M
Moshe Goldfarb
On Sat, 10 May 2008 11:44:23 -0400, DFS wrote:
> How can MS dictate anything to anybody? They offer a product for sale at a
> price, maybe with terms/conditions, and the OEM is free to accept it or not.
And Linux is free so how can a pay for product that is supposed to be
inferior absolutely destroy in terms of desktop market share, a free
product, Linux, that is supposed to be superior?
> Oh I forgot: we're here in la-la land, where everyone is a victim of big,
> bad MS. You nuts are like battered wives, except you imagine it all.
They have to blame someone or something for Linux's inability to break the
1 percent of desktop barrier.
>
>
>> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscent...t_to_limit_capabilities_of_cheap_laptops.html
>
> "...the goal apparently..."
> "...appears designed to ensure that distinction..."
> "...[official]... asked not to be identified..."
>
> The bias in the article, and your shrieking here, is all just paranoid
> speculation by MS-haters.
And next month when PCWorld prints a not so favorable article about Linux,
the COLA loons will be whining about a biased magazine.
They twist everything to fit their warped view of Linux.
> Once again, free Linux isn't competitive with paid-for Windows, and it makes
> you wacks hysterical because you know it.
They just can't accept that fact and they refuse to admit that Linux has a
serious problem if it can't compete with pay for products.
It's a total and complete embaressment to the Linux community when their
free product gets trounced by pay for products.
Open Office is another example.
That one is even available for Windows and yet people still demand MSOffice
instead.
> You OSS guys need to write better code - the rest will take care of itself.
> You can't honestly think OpenOffice and Gambas and Evolution and MySQL and
> crappy kid's educational software will beat MS and commercial products? It
> might do OK in the 3rd world, but anyone with money is fooling themselves
> that there's any reason to run that OSS dirtware.
The Linux community already has a solution.
Release more and more distributions to fix the problems with the current
ones.
Unfortunately this doesn't work well because these new distributions have
inherent problems of their own and then the cycle repeats itself again.
> This is yet another very clear example where you weenies play the victim:
>
> Left side of mouth: Linux is better than Windows. MS is incompetent
> Right side of mouth: MS is holding Linux back
It's entertaining to watch these Linux loons jump about trying to make the
data fit their arguments.
Never trust a Linux advocate because they will lie to you in order to suck
you in to using Linux.
It's the old "works for me" lie.
>
> Regardless what you call it, 'artificially crippled' Windows is a sight
> better than truly, naturally, nothing-but, can't-help-it, always-will-be
> crippled Linux.
Desktop Linux is on life support at the moment.
> Easily proven: a Windows system has access to an order of magnitude more and
> better software and games than the Linux system. Windows is far less buggy
> than Linux. And Windows is far more stable than Linux (I don't mean kernel
> panics vs BSOD - I mean in day to day consumer/app usage, installing,
> configuring, etc).
>
> Add it up and Linux ***loses again***
It certainly does.
The BBC pegged Linux usage at 0.8 percent which is pathetic considering
Linux is free and has been around for 10 + years.
>> than far more powerful Linux machines for the same price.
>
> Now go ahead and prove the Linux machines are "far more powerful for the
> same price".
Snicker......
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
> How can MS dictate anything to anybody? They offer a product for sale at a
> price, maybe with terms/conditions, and the OEM is free to accept it or not.
And Linux is free so how can a pay for product that is supposed to be
inferior absolutely destroy in terms of desktop market share, a free
product, Linux, that is supposed to be superior?
> Oh I forgot: we're here in la-la land, where everyone is a victim of big,
> bad MS. You nuts are like battered wives, except you imagine it all.
They have to blame someone or something for Linux's inability to break the
1 percent of desktop barrier.
>
>
>> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscent...t_to_limit_capabilities_of_cheap_laptops.html
>
> "...the goal apparently..."
> "...appears designed to ensure that distinction..."
> "...[official]... asked not to be identified..."
>
> The bias in the article, and your shrieking here, is all just paranoid
> speculation by MS-haters.
And next month when PCWorld prints a not so favorable article about Linux,
the COLA loons will be whining about a biased magazine.
They twist everything to fit their warped view of Linux.
> Once again, free Linux isn't competitive with paid-for Windows, and it makes
> you wacks hysterical because you know it.
They just can't accept that fact and they refuse to admit that Linux has a
serious problem if it can't compete with pay for products.
It's a total and complete embaressment to the Linux community when their
free product gets trounced by pay for products.
Open Office is another example.
That one is even available for Windows and yet people still demand MSOffice
instead.
> You OSS guys need to write better code - the rest will take care of itself.
> You can't honestly think OpenOffice and Gambas and Evolution and MySQL and
> crappy kid's educational software will beat MS and commercial products? It
> might do OK in the 3rd world, but anyone with money is fooling themselves
> that there's any reason to run that OSS dirtware.
The Linux community already has a solution.
Release more and more distributions to fix the problems with the current
ones.
Unfortunately this doesn't work well because these new distributions have
inherent problems of their own and then the cycle repeats itself again.
> This is yet another very clear example where you weenies play the victim:
>
> Left side of mouth: Linux is better than Windows. MS is incompetent
> Right side of mouth: MS is holding Linux back
It's entertaining to watch these Linux loons jump about trying to make the
data fit their arguments.
Never trust a Linux advocate because they will lie to you in order to suck
you in to using Linux.
It's the old "works for me" lie.
>
> Regardless what you call it, 'artificially crippled' Windows is a sight
> better than truly, naturally, nothing-but, can't-help-it, always-will-be
> crippled Linux.
Desktop Linux is on life support at the moment.
> Easily proven: a Windows system has access to an order of magnitude more and
> better software and games than the Linux system. Windows is far less buggy
> than Linux. And Windows is far more stable than Linux (I don't mean kernel
> panics vs BSOD - I mean in day to day consumer/app usage, installing,
> configuring, etc).
>
> Add it up and Linux ***loses again***
It certainly does.
The BBC pegged Linux usage at 0.8 percent which is pathetic considering
Linux is free and has been around for 10 + years.
>> than far more powerful Linux machines for the same price.
>
> Now go ahead and prove the Linux machines are "far more powerful for the
> same price".
Snicker......
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/