Re: Linux hits 6.1% on March!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
Re: Ubuntu ain't worth a CR@P !!!

NoStop, the lying linux idiot wrote:

>
> Tell us about the "real work" you get done Mr. Yawn. That's besides playing
> Minesweeper.
>
> Cheers.
>
>
"Minesweeper"...that seems to be the "go to" retort used by most of you
lying linux trolls.
Do you like minesweeper that much? Don't you have minesweeper in that
POS toy os you keep pushing?
Frank
 
Re: Ubuntu ain't worth a CR@P !!!

Frank wrote:
> NoStop, the lying linux idiot wrote:
>
>>
>> Tell us about the "real work" you get done Mr. Yawn. That's besides
>> playing
>> Minesweeper.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>>
> "Minesweeper"...that seems to be the "go to" retort used by most of you
> lying linux trolls.
> Do you like minesweeper that much? Don't you have minesweeper in that
> POS toy os you keep pushing?
> Frank

Had you installed Ubuntu, you would know the answer to that question.
But, you haven't because you *can't* because you're too stupid.

Alias
 
"Josef Moellers" <josef.moellers@fujitsu-siemens.com> wrote in message
news:ft02v4$pg2$1@nntp.fujitsu-siemens.com...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Josef Moellers" <josef.moellers@fujitsu-siemens.com> wrote in message
>> news:fsvprq$ns1$1@nntp.fujitsu-siemens.com...
>>
>>
>>> I 100% agree to you. Let everyone chose the OS that they want to use.
>>> Let no-one interfere e.g. by making documents accessible only to those
>>> using office systems of one manufacturer. Let no-one interfere e.g. by
>>> making web sites accessible only to those using browsers of one
>>> manufacturer. Let no-one interfere e.g. by making hardware accessible
>>> only to those using OSes of one manufacturer.
>>
>> Why do you want to remove choice from the people above?
>> What do you have against free choice?
>> Where does it say that if I want to build a site I should have to cater
>> for everyone?
>> Why do you want choice but deny it to others?
>
> You do have a point there, but, personally speaking, if I have to choose
> (pun intended) between *me* having access to information and *others*
> choosing a feature (or maybe just using whatever they got when they bought
> their PC), I'd rather settle for me having access.
>
> Then there is the question whether people really choose to use DOC or
> ActiveX controls or if this was pre-configured and they don't chnage this?
> Maybe some of us think that someone who has so much power to force
> technology onto people should have the moral obligation to make the
> specification for such technology available, so that *all* people can have
> access to the information available.
> Why can't Microsoft use existing standards (ODF)

M$ decided it wasn't extensible enough AFAIK. I am not an expert so I
couldn't be sure.

> but had to force yet another standard (OOXML) which will continue to make
> documents unaccessible to those *not* using their programs? Most likely,
> OOXML will become the default file format when storing office documents
> and most likeley people will just click "Save" rather than first select a
> different format.

But as the OOXML format is an iso standard anyone can read or write it. If
other developers don't support it then blame them. All the other formats
have been published too.
 
Re: Ubuntu ain't worth a CR@P !!!

Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>
>> NoStop, the lying linux idiot wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Tell us about the "real work" you get done Mr. Yawn. That's besides
>>> playing
>>> Minesweeper.
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>>
>> "Minesweeper"...that seems to be the "go to" retort used by most of
>> you lying linux trolls.
>> Do you like minesweeper that much? Don't you have minesweeper in that
>> POS toy os you keep pushing?
>> Frank
>
>
> Had you installed Ubuntu, you would know the answer to that question.
But, you haven't because you *can't* because you're too stupid.
>
> Alias

You dumb stupid POS! I don't play any games whatsoever. So I don't know
what games are included in any OS be they Windows, Mac or any linux distro.
Best you stick with your sheep and your butt-buddies, onthepot and
kurtsie...LOL!
Frank
 
"Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
news:JtMIj.160$DY1.17@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> "Josef Moellers" <josef.moellers@fujitsu-siemens.com> wrote in message
>> news:fsvprq$ns1$1@nntp.fujitsu-siemens.com...
>>
>>> I 100% agree to you. Let everyone chose the OS that they want to use.
>>> Let
>>> no-one interfere e.g. by making documents accessible only to those using
>>> office systems of one manufacturer. Let no-one interfere e.g. by making
>>> web sites accessible only to those using browsers of one manufacturer.
>>> Let
>>> no-one interfere e.g. by making hardware accessible only to those using
>>> OSes of one manufacturer.
>>
>> Why do you want to remove choice from the people above?
>
> How do you get /that/ interpretation of the above, dennis-at-home?
>
>> What do you have against free choice?
>
> Nothing. Yet you spin his words as if they mean the opposite.
>
> Why are you doing this, dennis-at-home?
>
>> Where does it say that if I want to build a site I should have to cater
>> for
>> everyone?
>
> But, /now/ you are saying /you/ want the option of "removing choice".
>
> Is it me that is confused, or you?
>
>> Why do you want choice but deny it to others?
>
> Ah, it is you that is confused.

I bet you feel stupid that you posted that cr@p.
 
Re: Linux hits 0.61% on March!

"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
news:Q0PIj.150325$pM4.126436@pd7urf1no...
>Supper good point.

Yeah supper was good last night.

>How can they measure it?

By counting web page hit stats, from over 40,000 web sites. The same way
they are counting every other OS. What, don't Linux users web surf?

> The stats are flawed. Novell for example estimates 33 million users.

Ah, more "estimates".

> The figure too of 0.61% must be severely flawed. If 33 million people
> are using Linux,

You are assuming the "estimate" is correct.

> and this report says 0.61%, then that means there are 5,409,836,065 PCs
> out there and we know that isn't true.

Right, so therefore the 33 million number must be wrong. That's nearly as
many users as OS X has, and no one believes that Linux has as many users as
OS X.

> MS for example, just passed 100 million sold with their monopoly-bundling
> this makes it a good indicator of PCs sold at 100m/year. Say 8 years
> average life, that make 800m PCs not 5400m.

So you are saying that EVERY PC sold last year came with Vista? But I
thought "no one wanted Vista"?

Instead of making up numbers to suit your agenda, why not use the real
numbers? There were about 233 million PCs sold in 2006, 255 million sold in
2007, 208 million in 2005. These numbers are easily found, do some
searching like I did.

That's nearly 700 million in just 3 years. That works out to around 1
billion sold in the last 5 years.

90+% are running windows - that makes about 900 million - not counting
servers. That means about 6,100,000 are running Linux - not counting
servers. Seems about right to me, considering MS "estimates" there will be
a billion PCs running Windows sometime in 2008.
 
* dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:

> But as the OOXML format is an iso standard anyone can read or write it.

Perhaps, if the standard is truly complete.

However, if Microsoft decides to implement certain features differently
than is specified in the published standard, and the standard is not
updated in a timely fashion, consumers and developers using that
standard are back to where they are now: using MS Office itself, or
accepting formatting problems to appear when the document is loaded into
other word processors.

>If other developers don't support it then blame them.

Given Microsoft's long track record of breaking their own rules, and
their recent rumblings about patents, I sure would get a LOT of legal
advice before even considering writing a product to handle a Microsoft
format.

And, in fact, the Microsoft "promise" seems geared to require the usual
agreements and license fees for commercial development.

> All the other formats have been published too.

Wayyyyyy too late to be very helpful. Microsoft's need for those
formats to get its office stranglehold ended long ago. And yet they
still delayed and delayed until hit with huge fines.

--
I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was
providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt
like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it
took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real problem.
-- Bill Gates, 1989 speech on the history of the microcomputer industry.
 
"Alias" <iamalias@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ft094k$8tn$1@aioe.org...


> Considering that it can't be counted, what the FUD meisters report as
> "market share" is not relevant to the immense growth that Ubuntu is
> experiencing. I can't install them for people who want to get rid of Vista
> fast enough. I'm doing two or three a day now. I have yet to have anyone
> ask me to remove Ubuntu and install *any* version of Windows.

So it is hard to install then.
I installed 25 XP machines in 4 hours from DVD when I needed them for a
demo.
I suggest you find a better way to do it. -)
 
* dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:

>> Ah, it is you that is confused.
>
> I bet you feel stupid that you posted that cr@p.

What crap?

--
The finest pieces of software are those where one individual has a complete
sense of exactly how the program works. To have that, you have to really
love the program and concentrate on keeping it simple, to an incredible
degree.
-- Bill Gates
 
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
<linonut@bollsouth.nut>
wrote
on Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:54:35 -0400
<MvRIj.14885$9O.8824@bignews3.bellsouth.net>:
> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>>> Ah, it is you that is confused.
>>
>> I bet you feel stupid that you posted that cr@p.
>
> What crap?
>

I would think that the question of whether a web designer
should have the choice of excluding 5% [*] or so of his
potential browsers is an interesting one. It may depend
on the competitiveness of his desired market if he decides
to exclude non-Windows browsers and his competitors don't,
and he is not the market leader, he'll probably get some
rather bad press from it all.

[*] the actual number is very squirrelly.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
If your CPU can't stand the heat, get another fan.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
news:136dc5-2fp.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
> <linonut@bollsouth.nut>
> wrote
> on Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:54:35 -0400
> <MvRIj.14885$9O.8824@bignews3.bellsouth.net>:
>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>>> Ah, it is you that is confused.
>>>
>>> I bet you feel stupid that you posted that cr@p.
>>
>> What crap?
>>
>
> I would think that the question of whether a web designer
> should have the choice of excluding 5% [*] or so of his
> potential browsers is an interesting one. It may depend
> on the competitiveness of his desired market if he decides
> to exclude non-Windows browsers and his competitors don't,
> and he is not the market leader, he'll probably get some
> rather bad press from it all.
>
> [*] the actual number is very squirrelly.

However it should be the web site owners choice.

I wonder if lino (lino is an old fashioned oil based floor covering BTW) nut
understands why he wrote a load of cr@p yet?
 
Re: Ubuntu ain't worth a CR@P !!!

"Alias" <iamalias@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ft0ii5$cv2$1@aioe.org...
> Frank wrote:
>> NoStop, the lying linux idiot wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Tell us about the "real work" you get done Mr. Yawn. That's besides
>>> playing
>>> Minesweeper.
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>>
>> "Minesweeper"...that seems to be the "go to" retort used by most of you
>> lying linux trolls.
>> Do you like minesweeper that much? Don't you have minesweeper in that POS
>> toy os you keep pushing?
>> Frank
>
> Had you installed Ubuntu, you would know the answer to that question. But,
> you haven't because you *can't* because you're too stupid.
>
> Alias

I have installed Ubuntu and it's crap. Not worth the price of the product!
Oops. It's FREE and nobody wants it? What does that say about that F'ed up
product?
 
Re: Ubuntu ain't worth a CR@P !!!

"Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com> wrote in message
news:u8Q7HzQlIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ft0ii5$cv2$1@aioe.org...
>> Frank wrote:
>>> NoStop, the lying linux idiot wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tell us about the "real work" you get done Mr. Yawn. That's besides
>>>> playing
>>>> Minesweeper.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> "Minesweeper"...that seems to be the "go to" retort used by most of you
>>> lying linux trolls.
>>> Do you like minesweeper that much? Don't you have minesweeper in that
>>> POS toy os you keep pushing?
>>> Frank
>>
>> Had you installed Ubuntu, you would know the answer to that question.
>> But, you haven't because you *can't* because you're too stupid.
>>
>> Alias
>
> I have installed Ubuntu and it's crap. Not worth the price of the
> product! Oops. It's FREE and nobody wants it? What does that say about
> that F'ed up product?
>
>

Actually the product is ok, the marketing dept is cr@p.
They lie in obvious ways.
They think the customers are incredibly stupid.
They tell the customers they are incredibly stupid or worse.
The customer is always wrong.. if it doesn't work the customer must be
deliberately breaking it.
 
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 23:20:32 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>
>> That's a Roy Schestowitz administered site so I will not go there for fear
>> of getting a virus or trojan or something.
>
> Run Linux. You won't have to worry. :)

Sure.

Tell that to Roy Schestowitz who had his LINUX based website hacked and
0wned a couple of weeks ago.


>> My advice to anyone is to use the OS that supports the applications you
>> need to run.
>
> Linux runs all the applications you need to run.

No it doesn't.
And it doesn't for a vast number of people which is why virtually nobody is
using it as a desktop system.


> Except for "viruses or trojans or something".
>
> *snicker*

See Roy Schestowitz who had a trojan embedded in his website and was
infecting God knows how many users who visted him.

>> IOW choose your applications first and then your OS.
>
> That's about the damned dumbest thing I've ever read. Like saying
> "build a nice roof, then put a house under it".

Really?
You've obviously never worked in Information Technology.
Living in your mother's basement doesn't qualify BTW.

> Intelligent people start with a solid foundation. Being A Wintard
> I'm sure that's a tough concept to wrap your brain around, but it's
> true.

Wrong.
Intelligent people choose the applications they need to run and then pick
the OS.
Why?
What if a certain application you need doesn't have say a Linux version?
Then what Jack?
Duhhhhh...... You're not very good at trolling BTW...

Next..............


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, dennis@home
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net>
wrote
on Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:19:54 +0100
<ft0tad$fa$1@news.datemas.de>:
>
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
> news:136dc5-2fp.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
>> <linonut@bollsouth.nut>
>> wrote
>> on Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:54:35 -0400
>> <MvRIj.14885$9O.8824@bignews3.bellsouth.net>:
>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>
>>>>> Ah, it is you that is confused.
>>>>
>>>> I bet you feel stupid that you posted that cr@p.
>>>
>>> What crap?
>>>
>>
>> I would think that the question of whether a web designer
>> should have the choice of excluding 5% [*] or so of his
>> potential browsers is an interesting one. It may depend
>> on the competitiveness of his desired market if he decides
>> to exclude non-Windows browsers and his competitors don't,
>> and he is not the market leader, he'll probably get some
>> rather bad press from it all.
>>
>> [*] the actual number is very squirrelly.
>
> However it should be the web site owners choice.

Indeed it should be, and the only caveat is that the
browser outside the market get an indication that there
will be malfunctions in his browser if he continues,
and that he does so at his own risk. Lockouts are also
acceptable (barely) one would assume the user would
go to the site's competitor in that case.

However, this also opens the door to an interesting
form of manipulation Microsoft might very well want to
persuade popular sites to use its tools, and having them
make IE-specific changes.

>
> I wonder if lino (lino is an old fashioned oil based
> floor covering BTW) nut understands why he wrote a
> load of cr@p yet?
>

You'll have to ask him. Not my day to read his mind. -)

Confirmed on the "Lino", which is short for "linoleum"
in one disambiguation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lino
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleum

Unknown as to the use of linseed oil in dessert toppings
or floor waxes.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Is it cheaper to learn Linux, or to hire someone
to fix your Windows problems?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
Re: Linux hits 0.61% on March!

About the stats of web page visits:
I know these stats are flawed for the simple reason that many many
sights I visit when on my other system using firefox on linux, I must
change the settings to tell the websites I am using windows. This is a
common setup. Many firefox and opera users even with windows setup
the browser to tell websites they use IE because the connection is
often refused otherwise. Granted there are less refusals than just 3
years ago, but this is still a fact.
I still use Vista. BUT I still use LInux also because when I need
uptime with NO problems, no reboots, no freezing, no local only
access, etc..
BUT,
Windows is mainstream, not Linux.(at least for now)

<begin vent>

A 747 may be a lots better plane, but when I need to land on my farm,
IT WILL NOT DO THE JOB same as my Cessna won't fly to China!

So, from my viewpoint, all this argueing doesn't help anyone and
people who continue to reply multiple times to the same arguement just
ain't helping those here who need it. It is difficult getting help
already without having to read 2 hours worth of who can piss the
fartherest just to find out the cure for a simple problem.

<end vent>
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:05:19 -0400, "Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote:

>"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
>news:Q0PIj.150325$pM4.126436@pd7urf1no...
>>Supper good point.
>
>Yeah supper was good last night.
>
>>How can they measure it?
>
>By counting web page hit stats, from over 40,000 web sites. The same way
>they are counting every other OS. What, don't Linux users web surf?
>
>> The stats are flawed. Novell for example estimates 33 million users.
>
>Ah, more "estimates".
>
>> The figure too of 0.61% must be severely flawed. If 33 million people
>> are using Linux,
>
>You are assuming the "estimate" is correct.
>
>> and this report says 0.61%, then that means there are 5,409,836,065 PCs
>> out there and we know that isn't true.
>
>Right, so therefore the 33 million number must be wrong. That's nearly as
>many users as OS X has, and no one believes that Linux has as many users as
>OS X.
>
>> MS for example, just passed 100 million sold with their monopoly-bundling
>> this makes it a good indicator of PCs sold at 100m/year. Say 8 years
>> average life, that make 800m PCs not 5400m.
>
>So you are saying that EVERY PC sold last year came with Vista? But I
>thought "no one wanted Vista"?
>
>Instead of making up numbers to suit your agenda, why not use the real
>numbers? There were about 233 million PCs sold in 2006, 255 million sold in
>2007, 208 million in 2005. These numbers are easily found, do some
>searching like I did.
>
>That's nearly 700 million in just 3 years. That works out to around 1
>billion sold in the last 5 years.
>
>90+% are running windows - that makes about 900 million - not counting
>servers. That means about 6,100,000 are running Linux - not counting
>servers. Seems about right to me, considering MS "estimates" there will be
>a billion PCs running Windows sometime in 2008.
 
Re: Linux hits 0.61% on March!

"willajabir" <willajabir@spam.net> wrote in message
news:5c48v3h2fjsfdupagotbgf3bdojvp3re9a@4ax.com...
> About the stats of web page visits:
> I know these stats are flawed for the simple reason that many many
> sights I visit when on my other system using firefox on linux, I must
> change the settings to tell the websites I am using windows.

Right. Standard Linux Loonie spin.
 
Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 23:20:32 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>
>>> That's a Roy Schestowitz administered site so I will not go there for
>>> fear of getting a virus or trojan or something.
>>
>> Run Linux. You won't have to worry. :)
>
> Sure.
>
> Tell that to Roy Schestowitz who had his LINUX based website hacked and
> 0wned a couple of weeks ago.
>
>
>>> My advice to anyone is to use the OS that supports the applications you
>>> need to run.
>>
>> Linux runs all the applications you need to run.
>
> No it doesn't.
> And it doesn't for a vast number of people which is why virtually nobody
> is using it as a desktop system.
>
>
>> Except for "viruses or trojans or something".
>>
>> *snicker*
>
> See Roy Schestowitz who had a trojan embedded in his website and was
> infecting God knows how many users who visted him.
>
Surely you mean Windoze users? If that is the case, maybe it was there on
purpose? So how many hours did it take for you to clean the virus off your
toy operating system? Was it fun Mr. Soap Suds?

Cheers.

--
The world can't afford the rich.

alt.os.linux.ubuntu - where the lunatic Hadron is a "Linux advocate"

Francis (Frank) adds a new "gadget" to his Vista box ...
Download it here: http://tinyurl.com/2hnof6
 
Alias wrote:

> Canuck57 wrote:
>> "Alias" <iamalias@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:fstklo$a96$3@aioe.org...
>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:34:38 +0200, OK wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> APRIL'S FOOL!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, is DECREASED to 0.61%, down from 0.65% in February:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpcustom=Linux
>>>>>
>>>>> The future looks bright :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile, Vista reached 14.05% in a steady linear growth:
>>>>>
>>>>>
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11&qpcustom=Windows+Vista
>>>> Linux seems to be losing no matter where you look.
>>>> The ODF vs OOXML debates.
>>>> Market Share.
>>>>
>>>> So if you want to be on the losing team, go with Linux.
>>>> At least you can say Linux is consistent.
>>>>
>>>> After 10+ years it still is hovering around 0.6 percent of desktop
>>>> market share.
>>>>
>>> Um, Linux cannot be sold so it therefore has ZERO market share.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> Supper good point. How can they measure it? The stats are flawed.
>> Novell for example estimates 33 million users.
>>
>> The figure too of 0.61% must be severely flawed. If 33 million people
>> are using Linux, and this report says 0.61%, then that means there are
>> 5,409,836,065 PCs out there and we know that isn't true.
>>
>> MS for example, just passed 100 million sold with their monopoly-bundling
>> this makes it a good indicator of PCs sold at 100m/year. Say 8 years
>> average life, that make 800m PCs not 5400m.
>>
>> These paid for Microsoft numbers are just part of their FUD war on Linux.
>>
>> Red Hat sales are up nicely too. Quite popular where these pollsters
>> don't go too.
>>
>>
>
> The Franks, Bill Yawns and Steve Ballmers of the world are scared
> sh¡tless that people will leave Windows en masse once they've learned
> how much better Linux is over Windows.
>
> Alias

They're also sweating because of what Intel is going to be releasing in
June. And, it'll be running Linux!

Cheers.

--

A US president declared war on poverty. Poverty won.
Another US president declared a war on drugs. Drugs won.
This US president declared a war on terror. Terror won.
Next?
 
What? wrote:

> NoStop wrote:
>> What? wrote:
>>
>> What?
>>
>
What?

--

A US president declared war on poverty. Poverty won.
Another US president declared a war on drugs. Drugs won.
This US president declared a war on terror. Terror won.
Next?
 
Back
Top