Leaders of The Linux Movement In Action. See Them Here!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

In article <47a7863a$0$25998$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Mustafa Korn <korn@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>Note: By the definition above a PS2, XBox and XBox360 are *ALL* linux
>machines because linux is available for them.
>

Pffftttt. You can install linux on a Sparc 10 but it's
certainly not a linux machine.
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. SeeThem Here!

On Feb 4, 5:00 pm, Meat Plow <m...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:36:58 -0600, thad05 wrote:
> > Hadron <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >> No. It is not.
>
> >> It CAN run Linux. But it, as a product, is NOT a Linux machine in any
> >> shape nor form.
>
> >> Give it up Peter you vile,lying, misleading, bottom feeding, pond
> >> dwelling low life.
>
> > Why do you guys bother to keep going around in circles on this
> > topic?  It is obvious you are working from different definitions
> > of 'Linux machine'.  To Hadron it evidently means a system that
> > comes with Linux standard.  To Rex it obviously means a system
> > *capable* of running Linux.  By one definition almost no
> > system is a Linux machine and by the other almost every system
> > is.  You are both right... and wrong... and getting very
> > repetitive.  >)
>
> Hardon for one likes to argue on about nothing endlessly. Keeps him busy
> in an otherwise pitiful existence.

Bold words from someone named Meat Plow.
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:27:47 -0800 (PST), cc wrote:

> On Feb 4, 5:00 pm, Meat Plow <m...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:36:58 -0600, thad05 wrote:
>>> Hadron <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> No. It is not.
>>
>>>> It CAN run Linux. But it, as a product, is NOT a Linux machine in any
>>>> shape nor form.
>>
>>>> Give it up Peter you vile,lying, misleading, bottom feeding, pond
>>>> dwelling low life.
>>
>>> Why do you guys bother to keep going around in circles on this
>>> topic?  It is obvious you are working from different definitions
>>> of 'Linux machine'.  To Hadron it evidently means a system that
>>> comes with Linux standard.  To Rex it obviously means a system
>>> *capable* of running Linux.  By one definition almost no
>>> system is a Linux machine and by the other almost every system
>>> is.  You are both right... and wrong... and getting very
>>> repetitive.  >)
>>
>> Hardon for one likes to argue on about nothing endlessly. Keeps him busy
>> in an otherwise pitiful existence.
>
> Bold words from someone named Meat Plow.


With a name like that, it looks like he has found the right group!!
The question is though, what search argument got him here.

Haha!

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:27:47 -0800 (PST), cc wrote:
>
>> On Feb 4, 5:00 pm, Meat Plow <m...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:36:58 -0600, thad05 wrote:
>>>> Hadron <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> No. It is not.
>>>
>>>>> It CAN run Linux. But it, as a product, is NOT a Linux machine in any
>>>>> shape nor form.
>>>
>>>>> Give it up Peter you vile,lying, misleading, bottom feeding, pond
>>>>> dwelling low life.
>>>
>>>> Why do you guys bother to keep going around in circles on this
>>>> topic?  It is obvious you are working from different definitions
>>>> of 'Linux machine'.  To Hadron it evidently means a system that
>>>> comes with Linux standard.  To Rex it obviously means a system
>>>> *capable* of running Linux.  By one definition almost no
>>>> system is a Linux machine and by the other almost every system
>>>> is.  You are both right... and wrong... and getting very
>>>> repetitive.  >)
>>>
>>> Hardon for one likes to argue on about nothing endlessly. Keeps him busy
>>> in an otherwise pitiful existence.
>>
>> Bold words from someone named Meat Plow.
>
>
> With a name like that, it looks like he has found the right group!!
> The question is though, what search argument got him here.
>
> Haha!

*chuckle*

Nice one.
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> A "standard PC" is not a Linux machine unless Linux is installed on it.
>
> Are you having some sort of difficulty with such an easy to understand issue?
>
> or do you think that any HW that CAN run linux should be counted as a
> Linux machine?

As I see it, it depends if you are talking about Linux machine in
the singular (a specific instance of machine) or as a description
of a class of hardware (all x86 PCs for example). Granted, the
first is the more common use, but I can believe that some people
would use the later... language can be slippery like that.

> They are potential linux platforms. But *POTENTIAL* does not equal
> "is". Otherwise Linux machines would be 100% of the PC market share
> ......
>
> Come off it Thad.

Actually, I tend to use the term the same way as you, but my GF
has a background in linguistics and loves to point out the pitfalls
of these sorts of word use issues. The point I was really getting
at was since Rex is arguing the 'class of hardware' interpretation
and you are using the term in the singular, the two of you are never
going to agree. That is why I find the argument kind of funny.

Thad
--
Yeah, I drank the Open Source cool-aid... Unlike the other brand, it had
all the ingredients on the label.
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com writes:

> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> A "standard PC" is not a Linux machine unless Linux is installed on it.
>>
>> Are you having some sort of difficulty with such an easy to understand issue?
>>
>> or do you think that any HW that CAN run linux should be counted as a
>> Linux machine?
>
> As I see it, it depends if you are talking about Linux machine in
> the singular (a specific instance of machine) or as a description
> of a class of hardware (all x86 PCs for example). Granted, the
> first is the more common use, but I can believe that some people
> would use the later... language can be slippery like that.

No. Only in COLA.

The PS3 is NOT a Linux machine. It is a Sony machine running a
proprietary OS.

>
>> They are potential linux platforms. But *POTENTIAL* does not equal
>> "is". Otherwise Linux machines would be 100% of the PC market share
>> ......
>>
>> Come off it Thad.
>
> Actually, I tend to use the term the same way as you, but my GF
> has a background in linguistics and loves to point out the pitfalls
> of these sorts of word use issues.

You don't need to say that. From the idiots using it to mean it "IS" a
Linux machine this is quite obvious. Albeit totally wrong.
 
Re: Leaders of The Micoshaft Asstroturfer Movement In Action. See Them Here!

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:28:54 -0600, thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com wrote:


> Actually, I tend to use the term the same way as you, but my GF
> has a background in linguistics and loves to point out the pitfalls
> of these sorts of word use issues.
> Thad

You should introduce your GF to 7 !
She could study him for some kind of a research project or something.



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Back
Top