /s
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 05:52:29 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
That will almost
certainly be Linux, depending on how important MS Flight Simulator ends
up in the equation.
Is that still around? I messed around with it in the early '80s. I was
also learning how to fly real planes. All I can say is if I was as bad at flying a Lark (sort of a Cessna 180 by Rockwell) as I was with the
simulator I wouldn't be bugging COLA today.
I read it and I wholeheartedly agree. I'll try to remember to elaborate
more on that thread, but the jist of it is that the "go it alone" aspect
of Linux is a barrier to marketplace adoption for new customers, which
would be referred to as a point of "friction". Similarly, what you
reference as 'lock in' would also be referred to as how customer
retention to a product is (or isn't) "sticky". For maximized success,
one wants one's product to be low friction and sticky ... easy for
people to adopt, and once they do, they never leave. That takes work to
be able to accomplish in the marketplace.
On 2024-03-22, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote at 22:56 this Wednesday (GMT):
vallor wrote:
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something
running ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
Obviously, a Chromebook is also far from optimal for most people,
despite the "larger marketshare" that gives the "full time UI
professionals" the "greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize
from".
-highhorse's anti-choice idiocy continues to astonish me.
You only have to look around you, to see that he's wrong. Pick a
market. Any healthy, competitive market will do.
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
I tried out Chromebooks. I agree. You can run Linux on them, but working around the ChromeOS is a pain.
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
chrisv is merely illustrating just how determined some fanboys can be to
try to deny even simple stuff. Here, it is of their time investments.
On 3/18/24 11:59 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/12/24 5:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
My gawd, GIMP on Linux is a second or two for the launch. On Windows it >>>> is that time just to know that your click worked.
Except for when it isn't. Launch time really doesn't mean all that much >>> anymore IMO, as its not an all that frequently repeated of an activity
(especially with adequate RAM), ...
I prefer a faster launch time when I am eager to edit a PNG.
Most people prefer faster launches. That's why it eventually became a
metric for focusing on.
I'm pretty sure Russell is just plain wrong,
on this one.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
I read it and I wholeheartedly agree. I'll try to remember to elaborate
more on that thread, but the jist of it is that the "go it alone" aspect
of Linux is a barrier to marketplace adoption for new customers, which
would be referred to as a point of "friction". Similarly, what you
reference as 'lock in' would also be referred to as how customer
retention to a product is (or isn't) "sticky". For maximized success,
one wants one's product to be low friction and sticky ... easy for
people to adopt, and once they do, they never leave. That takes work to
be able to accomplish in the marketplace.
This falls under the rubric of "no shit, Sherlock".
But if you grossly mess up and the recovery partition's been destroyed
too so as to truly need to do a bare metal install, the good news is
that all Macs for the past decade support having the OS reinstalled over
the Internet.
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is
bad
... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration
effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak.
So yes, I value my time and my confort. And you didn't gave me anything
to mow because your way would make me lost a lot of time and comfort.
Precisely the reason to trust professionals to be closer to offering a
more optimal UI.
When I do something it's useful for a really long time. For example,
When I started to learn about tilling Windows Managers, it was with
wmii. Then I was able to use a lot of its configuration to switch to
i3wm. And then, it was the same with swaywm. So with the lot of
similarities between the WM, I used the same shortcuts and I didn't need
to learn anything new. For a very few time invested during the years.
Unlike Windows, which changed everything with each upgrade and I needed
a few months to find my way out each time.
Which for users who don't need to know how to program tiling, but just
use the UI, this is relevant...how?
Once installed, Linux takes much less time to "get ready" than Windows
does, in my experience. Only a ridiculous person would complain about
the small amount of time needed to install and configure a new
installation.
I pity the kids.
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:20:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
We bought one for testing. It handled the web app reasonably well which
was a surprise.
On 2024-03-22, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
RonB wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 2024-03-22, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote at 22:56 this Wednesday (GMT):
vallor wrote:
BTW, what hh really wants in a Linux system is something
running ChromeOS. You telling me he can't find a Chromebook?
Obviously, a Chromebook is also far from optimal for most people,
despite the "larger marketshare" that gives the "full time UI
professionals" the "greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize
from".
-highhorse's anti-choice idiocy continues to astonish me.
You only have to look around you, to see that he's wrong. Pick a
market. Any healthy, competitive market will do.
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
I tried out Chromebooks. I agree. You can run Linux on them, but working >>> around the ChromeOS is a pain.
Nonsense! School kids everywhere use them! :-)
I pity the kids.
On 22 Mar 2024 02:29:21 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in
<l648o1F2m1hU9@mid.individual.net>:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:37:02 -0400, DFS wrote:
That was 2010, and it was based on the data found on this site, which
at the time indicated 50% of Linux users ran Ubuntu.
You spend too much time in Marty McFly's Delorean. Back in 1993 50% of
all Linux users ran Slackware.*
Another statistic pulled from my butt which is as good as any.
The reason so many people are running Ubuntu is that was most
vendors install, such as Dell.
System76 does have Pop!_OS, which I would have tried if the name
wasn't so cutesy.
One reason I prefer Mint is that snaps are turned off by default.
Snaps aren't good for the Linux ecosystem, because you can't
build your own "snap store" -- it's all Canonical's baby.
vallor wrote:
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv
had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a
clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
Well, it was "proven" that there can be "too much choice", you see.
(rolling eyes)
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 02:44 this Friday (GMT):
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 05:52:29 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
That will almost
certainly be Linux, depending on how important MS Flight Simulator
ends up in the equation.
Is that still around? I messed around with it in the early '80s. I was
also learning how to fly real planes. All I can say is if I was as bad
at flying a Lark (sort of a Cessna 180 by Rockwell) as I was with the
simulator I wouldn't be bugging COLA today.
Yeah, there was a modern remake of MS Flight Sim "recently".
On 3/16/24 5:49 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 12-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
It is. By definition. If it's a bloated application, it means it has
useless complexities. For some tasks you need complexity. It's not
bloated in those cases.
They are two issues with the bloated applications. First they waste
resources. Second, they are more difficult to maintain than necessary.
Oh, I agree for *real* bloat.
Problem is that Feeb is wrong
On 3/17/24 5:24 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 17-03-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:49:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> >>> wrote in <ut4t4o$32464$1@dont-email.me>:
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling
around with their gear to finally get something to work,
So who is doing that?
FR/LP/NV/DG/whatever. He's the only one. He's not a representative Linux
user. He's a Windows advocate trying to make Linux users passing for
fools. It looks like some take the bait.
Nah, feeb's not the only one, because there's others who have taken
exception to my comment. Feel free to review every direct reply,
especially your own.
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:53:54 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I pity the kids.
Beats the hell out of what I had as a kid:
https://picclick.com/1950s-Vintage-Yellow-Sterling-Multiplier-Pencil-Box-Case-313543772142.html
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:43:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
Once installed, Linux takes much less time to "get ready" than Windows
does, in my experience. Only a ridiculous person would complain about
the small amount of time needed to install and configure a new
installation.
I think the 'get ready' time is equivalent. I've got my catalog of stuff I install most of which are cross platform.
Full disclosure: I've never installed Windows since I upgraded a 3.1
laptop to 3.11 Workgroup. At work IT drops off the new Windows box or I
buy something with Windows pre-installed. My builds have all went straight
to Linux.
When IT drops off a bare metal box they leave rapidly. Linux is strictly 'don't ask, don't tell' for them.
On 2024-03-23, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:53:54 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I pity the kids.
Beats the hell out of what I had as a kid:
https://picclick.com/1950s-Vintage-Yellow-Sterling-Multiplier-Pencil-Box-
Case-313543772142.html
I'm guessing you probably had a slide rule as well. I did — although I never
really used it. I think we were luckier, we actually did things outside.
I do remember when relatively inexpensive portable calculators first came to Value-Mart in the early 70s. Of course I had to get one. That's when they still used LEDs instead of LCDs — and sometimes even different colored LEDs,
like blue or green instead of red.
On 3/22/24 2:11 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
I read it and I wholeheartedly agree. I'll try to remember to elaborate >>> more on that thread, but the jist of it is that the "go it alone" aspect >>> of Linux is a barrier to marketplace adoption for new customers, which
would be referred to as a point of "friction". Similarly, what you
reference as 'lock in' would also be referred to as how customer
retention to a product is (or isn't) "sticky". For maximized success,
one wants one's product to be low friction and sticky ... easy for
people to adopt, and once they do, they never leave. That takes work to >>> be able to accomplish in the marketplace.
This falls under the rubric of "no shit, Sherlock".
Indeed it does, yet there's so many Linux fanboys that fail to
comprehend just how much friction Linux has which therefore limits its
appeal to perspective adopters/buyers. It seems that they believe that
just because they've crawled across a mile of sharp glass, others should
too.
And FYI, if you don't like the industry term of friction, perhaps you
could envision it as a 'moat' that keeps new customers out, although
that's actually a different industry term: it commonly refers to
elements which keep competitors from poaching your customers.
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
Back
around 2000, we owned a Piper Archer III -- loved that thing,
wish we still had it. (It even had air conditioning. :) )
On 3/23/2024 4:35 AM, vallor wrote:
Back around 2000, we owned a Piper Archer III -- loved that thing,
wish we still had it. (It even had air conditioning. :) )
Too heavy to fly?
rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:43:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
Once installed, Linux takes much less time to "get ready" than Windows
does, in my experience. Only a ridiculous person would complain about
the small amount of time needed to install and configure a new
installation.
I think the 'get ready' time is equivalent. I've got my catalog of stuff I >> install most of which are cross platform.
Full disclosure: I've never installed Windows since I upgraded a 3.1
laptop to 3.11 Workgroup. At work IT drops off the new Windows box or I
buy something with Windows pre-installed. My builds have all went straight >> to Linux.
When IT drops off a bare metal box they leave rapidly. Linux is strictly
'don't ask, don't tell' for them.
Every laptop the government handed me for project usage immediately got Linux on it. The main downside was that we had to set up the CAC and handle security
updates ourselves. Me, the Russian guy, and a couple other dudes.
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:18:54 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in <utmocb$3m8el$2@dont-email.me>:
On 3/23/2024 4:35 AM, vallor wrote:
Back around 2000, we owned a Piper Archer III -- loved that thing,
wish we still had it. (It even had air conditioning. :) )
Too heavy to fly?
I feel sorry for you.
chrisv wrote:
vallor wrote:
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv >>>> had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a >>>> clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
Well, it was "proven" that there can be "too much choice", you see.
(rolling eyes)
...and then debunked, which he conveniently ignored.
Le 22-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
But if you grossly mess up and the recovery partition's been destroyed
too so as to truly need to do a bare metal install, the good news is
that all Macs for the past decade support having the OS reinstalled over
the Internet.
It's really the useless part. I can effortlessly reinstall my OS any
time I want. My concern in case of destruction is not about my OS but
about my personal data.
Le 19-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
On 3/16/24 5:49 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 12-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
It is. By definition. If it's a bloated application, it means it has
The funny thing about 'bloat' is that it isn't necessarily a bad thing. >>>
useless complexities. For some tasks you need complexity. It's not
bloated in those cases.
They are two issues with the bloated applications. First they waste
resources. Second, they are more difficult to maintain than necessary.
Oh, I agree for *real* bloat.
There is not such thing as real or false bloat. Either it's bloated or
it's necessary complexity.
Problem is that Feeb is wrong
Yes, he's always wrong, it's well known.
Le 19-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is
bad
I'm not implying anything. It's clear.
... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
Why should I cite anyone?
When I'm using my computer, I not asking
anyone how he feels about it. I can see by myself that the GUI designed
by UI professionals are slowing me. So they're bad and it needs to be changed. I have nobody to cite and I really see no reason why I should.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
No.
When I want a theme, I can find a few even with a limited market
share. I don't find the exact one that I want, but I can find easily a
close enough one. When I want a way to do something, I can find someone
who needed it before me or something close. Without need of market
share.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration
effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak.
Yes, but the amount of time added is less than the time I would loose by using a default done by a bad UI designer.
So yes, I value my time and my confort. And you didn't gave me anything
to mow because your way would make me lost a lot of time and comfort.
Precisely the reason to trust professionals to be closer to offering a
more optimal UI.
Nope. I know tools designed by professionals. They are not mean to be efficient but to be beautiful and use by someone who don't want to learn.
When I do something it's useful for a really long time. For example,
When I started to learn about tilling Windows Managers, it was with
wmii. Then I was able to use a lot of its configuration to switch to
i3wm. And then, it was the same with swaywm. So with the lot of
similarities between the WM, I used the same shortcuts and I didn't need >>> to learn anything new. For a very few time invested during the years.
Unlike Windows, which changed everything with each upgrade and I needed
a few months to find my way out each time.
Which for users who don't need to know how to program tiling, but just
use the UI, this is relevant...how?
That's exactly my point. Thanks a lot for your support. You really
dismissed my points because you consider they are irrelevant when you
don't understand them.
I'll rephrase it.
You say: "If you value your time, do my way."
I say: "I value my time and your way will slow me and make me lose my
time."
You say: "Your arguments are irrelevant for people who don't like your
way."
And that's where your arguments are garbage. I don't care about the way
the others are using their computers. I care about the way I'm using
mine.
So, when you say: "Do my way because others don't like your way, it's
better for you.", it's just shit.
Le 19-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
On 3/17/24 5:24 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 17-03-2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> a écrit :
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:49:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> >>>> wrote in <ut4t4o$32464$1@dont-email.me>:
And for those who want to defend their hours & hours spent twaddling >>>>> around with their gear to finally get something to work,
So who is doing that?
FR/LP/NV/DG/whatever. He's the only one. He's not a representative Linux >>> user. He's a Windows advocate trying to make Linux users passing for
fools. It looks like some take the bait.
Nah, feeb's not the only one, because there's others who have taken
exception to my comment. Feel free to review every direct reply,
especially your own.
I replied to the parts which interested me, as I said, you changed the subject. You answered to something else.
I don't pass hours and hours to just have something barely working. I
pass minutes to have something really better in the long run. Which is
not the same as what you said, so it doesn't apply to me even if you disagree. Which means that save me hours on the long run, because the
time is adding in both ways.
It's the same for your links about the processes. I didn't read the
content because I have better things to to. I read the abstract and it's clear you compare the way some processes are harmonised in companies
with the way some tools are adapted on personal computers. Two
different things. You believe it's the same, good for you: it's not and
I don't care what you believe when you change the subjects.
For your need of a citation, I really don't see how some citation can
support my claim that I'm able to adapt my tools better than the
defaults. I can see it by myself, it's easy.
For example, if I want to open a pdf file.
My way: I press [Windows]+[z], my pdf files are displayed in wofi. I
type some letters of its name, when it's selected I press [Enter] and my
pdf file is opened in zathura.
Microsoft/Apple way: I need to open the file manager. I need to find the directory in which my file is stored. I need to find the file in the directory. I need to open it. I need to close the file manager.
I can see by myself that I'm faster with my way than with the way
provided by Apple/Microsoft. I never tried Apple but it's the same way
as the Microsoft way, so I know I would be slower using a Mac.
In my way, the information comes to me.
In Microsoft/Apple way, I need
to look for the information.
That's a huge difference. I saves me a few
seconds each time I'm opening a pdf file, and that's a lot of times. So
the few seconds add up very fast. At least one or two minutes each
day. So, in years, it's really hours saved. For a few minutes
configuration. Really, only one line in my config file:
bindsym $mod+z exec find ~ \( -path ~/Download\* -o -path ~/divers\* -o -path ~/Lecture/Pdf/ALire/\* \) -a \( -name "*.pdf" -o -name "*.ps" -o -name "*.epub" \) 2>/dev/null | wofi -d | xargs -r -I % zathura "%"
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:52:13 -0500, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <fm7ovittinum1tf83bm32gau4c46v6ms6h@4ax.com>:
vallor wrote:
-hh wrote:
Let's not forget how DFS has frequently ribbed chrisv about how chrisv >>>> had refused to show spending the time to optimize a build on NewEgg
because it would take too many hours...think it was part of the "more
choices are always better" which backfired on chrisv due to it being a >>>> clear example of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.
And how is this related to the price of tea in China?
Well, it was "proven" that there can be "too much choice", you see.
(rolling eyes)
...and then debunked, which he conveniently ignored.
I thought it was so everywhere around the world. We never used any multiplication table. If numbers were greater than 9 we either logically solved them in mind or did the actual multiplication with pen and paper
to get the results.
Then I got a no-name scientific calculator. Then a Sinclair calculator
kit.
Later a fancy TI with gold trim and lettering. Then an HP-32.
I'm guessing you probably had a slide rule as well. I did — although I never really used it. I think we were luckier, we actually did things outside.
I do remember when relatively inexpensive portable calculators first
came to Value-Mart in the early 70s. Of course I had to get one. That's
when they still used LEDs instead of LCDs — and sometimes even different colored LEDs,
like blue or green instead of red.
I agree that flying a real aircraft is easier than a simulator. Back
around 2000, we owned a Piper Archer III -- loved that thing,
wish we still had it. (It even had air conditioning. )
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 17:58 this Friday (GMT):
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:20:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
We bought one for testing. It handled the web app reasonably well which
was a surprise.
Having a "web-only" computer isn't really useful though..
Yeah, I remember when the eeePC (see rbowman's posts) came out, with
Linux.
IIRC the CEO of ASUS ended up apologizing to Microsoft about it.
Part of the Microsoft "moat".
Apparently the eeePC was a "mote in Bill's eye". :D
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
Same here: for Windows, everything was turnkey by IT, including the installation of all relevant Apps. All I had to do was to log in and
walk through a couple of settings in MS-Outlook to link into the host computer. OTOH, if it wasn't a Windows box, it was 100% DIY, but also
came with instructions of various command line modifications that IT
security required...a royal PITA.
That depends. Some people live on the web. But those people usually get
their "fix" fulfilled using smartphones these days.
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so forth
to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is close.
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:50 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated
refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so
forth to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is
close.
I'm using cool-retro-term to post right now! :D
On 2024-03-23, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 17:58 this Friday (GMT):
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:20:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Chromebooks are pretty bad, yeah.
We bought one for testing. It handled the web app reasonably well which
was a surprise.
Having a "web-only" computer isn't really useful though..
That depends. Some people live on the web. But those people usually get
their "fix" fulfilled using smartphones these days.
On 3/23/2024 4:03 PM, rbowman wrote:
Then there was the attempt to blacklist sports and porn sites.
In early 2000's it could get circumvented. All Mexican employees had to
watch soccer, and all of them did, at work They did it by some trick
they played on the browser which I don't remember. The browser wasn't
even supposed to be able to come up, but they brought it up, and went straight to Spanish language soccer games.
On 3/23/2024 2:19 PM, rbowman wrote:
When numbers greater than 9 were introduced I misunderstood the
algorithm.
19 X 24
______
166
48 ______
4966
What was _your_ algorithm? No idea how you got that result.
On 3/22/24 6:52 PM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 19-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is >>> bad
I'm not implying anything. It's clear.
What's clear? "Yes" or "No", are you explicitly claiming that the work
done by full time UI professionals is invariably bad?
... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
Why should I cite anyone?
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
When I'm using my computer, I not asking
anyone how he feels about it. I can see by myself that the GUI designed
by UI professionals are slowing me. So they're bad and it needs to be
changed. I have nobody to cite and I really see no reason why I should.
Merely your non-professional opinion...right? Have you ever even worked professionally with any UI designers? UI researchers? Obviously, not.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something
almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
No.
Because your sample size of n=1 is more profound than n=millions that
the professionals work with. "Check!" /s
When I want a theme, I can find a few even with a limited market
share. I don't find the exact one that I want, but I can find easily a
close enough one. When I want a way to do something, I can find someone
who needed it before me or something close. Without need of market
share.
Except you're failing to show how your choice provides for an
objectively more productive UI. It is clear that you don't know if
you're becoming more productive or less based on your UI choice.
There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration
effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak.
Yes, but the amount of time added is less than the time I would loose by
using a default done by a bad UI designer.
Not so, because you've not quantified what the productivity hit was this allegedly "bad UI": you merely claiming something doesn't make it true.
When I do something it's useful for a really long time. For example,
When I started to learn about tilling Windows Managers, it was with
wmii. Then I was able to use a lot of its configuration to switch to
i3wm. And then, it was the same with swaywm. So with the lot of
similarities between the WM, I used the same shortcuts and I didn't need >>>> to learn anything new. For a very few time invested during the years.
Unlike Windows, which changed everything with each upgrade and I needed >>>> a few months to find my way out each time.
Which for users who don't need to know how to program tiling, but just
use the UI, this is relevant...how?
That's exactly my point. Thanks a lot for your support. You really
dismissed my points because you consider they are irrelevant when you
don't understand them.
I'll rephrase it.
You say: "If you value your time, do my way."
Nope. I'm saying that the UI professionals know what they're doing, and
that there's productivity value gained through UI standardization.
I say: "I value my time and your way will slow me and make me lose my
time."
That does appear to be what you're saying, but it was done without you offering objective proof that "your way" actually is more productive,
either for you or for anyone else.
You say: "Your arguments are irrelevant for people who don't like your
way."
Incorrect. In addition to noting (above) that you've not come close to substantiating your claim, I'm saying here that the UI developers are optimizing for their majority use case. Plus those users do not need to
get down into the weeds of UI is driven by wmii, i3wm, or swaywm.
Indeed, the very fact that you called out those protocols is an
illustration of how far you're off of consideration of the mainstream
use case.
Finally, I've noted that there is positive value in productivity in
there being UI standardization.
And that's where your arguments are garbage. I don't care about the way
the others are using their computers. I care about the way I'm using
mine.
Its perfectly fine for you to optimize "for you". The problem that you
have is, as already noted above, you have no objective substantiation
that you're actually optimizing it even for just yourself.
So, when you say: "Do my way because others don't like your way, it's
better for you.", it's just shit.
Nope. You are totally free to be stupid and refuse to apply the Best Practices as applied by pro's who are paid to do this sort of work.
Where the line is drawn is when you recommend to others that they should
be just as obstinately stupid as you are oh so proudly being.
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:26:33 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
Then I got a no-name scientific calculator. Then a Sinclair calculator
kit.
Later a fancy TI with gold trim and lettering. Then an HP-32.
I never had a TI but I still have a HP-16C.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-16C
That was fun to leave lying around in hex mode. If the RPN didn't get somebody trying to figure out how much everyone should kick in for the
pizza order the hex math did.
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:16:29 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I'm guessing you probably had a slide rule as well. I did — although I
never really used it. I think we were luckier, we actually did things
outside.
In college definitely. I can't remember if I had one in high school.
On 3/23/24 8:29 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:Same here: for Windows, everything was turnkey by IT, including the installation of all relevant Apps. All I had to do was to log in and
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:43:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
Once installed, Linux takes much less time to "get ready" than Windows >>>> does, in my experience. Only a ridiculous person would complain about >>>> the small amount of time needed to install and configure a new
installation.
I think the 'get ready' time is equivalent. I've got my catalog of stuff I >>> install most of which are cross platform.
Full disclosure: I've never installed Windows since I upgraded a 3.1
laptop to 3.11 Workgroup. At work IT drops off the new Windows box or I >>> buy something with Windows pre-installed. My builds have all went straight >>> to Linux.
walk through a couple of settings in MS-Outlook to link into the host computer. OTOH, if it wasn't a Windows box, it was 100% DIY, but also
came with instructions of various command line modifications that IT
security required...a royal PITA.
When IT drops off a bare metal box they leave rapidly. Linux is strictly >>> 'don't ask, don't tell' for them.
Every laptop the government handed me for project usage immediately got Linux
on it. The main downside was that we had to set up the CAC and handle security
updates ourselves. Me, the Russian guy, and a couple other dudes.
I recall using PKard, a third party CAC reader, during a time when MacOS didn't natively support stuff. It was learn-as-you-go, since it was up
to local IT groups to decide if they were going to support anything non-Windows. Fortunately, MacOS now natively supports CAC readers
again, so there's one fewer hoop to have to jump through.
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:30:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote in <utnvmq$3vgcp$1@dont-email.me>:
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:50 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated
refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so
forth to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is
close.
I'm using cool-retro-term to post right now! :D
Will have to check that out.
For hardcore retro, you can also use the "phosphor" screen hack
from xscreensaver:
$ /usr/libexec/xscreensaver/phosphor -program bash
vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:30:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote in
<utnvmq$3vgcp$1@dont-email.me>:
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:50 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated
refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so
forth to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is
close.
I'm using cool-retro-term to post right now! :D
Will have to check that out.
For hardcore retro, you can also use the "phosphor" screen hack
from xscreensaver:
$ /usr/libexec/xscreensaver/phosphor -program bash
Cool stuff, guys!
Just install cool-retro-term on Ubuntu. One setup it needs to add is the Atari
ST with its Herkey (sp?) font. Putting in a issue request.
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 13:24 this Sunday (GMT):
vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:30:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote in
<utnvmq$3vgcp$1@dont-email.me>:
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:50 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated
refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so
forth to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is
close.
I'm using cool-retro-term to post right now! :D
Will have to check that out.
For hardcore retro, you can also use the "phosphor" screen hack
from xscreensaver:
$ /usr/libexec/xscreensaver/phosphor -program bash
Cool stuff, guys!
Just install cool-retro-term on Ubuntu. One setup it needs to add is the Atari
ST with its Herkey (sp?) font. Putting in a issue request.
Weird, I didn't have to add a seperate font.
My dad got a bunch of small circular slide rules in cases labeled with
the name of the company he worked for. I gave some away to classmates.
-highhorse wrote:
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
My opinion on my way of using my computer is a thousand times worthiest
than your opinion of my way of using my own computer. No study can prove >otherwise.
Merely your non-professional opinion...right? Have you ever even worked
professionally with any UI designers? UI researchers? Obviously, not.
That's the really big issue with UI designers/researchers. They work in
their own world outside of the reality. I've work with a lot of real end >users. I know the gap between your fantasy and the reality.
Le 23-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
On 3/22/24 6:52 PM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 19-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
Plus you're implying that the work done by full time UI professionals is >>>> bad
I'm not implying anything. It's clear.
What's clear? "Yes" or "No", are you explicitly claiming that the work
done by full time UI professionals is invariably bad?
Of course no. I'm claiming a lot of UI professionals use more time to
choose the colors and the size of the angles than the usability of the
tools they design. Sometimes it can be good.
But clearly, for example, that is bad design:
https://www.workday.com/
It's clear a lot of professional UI designers had worked a lot for it.
I can't understand how so many companies switch to it.
There are others, I won't look for every case I know.
... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
Why should I cite anyone?
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
My opinion on my way of using my computer is a thousand times worthiest
than your opinion of my way of using my own computer. No study can prove otherwise.
When I'm using my computer, I not asking
anyone how he feels about it. I can see by myself that the GUI designed
by UI professionals are slowing me. So they're bad and it needs to be
changed. I have nobody to cite and I really see no reason why I should.
Merely your non-professional opinion...right? Have you ever even worked
professionally with any UI designers? UI researchers? Obviously, not.
That's the really big issue with UI designers/researchers. They work in
their own world outside of the reality. I've work with a lot of real end users. I know the gap between your fantasy and the reality.
The best tools I'm using are tools written by developers for developers.
No
professional UI designer to interfere and put garbage designed to help
the users unwilling to learn when it become more difficult for the
advanced users.
And
finely, you can use the time spend by others to start from something >>>>> almost ready to adapt it easily to your own needs.
That's an argument to go with whoever has the larger marketshare, as
they've had the greatest amount of user UI feedback to optimize from.
No.
Because your sample size of n=1 is more profound than n=millions that
the professionals work with. "Check!" /s
Still no. The reason is not the market share size. It's the number of developers involved.
The market share is full of end users unwilling to
do the least effort to learn. The difference doesn't come from the end
users but from the developers.
When I want a theme, I can find a few even with a limited market
share. I don't find the exact one that I want, but I can find easily a
close enough one. When I want a way to do something, I can find someone
who needed it before me or something close. Without need of market
share.
Except you're failing to show how your choice provides for an
objectively more productive UI. It is clear that you don't know if
you're becoming more productive or less based on your UI choice.
I can see it by myself. I have nothing more to show. I gave you one simple example. You are unable to look at it.
Yes, but the amount of time added is less than the time I would loose by >>> using a default done by a bad UI designer.There's a lot of
configuration files and ideas to help you improve your configuration >>>>> effortlessly.
Still isn't a zero amount of time ... which adds up the more you tweak. >>>
Not so, because you've not quantified what the productivity hit was this
allegedly "bad UI": you merely claiming something doesn't make it true.
If I loose some time, it's bad for me. If I see a lot of people losing
time it's bad in a general sense. If I see a lot of people asking for
help, it's a proof that it's bad. I claim I'm faster with my way of
doing things than when I do things designed by Microsoft (when I need to
ask for help sometimes). I know it. I see it every day.
When I do something it's useful for a really long time. For example, >>>>> When I started to learn about tilling Windows Managers, it was with
wmii. Then I was able to use a lot of its configuration to switch to >>>>> i3wm. And then, it was the same with swaywm. So with the lot of
similarities between the WM, I used the same shortcuts and I didn't need >>>>> to learn anything new. For a very few time invested during the years. >>>>> Unlike Windows, which changed everything with each upgrade and I needed >>>>> a few months to find my way out each time.
Which for users who don't need to know how to program tiling, but just >>>> use the UI, this is relevant...how?
That's exactly my point. Thanks a lot for your support. You really
dismissed my points because you consider they are irrelevant when you
don't understand them.
I'll rephrase it.
You say: "If you value your time, do my way."
Nope. I'm saying that the UI professionals know what they're doing, and
that there's productivity value gained through UI standardization.
Your way is to follow UI professionals. So it's what I say.
But they do it for all end-users, when all end-users or not the same.
Some are more technical than others, some are more functionals, some are
more willing to learn, some are using it on a day to day basis, some are using it only once a month or once a year. Some want to use it, some
don't.
So, by design, ou can't have something perfect for everyone.
And I know better than you what's better for me.
I say: "I value my time and your way will slow me and make me lose my
time."
That does appear to be what you're saying, but it was done without you
offering objective proof that "your way" actually is more productive,
either for you or for anyone else.
I. DON'T. CARE. FOR. ANYONE. ELSE. What part don't you understand? I'm
not an English speaker, I can try to say it in another way if it's
needed.
I care for me. My way is better for me. I don't claim my way is better
for others: I just don't care. What don't you understand.
You say: "Your arguments are irrelevant for people who don't like your
way."
Incorrect. In addition to noting (above) that you've not come close to
substantiating your claim, I'm saying here that the UI developers are
optimizing for their majority use case. Plus those users do not need to
get down into the weeds of UI is driven by wmii, i3wm, or swaywm.
Indeed, the very fact that you called out those protocols is an
illustration of how far you're off of consideration of the mainstream
use case.
And still you refuse to believe I'm more productive in my way than in Windows/Mac way. So it's far from incorrect.
Finally, I've noted that there is positive value in productivity in
there being UI standardization.
Which is another subject I don't contest.
And that's where your arguments are garbage. I don't care about the way
the others are using their computers. I care about the way I'm using
mine.
Its perfectly fine for you to optimize "for you". The problem that you
have is, as already noted above, you have no objective substantiation
that you're actually optimizing it even for just yourself.
I provide you an easy example. Only one line.
It's easy to see how it's
fast to write. It's easy to see how it's fast to use. It's easy to see
how it's difficult for me who's always on the keyboard to switch to
the mouse to find the file explorer and to find the directories and the
files in it.
Still you refuse to consider it can be better for me because no one
payed by a company will be willing to study my way of doing things that
can be good only for me.
So, when you say: "Do my way because others don't like your way, it's
better for you.", it's just shit.
Nope. You are totally free to be stupid and refuse to apply the Best
Practices as applied by pro's who are paid to do this sort of work.
I refuse to apply the best practices designed for others when I can see
by myself they don't suit me. You can consider it stupid, it's an honour
to be considered stupid by a sheep.
OK, you don't trust/believe/understand what I say. It's useless to go further.
By the way, my way of doing things doesn't change with every update.
Unlike Microsoft. So if say, the design of Windows 7 is good, why change
it for Windows 8? Do you really believe you win productivity when your
end users have to lose time to know where they need to click once the interface changed?
Where the line is drawn is when you recommend to others that they should
be just as obstinately stupid as you are oh so proudly being.
When did I recommend to others to do the same? It's the only part of the discussion I would consider answering if my provider display your
answer.
Because I don't care if your lack of brain makes you follows the reports without the ability to understand them. But when you tell I want to
impose my way on others, it's another story.
candycanearter07 wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 13:24 this Sunday (GMT):
vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:30:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote in
<utnvmq$3vgcp$1@dont-email.me>:
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:50 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
I do like the asthetic of amber monitors..
https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
At least on my box it's a little too retro. The slightly lighter
background in the screen shot keeps sweeping down in a simulated
refresh.
I flip it around when I configure Termianl, Windows Terminal and so >>>>>> forth to use black text on a sort of beige background. #FFFDD0 is
close.
I'm using cool-retro-term to post right now! :D
Will have to check that out.
For hardcore retro, you can also use the "phosphor" screen hack
from xscreensaver:
$ /usr/libexec/xscreensaver/phosphor -program bash
Cool stuff, guys!
Just install cool-retro-term on Ubuntu. One setup it needs to add is the Atari
ST with its Herkey (sp?) font. Putting in a issue request.
Weird, I didn't have to add a seperate font.
For the Atari ST look? I didn't see that in the setup menu.
Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
My opinion on my way of using my computer is a thousand times worthiest
than your opinion of my way of using my own computer. No study can prove
otherwise.
Exactly. Freedom-haters, like -highhorse, just don't "get it".
Merely your non-professional opinion...right? Have you ever even worked >>> professionally with any UI designers? UI researchers? Obviously, not.
That's the really big issue with UI designers/researchers. They work in
their own world outside of the reality. I've work with a lot of real end
users. I know the gap between your fantasy and the reality.
I'm reminded of, years ago, the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" ridiculing
us for rejecting the move to push mobile UI's onto desktop computers. According to him, we should have all bowed-down to the corporations
and their "professional UI designers". >
Of course, we were right, as we were about *everything* of importance,
in here.
On 3/19/2024 2:36 PM, -hh wrote:
... but do you have any credible citations for that? Cite, please.
That's not how you asked me for citation.
I see you're still apt to get educated. Some others here aren't.
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
--
'Had I been there looking over your shoulder making you explain why
you chose each particular component over all the others in that
category, it would be hours and hours and a big hassle for you. All
thanks to "choice!".' - some dumb fsck, arguing that there's "too
much choice" in computer hardware
(snipped, unread)
Of course, -highhorse battles on, *refusing* to admit defeat.
Imagine being so *stupid* as DumFSck to believe that the above is a
"winning argument". And -highhorse supported it!
*Astonishing* idiocy.
Too *stupid* to figure-out that their argument is easily turned-around
with "If I was doing it with other decent, like-minded people
opposed to obtuse assholes who are looking to ridicule andattack) it would be hours and hours of fun!"
Does that make me right?
In the paragraph that I responded-to in my previous post, -highhorse dishonestly frames the argument, he claims that a reasonable and
correct argument "backfired", and he conjures-up and attacks with shit
which is clearly untrue, like his "clear example of
do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" nonsense.
IOW, nothing but garbage. That's classic -highhorse, when he's
defeated, butthurt, and has got nothing *but* garbage to respond with.
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 13:43:52 -0400, -hh wrote:
What we've seen with some Linux fanboy braggarts ...
Well, we GNU/Linux "fanboy braggarts" have a fuck of a lot
to brag about. We are advocating the greatest OS in the
history of technical man, fer chrissake.
On 3/24/24 8:21 PM, chrisv wrote:
Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
My opinion on my way of using my computer is a thousand times worthiest
than your opinion of my way of using my own computer. No study can prove >>> otherwise.
Exactly. Freedom-haters, like -highhorse, just don't "get it".
Re-arrange your cotton, chrisv: I'm telling Stéphane that there's other users so it isn't "his way is best" for everyone. Industry pros make
their UI changes based on objective standards and research data, ...
...which
both you and Stéphane lack when attempting to make your arguments be convincing: you're following the path of 'Religious Zealot'.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/24/24 8:21 PM, chrisv wrote:
Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
Because you're trying to outwardly go beyond your personal opinion.
My opinion on my way of using my computer is a thousand times worthiest >>>> than your opinion of my way of using my own computer. No study can prove >>>> otherwise.
Exactly. Freedom-haters, like -highhorse, just don't "get it".
Re-arrange your cotton, chrisv: I'm telling Stéphane that there's other
users so it isn't "his way is best" for everyone. Industry pros make
their UI changes based on objective standards and research data, ...
If so, then, at least on Windows, why is the (often clumsy to use) desktop constantly churning with each release? Why is the Teams UI so abysmal?
Why is Outlook such a clusterfuck?
Why so cluttered with unnecessary popups?
My corporate (copro-ate?) laptop now shows a cutesy little icon next to
the search pane, changing each day. Teams keeps popping up a box advertising a
"New Feature! Try it!" or "Got it".
And then the Corp lathers on all kinds of stuff to try to be "helpful" (though that's not really Microsoft's fault).
I would prefer the desktop stay out of my way. That's why my Linux desktop has
no icons or "start" menu (a right-click on the desktop brings up a menu; and each can be torn off so that it stays on the desktop.)
...which
both you and Stéphane lack when attempting to make your arguments be
convincing: you're following the path of 'Religious Zealot'.
Dude, you're trying to say that people cannot strongly prefer something not provided by the vendor?
On 3/26/2024 8:32 AM, -hh wrote:
So then, just what credible citations are you delinquent in providing
to me?
Hehe :) There is a way to deal with individuals like you. And I mean
those who get the help, which in this case was some pieces of valuable information, and then get aggressive in asking more be done for them
just because it got them curious or nervous or suspicious etc.
And the way to do it is, "Pay me sucker!" :-)
At this point in dealing with an insolent person like you, I want money.
I'm nice to you cause I haven't changed my mind about not charging you
for the information that I already provided. But I want good money for anything in addition to that.
I'm not kidding. You need to learn a few lessons. Bozos have spoiled you
too far. I'm not your Bozo. So pay me or fuck off.
On 3/12/2024 4:20 PM, Lamer Larry wrote:
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 13:43:52 -0400, -hh wrote:
What we've seen with some Linux fanboy braggarts ...
Well, we GNU/Linux "fanboy braggarts" have a fuck of a lot
to brag about. We are advocating the greatest OS in the
history of technical man, fer chrissake.
That would be Unix.
The Linux kernel seems to be a good piece of work, but GuhNoo itself is
just a cadge of the real thing.
Can you imagine spending years of your life cloning others work, then
putting your own name on it as if it's something you originated? Then walking around with your fat belly sticking out and calling yourself "Doctor"? What a phony.
The GuhNoo "core utilities"
arch base64 basename cat
chcon chgrp chmod chown
chroot cksum comm cp
csplit cut date dd df dir dircolors dirname du echo env expand expr factor false fmt
fold groups head hostid
hostname id install join
kill link ln logname ls md5sum mkdir mkfifo mknod mktemp mv nice nl nohup nproc numfmt od paste pathchk pinky pr printenv printf ptx
pwd readlink realpath rm
rmdir runcon seq shred shuf sleep sort split stat stdbuf stty sum tac tail tee test timeout touch tr true
truncate tsort tty uname
unexpand uniq unlink uptime
users vdir wc who whoami yes
Which *weren't* cadged from Unix?
The rate of change in the Windows UI just isn't all that fast or
dramatic. For example, tje {min/max/close} icons for a desktop UI files window are still in the upper right corner, just as its been since at
least Windows 95 came out ~30 years ago. Similarly, 'Start' menu bottom left, etc.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:20:03 -0400, -hh wrote:
The rate of change in the Windows UI just isn't all that fast or
dramatic. For example, tje {min/max/close} icons for a desktop UI files
window are still in the upper right corner, just as its been since at
least Windows 95 came out ~30 years ago. Similarly, 'Start' menu bottom
left, etc.
You miss all the changes people spend days haggling over. Skeuomorphic or flat UIs? Maybe Material Design? Microsoft's developing Fluent Design system? Should corners be sharp or rounded? If rounded what radius?
I take it you missed Windows 8?
On 3/26/24 12:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:^ (damning with faint praise)
I would prefer the desktop stay out of my way. That's why my Linux desktop has
no icons or "start" menu (a right-click on the desktop brings up a menu; and >> each can be torn off so that it stays on the desktop.)
Um...we've seen your "elegant" desktop before...
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/Chris_Ahlstrom-Facebook_Linux-desktop.jpg>
...which
both you and Stéphane lack when attempting to make your arguments be
convincing: you're following the path of 'Religious Zealot'.
Dude, you're trying to say that people cannot strongly prefer something not >> provided by the vendor?
No. What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible
as they try to claim.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:20:03 -0400, -hh wrote:
The rate of change in the Windows UI just isn't all that fast or
dramatic. For example, tje {min/max/close} icons for a desktop UI files
window are still in the upper right corner, just as its been since at
least Windows 95 came out ~30 years ago. Similarly, 'Start' menu bottom
left, etc.
You miss all the changes people spend days haggling over. Skeuomorphic or flat UIs? Maybe Material Design? Microsoft's developing Fluent Design system? Should corners be sharp or rounded? If rounded what radius?
I take it you missed Windows 8?
On 3/26/2024 5:23 PM, -hh wrote:
Pay you ...
No. You'd be paying my dick, not me.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/26/24 12:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:^ (damning with faint praise)
I would prefer the desktop stay out of my way. That's why my Linux desktop has
no icons or "start" menu (a right-click on the desktop brings up a menu; and
each can be torn off so that it stays on the desktop.)
Um...we've seen your "elegant" desktop before...
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/Chris_Ahlstrom-Facebook_Linux-desktop.jpg>
Did I say it was "elegant"?
example of what can be done with fluxbox and compton. I will often open up a number of windows on my github app to create a screenshot showing multiple dialogs and editing windows at once.
You missed capturing my demo of fluxbox tear-off menus back then
You showed me mine. Now show me yours. :-D
...which
both you and Stéphane lack when attempting to make your arguments be
convincing: you're following the path of 'Religious Zealot'.
Dude, you're trying to say that people cannot strongly prefer something not >>> provided by the vendor?
No. What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible
as they try to claim.
It provides all the proof they need to avoid it. For me, I can't fscking stand
using Windows, even with the help of Git Bash.
8 was certainly interesting, though I admit I do have some nostalgia for
it.
What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible
as they try to claim.
On 3/27/24 12:08 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/26/24 12:29 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:^ (damning with faint praise)
I would prefer the desktop stay out of my way. That's why my Linux
desktop has
no icons or "start" menu (a right-click on the desktop brings up a
menu; and
each can be torn off so that it stays on the desktop.)
Um...we've seen your "elegant" desktop before...
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/Chris_Ahlstrom-Facebook_Linux-desktop.jpg>
Did I say it was "elegant"?
Well, you are implying that it is somehow superior. Frankly, it breaks
UI usability rules which is why it is visually hard to navigate.
How kind of you to preserve and remember my
example of what can be done with fluxbox and compton. I will often
open up a
number of windows on my github app to create a screenshot showing
multiple
dialogs and editing windows at once.
I only kept it because it an example of a horrifically bad UI desktop.
You missed capturing my demo of fluxbox tear-off menus back then
You showed me mine. Now show me yours. :-D
Sure. I've taken a screenshot, but it looks like one of my domains has a login issue; will have to give IT a call in the morning to sort it out.
...which
both you and Stéphane lack when attempting to make your arguments be >>>>> convincing: you're following the path of 'Religious Zealot'.
Dude, you're trying to say that people cannot strongly prefer
something not
provided by the vendor?
No. What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible >>> as they try to claim.
It provides all the proof they need to avoid it. For me, I can't
fscking stand
using Windows, even with the help of Git Bash.
Since they can't quantify it, that's just all confirmation bias.
-hh
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:00:11 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
8 was certainly interesting, though I admit I do have some nostalgia for
it.
I went from 7 to 10 and never had the pleasure.
The worst thing about 8 was when Ubuntu decided to follow the rabbit down
its hole.
-hh wrote:
What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible
as they try to claim.
Misrepresenting what has been claimed, again, -highhorse?
Strongly preferring one solution over another does not equal claiming
that the other solution is "horrible".
No matter how loudly you stomp your feet, people's preferences need
not be justified with "objective proof".
On 3/20/2024 8:49 PM, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
--
'Had I been there looking over your shoulder making you explain why
you chose each particular component over all the others in that
category, it would be hours and hours and a big hassle for you. All
thanks to "choice!".' - some dumb fsck, arguing that there's "too
much choice" in computer hardware
(snipped, unread)
Of course, -highhorse battles on, *refusing* to admit defeat.
Imagine being so *stupid* as DumFSck to believe that the above is a
"winning argument". And -highhorse supported it!
*Astonishing* idiocy.
Too *stupid* to figure-out that their argument is easily turned-around
with "If I was doing it with other decent, like-minded people
It's gonna be very hard for a frothing prick such as yourself to find like-minded people.
opposed to obtuse assholes who are looking to ridicule andattack) it would be hours and hours of fun!"
1) I'm just asking you to support your claim. If there aren't too many choices (in computer hardware, or x86_64 desktop distros) you should
have NO problem comparing them all.
2) It's minutes and minutes of fun. Two hours of doing a proper
comparison of 30 power supply candidates and you and your like-minded
morons will be pissed.
Did I say 30?
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007657%20600014002%20600479297%204814%204017&PageSize=60&Order=2
I already drastically narrowed the choices down for you, lamer. Get to comparing and choosing.
Does that make me right?
In the paragraph that I responded-to in my previous post, -highhorse
dishonestly frames the argument, he claims that a reasonable and
correct argument "backfired", and he conjures-up and attacks with shit
which is clearly untrue, like his "clear example of
do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" nonsense.
IOW, nothing but garbage. That's classic -highhorse, when he's
defeated, butthurt, and has got nothing *but* garbage to respond with.
babble on!
On 3/27/24 10:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:00:11 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
8 was certainly interesting, though I admit I do have some nostalgia for >>> it.
I went from 7 to 10 and never had the pleasure.
Same here. IIRC, was 3.1 to 95; think that there was 98SE briefly?, but
then to Vista, then Vista to 7, and 7 to 10.
The worst thing about 8 was when Ubuntu decided to follow the rabbit down
its hole.
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
-hh
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote at 13:22 this Thursday (GMT):
On 3/27/24 10:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:00:11 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
8 was certainly interesting, though I admit I do have some nostalgia for >>>>> it.
I went from 7 to 10 and never had the pleasure.
Same here. IIRC, was 3.1 to 95; think that there was 98SE briefly?, but >>> then to Vista, then Vista to 7, and 7 to 10.
Breifly Vista, 7, 8.1, 10. Jumped ship from Windows before W11 so I've >>never actually used it.
I had 3.x, 95, 98, 2000, XP, 7, 8.x, 10 and 11, but never again.
The worst thing about 8 was when Ubuntu decided to follow the rabbit down >>>> its hole.
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >>> because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
Linux Mint?
Say what you will, but Mint just works. I like that.
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
What I'm saying is simply that no matter how loudly they try to
stomp their feet, their mere personal preference doesn't constitute
objective proof that the mainstream UI solution is allegedly as horrible >>> as they try to claim.
Misrepresenting what has been claimed, again, -highhorse?
Nope.
Strongly preferring one solution over another does not equal claiming
that the other solution is "horrible".
It is when they try to push their personal solution for everyone else.
No matter how loudly you stomp your feet, people's preferences need
not be justified with "objective proof".
When they claim that it is vastly more productive for them and by
extension this applies to everyone else too, then something better than
the claims of some dude on Usenet is most certainly merited.
Stop stamping your feet and claiming that your religion is best, chrisv.
The only time I boot into Windows is to upgrade it.
Today I booted Windows 11 on a laptop only to find that they had another button on the right side of the panel (task bar?) — (I guess from the
last time I updated) — "CoPilot Trial,"
Exactly, I happen to think M$'s GUI is logical, and voila, Mint Cinnamon gives me essentially the same thing. Choice. Others want something
else. Also, choice. It's beautiful.
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
-hh wrote:
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >>>because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
So much for you not being an idiot. Ubuntu didn't "blindly" do
anything, they just made the wrong choice for their default UI. You
could still choose to run a classic UI. None of the other distros,
AFAIK, followed that lead at all.
Choice. What you don't get from Microshaft and crApple.
Exactly, I happen to think M$'s GUI is logical, and voila, Mint
Cinnamon gives me essentially the same thing. Choice. Others want
something else. Also, choice. It's beautiful.
'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
Not fond of Adobe. Bloated expensive apps crammed down your throat by "The Corporation". (Along with Cisco and Microsoft stuff.)
Why are you guys running windows on bare metal, or even at all?
On 3/29/2024 5:25 AM, Yaxley Peaks wrote:
Why are you guys running windows on bare metal, or even at all?
Macs are too expensive/locked in, and Linux is....
.000000000000000000000
My cat just stepped on my keyboard. Turns out he knows what's what.
-hh wrote:
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better
because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
So much for you not being an idiot. Ubuntu didn't "blindly" do
anything, they just made the wrong choice for their default UI.
You could still choose to run a classic UI. None of the other distros, AFAIK, followed that lead at all.
Choice. What you don't get from Microshaft and crApple.
Joel wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
-hh wrote:
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >>>>because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
So much for you not being an idiot. Ubuntu didn't "blindly" do
anything, they just made the wrong choice for their default UI. You >>>could still choose to run a classic UI. None of the other distros, >>>AFAIK, followed that lead at all.
Choice. What you don't get from Microshaft and crApple.
Exactly, I happen to think M$'s GUI is logical, and voila, Mint
Cinnamon gives me essentially the same thing. Choice. Others want
something else. Also, choice. It's beautiful.
'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
And it can be complemented by apps like Krita and Inkscape.
Not fond of Adobe. Bloated expensive apps crammed down your throat by "The Corporation". (Along with Cisco and Microsoft stuff.)
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
-hh wrote:
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >>> because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
So much for you not being an idiot. Ubuntu didn't "blindly" do
anything, they just made the wrong choice for their default UI. You
could still choose to run a classic UI. None of the other distros,
AFAIK, followed that lead at all.
Choice. What you don't get from Microshaft and crApple.
Exactly, I happen to think M$'s GUI is logical, and voila, Mint
Cinnamon gives me essentially the same thing. Choice. Others want
something else. Also, choice. It's beautiful.
'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
Oh, so what you're trying to claim then is that their invention of a UI
which mimicked Windows 8 just as Microsoft was launching it was all
nothing more than a pure coincidence?
There's always the choice to not adopt/buy, which is what a lot of
mainstream customers did to MS ... and resulted in MS backtracking.
'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above
kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that
Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste. Sure, its expensive and it is overkill for a lot of people (usually the ones who complain about its
cost), but it has been the industry's premier digital graphics tool for
the better part of two decades.
Wasn't Unity released *before* Windows 8?
I think I got rid of that button also. I can't remember what it was
called,
but I've deleted it and moved the icons that were in the middle to the
left where it used to be. When I installed Windows 11 I didn't set up an online account, so I think I bypassed some of the crap. But it probably
came in with the updates anyhow.
The configuration of Cinnamon, Xfce and Mate in Linux Mint are all
basically the same. Looks a lot like Windows 7, I guess. I've seen Xfce
more or less set up to emulate a Mac also, but I like Linux Mint's configuration better.
On 3/24/24 7:33 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 23-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
That does appear to be what you're saying, but it was done without you
offering objective proof that "your way" actually is more productive,
either for you or for anyone else.
I. DON'T. CARE. FOR. ANYONE. ELSE. What part don't you understand? I'm
not an English speaker, I can try to say it in another way if it's
needed.
Yes, we know that you only care about yourself.
I care for me. My way is better for me. I don't claim my way is better
for others: I just don't care. What don't you understand.
Your statement is incorrect: you do care. If you honestly believed that others don't matter then you'd not be evangelizing.
It is obvious that
the reason why you're making such an effort to try to defend your
workflow is to try to "sell" it to others.
Where the line is drawn is when you recommend to others that they should >>> be just as obstinately stupid as you are oh so proudly being.
When did I recommend to others to do the same? It's the only part of the
discussion I would consider answering if my provider display your
answer.
Because I don't care if your lack of brain makes you follows the reports
without the ability to understand them. But when you tell I want to
impose my way on others, it's another story.
Insult attempts show that you're frustrated because you've not really
been listening to what I've been saying. You are entrenched in your ways
and closed to new ideas such that you've become stagnant.
chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
So much for fanboy innuendo that these independent developers are better >>> because they don't just blindly copy what the professionals do.
So much for you not being an idiot. Ubuntu didn't "blindly" do
anything, they just made the wrong choice for their default UI.
Oh, so what you're trying to claim then is that their invention of a UI
which mimicked Windows 8 just as Microsoft was launching it was all
nothing more than a pure coincidence?
You could still choose to run a classic UI. None of the other distros,
AFAIK, followed that lead at all.
Because they lacked the resources? What did they invest in instead?
Choice. What you don't get from Microshaft and crApple.
There's always the choice to not adopt/buy, which is what a lot of
mainstream customers did to MS ... and resulted in MS backtracking.
This "choice" bit by chrisv is a Red Herring diversion attempt,
it was about how some folks
foolishly try to make claims without any objective support.
Here, their claim was that they found that XYZ personally gives them a
warm fuzzy, but that is not objective or generalizable to everyone else.
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above
kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that
Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste.
-hh wrote:
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above
kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that
Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste.
Again, -highhorse conjures shit up that no normal person could have
thought what the issue was, at all.
FFS, all along he's been a Photoshop defender! Obviously!
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:40:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
The configuration of Cinnamon, Xfce and Mate in Linux Mint are all
basically the same. Looks a lot like Windows 7, I guess. I've seen Xfce
more or less set up to emulate a Mac also, but I like Linux Mint's
configuration better.
Debian's default xfce has the menu and apps up on the top band and a few icons on the botton. I suppose I could change it but I'm not like he who shall be nameless that spends more time tinkering than accomplishing anything.
rbowman wrote:
Debian's default xfce has the menu and apps up on the top band and a few
icons on the botton. I suppose I could change it but I'm not like he who
shall be nameless that spends more time tinkering than accomplishing
anything.
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it? ;)
(Just because I do it, and have the time to mess around,
doesn't mean I expect anyone else to fiddle with such things...)
The advocate's position on the issue was always reasonable.
vallor wrote:
rbowman wrote:
Debian's default xfce has the menu and apps up on the top band and a
few icons on the botton. I suppose I could change it but I'm not like
he who shall be nameless that spends more time tinkering than
accomplishing anything.
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it? ;)
Freedom-hating trolls have fought about it, over the years. "Tinkering"
was attacked and ridiculed. The time it takes to do a bit of research
and try a few options was attacked as tragic.
One wonders if the trolling creeps also attacked people who "wasted
valuable time" watching TV or going for a walk or whatever, as if those fscking assholes should be the judge of how others choose to spend their time.
(Just because I do it, and have the time to mess around,
doesn't mean I expect anyone else to fiddle with such things...)
Of course not, any more than those of us who specify and build our PC's
from components expect everyone else to.
On 2024-03-30, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:42:18 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Wasn't Unity released *before* Windows 8?
Yes, after googling it. A netbook edition with Unity was floated out in
2010. The phone (RIP) got Metro in 2011 followed by Windows 8. I knew they >> were in response to phones/netbooks/tablets but didn't remember the exact
sequence.
At work I sometimes start sentences with 'Some number of years ago..'
I've never been good with timelines unless it's tied to something like 'I
was driving the Firebird' that ties it down to 1982 - 1986.
I'm not always good at timelines either. Especially as I've gotten older. I notice that I remember things that happened four or five years ago as happening a year or two back instead. It's like time is compressing.
Also, like you, I figure timelines by using "where was I and what was I doing?" and try to tie the date to something specific.
On 3/28/24 4:22 PM, Joel wrote:
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
From a learning curve standpoint, GIMP's fewer options make it shorter
and thus easier & faster to grasp.
For those who don't need anything
more than the 80% solution, GIMP is just that: the 80% solution.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:40:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
The configuration of Cinnamon, Xfce and Mate in Linux Mint are all
basically the same. Looks a lot like Windows 7, I guess. I've seen Xfce
more or less set up to emulate a Mac also, but I like Linux Mint's
configuration better.
Debian's default xfce has the menu and apps up on the top band and a few icons on the botton. I suppose I could change it but I'm not like he who shall be nameless that spends more time tinkering than accomplishing anything.
I'm not always good at timelines either. Especially as I've gotten
older. I notice that I remember things that happened four or five years
ago as happening a year or two back instead. It's like time is
compressing.
Remember LSMFT?
A couple days ago I was googling for the song sung (to the tune of
"Johnny Comes Marching Home) for a Tecmatic razor blade.
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it?
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/28/24 4:22 PM, Joel wrote:
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
From a learning curve standpoint, GIMP's fewer options make it shorter
and thus easier & faster to grasp.
LOL. You haven't use GIMP in the last few years, then.
They'd rather go watch "Big Bang Theory" than "tinker". That's their
choice.
I used to build my own PC's, until decided to buy a turnkey system this
last go-around.
https://www.davidrevoy.com/
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:39:17 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it?
Ooh, touchy! I wasn't even thinking about you.
On 30 Mar 2024 19:52:31 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in <l6r8rvFkfnpU6@mid.individual.net>:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:39:17 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it?
Ooh, touchy! I wasn't even thinking about you.
You took out the smiley: ;)
On 3/29/2024 7:00 PM, -hh wrote:
'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above
kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that
Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste. Sure, its expensive and it is
overkill for a lot of people (usually the ones who complain about its
cost), but it has been the industry's premier digital graphics tool
for the better part of two decades.
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop,
when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its functionality. <rolls eyes>"
JED: "As far as not wanting to spend $600 on a professional tool when I
am not a professional... that just makes me a normal person."
Homer: "AFAICT the only substantial difference [between gimp and
Photoshop] is about £600 that could be put to far better use, and a
whole lotta hype."
Homer: "I'd never, ever waste my money on Photoshop." --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-hh wrote:
This "choice" bit by chrisv is a Red Herring diversion attempt,
Not.
it was about how some folks
foolishly try to make claims without any objective support.
Notice, everyone, the magic shape-shifting argument.
The point has already been made that no "objective support" is needed,
to know what one likes.
Here, their claim was that they found that XYZ personally gives them a
warm fuzzy, but that is not objective or generalizable to everyone else.
The point has already been made that no advocate has claimed personal
tastes are objective or generalizable to everyone else.
If anyone is guilty of that, it's -highhorse, with his implications
that rich companies who have lots of users giving lots of feedback are
going be objectively better.
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above
kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that
Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste.
Again, -highhorse conjures shit up that no normal person could have
thought what the issue was, at all. He's 180 degrees from it!
FFS, all along he's been a Photoshop defender! Obviously!
Sheesh!
Le 25-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
On 3/24/24 7:33 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
Le 23-03-2024, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> a écrit :
That does appear to be what you're saying, but it was done without you >>>> offering objective proof that "your way" actually is more productive,
either for you or for anyone else.
I. DON'T. CARE. FOR. ANYONE. ELSE. What part don't you understand? I'm
not an English speaker, I can try to say it in another way if it's
needed.
Yes, we know that you only care about yourself.
No, you don't understand, you can't understand and you'll never been
able to understand.
If you did you would have been stopped saying I'm telling my way is better for others long ago. That only fact proves you don't try to understand
what I'm saying. You only want to tell your claim whatever is real about
it.
I care for me. My way is better for me. I don't claim my way is better
for others: I just don't care. What don't you understand.
Your statement is incorrect: you do care. If you honestly believed that
others don't matter then you'd not be evangelizing.
If I was really evangelizing, you would have been able to answer my only question: when did I say anyone to do it my way? You can't everything
you say is like you: shit.
It is obvious that
the reason why you're making such an effort to try to defend your
workflow is to try to "sell" it to others.
You see, you don't try to understand what I'm saying, you only try to
imagine what I could have said to go in you way when there isn't. The
only effort I'm making is to be able to keep doing things my way.
Where the line is drawn is when you recommend to others that they should >>>> be just as obstinately stupid as you are oh so proudly being.
When did I recommend to others to do the same? It's the only part of the >>> discussion I would consider answering if my provider display your
answer.
Because I don't care if your lack of brain makes you follows the reports >>> without the ability to understand them. But when you tell I want to
impose my way on others, it's another story.
Insult attempts show that you're frustrated because you've not really
been listening to what I've been saying. You are entrenched in your ways
and closed to new ideas such that you've become stagnant.
I'm insulting you only because you are distorting what I say to make me
tells things I disagree with. And that pisses me off. You are an
insufferable piece of shit. It's neither fun nor interesting.
You are everything I despised, a worthless sheep unable to think by
himself and to try to understand, you only want everyone to be conform
to is vision of what the TV told him.
You're neither the first, nor the
last. A great French band made a song about people like you more than
forty years ago, that song is still actual. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOAyC6PvVmg>
I'm won't translate it for you because you wouldn't be able to
understand it anyway.
chrisv wrote:
Not.
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!
it was about how some folks
foolishly try to make claims without any objective support.
Notice, everyone, the magic shape-shifting argument.
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!
The point has already been made that no "objective support" is needed,
to know what one likes.
Oh, look: chrisv trying to claw back to the original subject!
The point has already been made that no advocate has claimed personal
tastes are objective or generalizable to everyone else.
But if that were actually true, then they'd not posted, rather than to >advocate for their (...wait for it...) personal preference.
If anyone is guilty of that, it's -highhorse, with his implications
that rich companies who have lots of users giving lots of feedback are
going be objectively better.
Bigger sample sizes yield better estimates.
Why did chrisv fail Statistics 101?
Again, -highhorse conjures shit up that no normal person could have
thought what the issue was, at all. He's 180 degrees from it!
Nope, DFS was already man enough to step up and admit that he wrote an >ambiguous statement ... way back in August 2012.
Which means that
you've been dry-humping that line for more than a decade.
FFS, all along he's been a Photoshop defender! Obviously!
Sheesh!
When one is experienced enough to know what the right tool is for a job,
one uses said correct tool if one has it in your toolbox, and if one
doesn't have it, if you're also smart .. you go and get it.
OTOH, if you're a luzer linux troll fanboy fool, you try to claim that
GIMP is "70,000 better" and get humiliated by literally _everyone_.
On 3/29/24 8:24 PM, DFS wrote:======== (what -hh is doing to DFS)
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop,
when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
Ah, got it; no worries.
The irony is that you wrote that back in Aug 2012, yet chrisv is still
trying to dry-hump it...while never actually properly addressing the
original point.
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
<bs brevsnip>
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe
that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies! /s
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:03:55 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
Remember LSMFT?
Loose Straps Mean Floppy Tits?
Lickies were my poison of choice when I smoked, plus Exports when in
Canada.
A couple days ago I was googling for the song sung (to the tune of
"Johnny Comes Marching Home) for a Tecmatic razor blade.
I don't remember that one or Tecmatic blades. Ah, google to the rescue.
Never used them. Blue Blades ruled.
https://groomatorium.com/products/gillette-super-blue-double-edge-safety- razor-blades-5-blades
"SUPER STAINLESS"
"SHANGHAI, CHINA"
Give me a break. I also remember a Schick injector. Never had an electric.
My mother trolled me one Christmas by putting a present I really wanted in
an electric razor box she'd dug up someplace.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:14:18 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/28/24 4:22 PM, Joel wrote:
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
From a learning curve standpoint, GIMP's fewer options make it shorter
and thus easier & faster to grasp.
LOL. You haven't use GIMP in the last few years, then.
The last thing I did with GIMP was editing some png icons. It was not a pleasant experience. I remember one meeting when I specifically referenced GIMP as the was not to do a UI.
-highhorse wrote
some dumb fsck wrote:
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs 600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop,
when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
Ah, got it; no worries.======== (what -hh is doing to DFS)
The irony is that you wrote that back in Aug 2012, yet chrisv is still
trying to dry-hump it...while never actually properly addressing the
original point.
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.
<bs brevsnip>
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe
that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies! /s
-hh raising a straw man just to knock it down. :-D
Hint: *everyone* factors cost into what they decide to purchase, or not.
On 2024-03-30, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:14:18 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/28/24 4:22 PM, Joel wrote:
but I can say that I was not especially impressed with Photoshop, I
still had months left on my year of it when I deleted Win11, and
couldn't give a fuck less. GIMP all the way, now.
From a learning curve standpoint, GIMP's fewer options make it shorter >>>> and thus easier & faster to grasp.
LOL. You haven't use GIMP in the last few years, then.
The last thing I did with GIMP was editing some png icons. It was not a
pleasant experience. I remember one meeting when I specifically referenced >> GIMP as the was not to do a UI.
Unless Photoshop has changed significantly, it isn't exactly intuitive either.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 3/29/24 8:24 PM, DFS wrote:======== (what -hh is doing to DFS)
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop,
when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
Ah, got it; no worries.
The irony is that you wrote that back in Aug 2012, yet chrisv is still
trying to dry-hump it...while never actually properly addressing the
original point.
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.
<bs brevsnip>
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe
that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies! /s
-hh raising a straw man just to knock it down. :-D
Hint: *everyone* factors cost into what they decide to purchase, or not.
At my job they would get you a license for Photoshop or Adobe Pro if you asked
for it and had a business.
I saved them some money using GIMP, which runs
fine (albeit slowly) on Windows.
made good by saying that it was theirs and that they had unintentionally
had misstated and changed my comments' tone, which I've accepted.
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-highhorse wrote
some dumb fsck wrote:
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop, >>>> when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
Confirming that my interpretation of it was spot-on. Not that there
was ever any doubt of my correctness.
Ah, got it; no worries.======== (what -hh is doing to DFS)
The irony is that you wrote that back in Aug 2012, yet chrisv is still
trying to dry-hump it...while never actually properly addressing the
Heh. And vice versa!
original point.
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.
A perfect example of our position, and obviously reasonable.
Definitely not supporting the lying charges of -highhorse and DumFSck.
Why does the dumb fsck bring it up? Who knows?
<bs brevsnip>
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe
that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
Oh, is that what has been claimed, that no Linux fanboy considers cost
a factor?
seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies! /s
-hh raising a straw man just to knock it down. :-D
He's shamelessly dishonest.
Hint: *everyone* factors cost into what they decide to purchase, or not.
<snip>
<bs snip>
Sure, but it is only the Linux DIY fanboys would choose to walk over a
mile of glass and hot lava just to save 59 cents.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
<bs snip>
Sure, but it is only the Linux DIY fanboys would choose to walk over a
mile of glass and hot lava just to save 59 cents.
You are a limp-wristed drama queen. :-D
At worst some free-software-only users sacrifice proprietary featureitis.
And at work? Let the Corp pay for said featureitis.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
<snip>
Jesus H. Christ you are tedious.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
<bs snip>
Sure, but it is only the Linux DIY fanboys would choose to walk over a
mile of glass and hot lava just to save 59 cents.
You are a limp-wristed drama queen. :-D
At worst some free-software-only users sacrifice proprietary
featureitis.
And at work? Let the Corp pay for said featureitis.
-highhorse wrote:
<snip>
Jesus H. Christ you are tedious.
chrisv wrote:
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
some dumb fsck wrote:
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images >>>>> needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.
A perfect example of our position, and obviously reasonable.
Definitely not supporting the lying charges of -highhorse and DumFSck.
Why does the dumb fsck bring it up? Who knows?
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe >>>> that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
Oh, is that what has been claimed, that no Linux fanboy considers cost
a factor?
(snipped, unread)
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
some dumb fsck wrote:
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images >>>>>> needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality. <rolls eyes>"
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.
A perfect example of our position, and obviously reasonable.
Definitely not supporting the lying charges of -highhorse and DumFSck.
Why does the dumb fsck bring it up? Who knows?
-highhorse's "example" fell flat, also. One guy had a brain-fart
where he arbitrarily assigned a 1 cent cost to GIMP, but that sure
doesn't support the lying claims of -highhorse and DumFSck.
It was an example of an advocate saying something stupid, but how does
that compare to the constant stream of stupidity and lies from the
haters?
I'll take someone who has the occasional brain fart over some
asshole who *lies* to attack others, any day of the week.
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe >>>>> that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';
Oh, is that what has been claimed, that no Linux fanboy considers cost
a factor?
(snipped, unread)
Poor -highhorse. The fact that he needs to *lie* says it all.
All the other 3/31 -highhorse posts were deleted, unread. As will his response to this post.
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
<snip>
Jesus H. Christ you are tedious.
That's how he "wins", with an avalanche of garbage. So much wrong, so
much dishonest, that it's a real effort to rebut.
Remember he also claimed that the advocates had an "irrational hatred"
of Photoshop. This demonstrated "sheer close-mindedness" on our part.
Such obvious lying, to attack our position, is a concession of defeat.
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-highhorse wrote:
<snip>
Jesus H. Christ you are tedious.
That's how he "wins", with an avalanche of garbage. So much wrong, so
much dishonest, that it's a real effort to rebut.
Remember he also claimed that the advocates had an "irrational hatred"
of Photoshop.
On 3/31/24 5:35 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
<snip>
Jesus H. Christ you are tedious.
Point is that when someone like chrisv is being paid $25/hour, a tool
which improves his productivity by, oh, say +10% will pay for itself
over time. If te tool costs $500, then 10% higher productivity means
that its value is 40*.1 = 4 hours/week, which is worth $100 and ROI
"break even" point is five weeks: a good investment to make.
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
Unless Photoshop has changed significantly, it isn't exactly intuitive >>either.
It's hard to use any of the image editing apps, Photoshop not least of
such, but while I can acknowledge Wintendo being needed for the degree
of support Adobe provides, it isn't something I'm ever going to care
about, and GIMP is good.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 21:25:31 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
On 30 Mar 2024 19:52:31 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in
<l6r8rvFkfnpU6@mid.individual.net>:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:39:17 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
Nothing wrong with "tinkering". Big woop, wanna fight about it?
Ooh, touchy! I wasn't even thinking about you.
You took out the smiley: ;)
blame Pan. It has no sense of humor.
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Point is that when someone like chrisv is being paid $25/hour, a tool
which improves his productivity by, oh, say +10% will pay for itself
over time. If te tool costs $500, then 10% higher productivity means
that its value is 40*.1 = 4 hours/week, which is worth $100 and ROI
"break even" point is five weeks: a good investment to make.
Imagine using a productivity argument with bloatware from Microsoft and Adobe
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
-hh wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Point is that when someone like chrisv is being paid $25/hour, a tool
which improves his productivity by, oh, say +10% will pay for itself
over time. If te tool costs $500, then 10% higher productivity means
that its value is 40*.1 = 4 hours/week, which is worth $100 and ROI
"break even" point is five weeks: a good investment to make.
Imagine using a productivity argument with bloatware from Microsoft and Adobe
-highhorse moved the goalposts. The discussion was regarding
configuration changes, not "tools that cost money".
-highhorse moved the goalposts. The discussion was regarding
configuration changes, not "tools that cost money".
Nah, the point that I keep on is that of the product's ability to make
one's life easier and more fruitful (eg, productive) which in an (snipped, unread)
-hh wrote:
-highhorse moved the goalposts. The discussion was regarding
configuration changes, not "tools that cost money".
Nah, the point that I keep on is that of the product's ability to make
one's life easier and more fruitful (eg, productive) which in an (snipped, unread)
Was anyone fooled? If so, go back and read -highhorse's responses to Stephane, which is where this started.
Argument lost, so goalposts were moved.
-hh wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Not.
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!
No I don't. You are lying ... oops!
it was about how some folks
foolishly try to make claims without any objective support.
Notice, everyone, the magic shape-shifting argument.
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!
Ridiculous nonsense ... oops!
The point has already been made that no "objective support" is needed,
to know what one likes.
Oh, look: chrisv trying to claw back to the original subject!
Oh, look: -highhorse trying to evade my point!
The point has already been made that no advocate has claimed personal
tastes are objective or generalizable to everyone else.
But if that were actually true, then they'd not posted, rather than to
advocate for their (...wait for it...) personal preference.
No one with a brain is going to buy your made-up "if that were
actually true" idiocy. The point has been made, and it is correct.
Your *lies* to the contrary are just that.
If anyone is guilty of that, it's -highhorse, with his implications
that rich companies who have lots of users giving lots of feedback are
going be objectively better.
Bigger sample sizes yield better estimates.
Why did chrisv fail Statistics 101?
See how he accepted my point, everyone? All this time, he's been
attacking us for what he is guilty of.
Again, -highhorse conjures shit up that no normal person could have
thought what the issue was, at all. He's 180 degrees from it!
Nope, DFS was already man enough to step up and admit that he wrote an
ambiguous statement ... way back in August 2012.
I recognized that and addressed it, here:
<s15g0j1pg664ch080rvjin27d4bf6uqeki@4ax.com>
My interpretation of DumFSck's "ambiguous" statement has always been
correct. You attacked with *lies* and he supported you.
This is not in dispute.
Which means that
you've been dry-humping that line for more than a decade.
Nope. See above. You both attacked our reasonable position with
*lies*.
FFS, all along he's been a Photoshop defender! Obviously!
Sheesh!
When one is experienced enough to know what the right tool is for a job,
one uses said correct tool if one has it in your toolbox, and if one
doesn't have it, if you're also smart .. you go and get it.
Poor -highhorse, pretending to be the "reasonable" one, here.
The cola advocates have *always* been reasonable, on this issue.
Since we were so clearly correct and reasonable, and you were so badly defeated, all you could do was respond with *lies*.
OTOH, if you're a luzer linux troll fanboy fool, you try to claim that
GIMP is "70,000 better" and get humiliated by literally _everyone_.
Check this out, folks. He's so butthurt and desparate that he's
trying to attck me with something that some other idiot did! He
thinks that he can "win" with such garbage!
Talk about your luzer lying troll fanboy fools!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 11:06:46 |
| Calls: | 6,706 |
| Files: | 12,236 |
| Messages: | 5,350,918 |
