Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen - Linux

This is a discussion on Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen - Linux ; http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0 So much for the "superior" quality of apple software They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts -- Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

  1. Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0

    So much for the "superior" quality of apple software

    They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    --
    Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware


  2. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Peter KŲhlmann wrote:

    > http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >
    > So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >
    > They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts


    sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.

    the company Unsanity has now apologized:

    http://unsanity.org/

  3. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____

    > Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>
    >> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>
    >> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts

    >
    > sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >
    > the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >
    > http://unsanity.org/


    You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not test the
    build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and resolve it.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useful fact: close elevator button = Express Mode
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  4. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >
    >> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>
    >>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>
    >>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts

    >>
    >> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>
    >> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>
    >> http://unsanity.org/

    >
    > You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    > test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and resolve
    > it.
    >


    It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of code
    without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    test/change their products.
    In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a clearly
    worded (it's apple users, after all) warning
    --
    All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
    parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
    can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means,
    do not use a hammer.


  5. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 09:35 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >>
    >>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>>
    >>>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>>
    >>>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    >>>
    >>> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>>
    >>> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>>
    >>> http://unsanity.org/

    >>
    >> You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    >> test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and resolve
    >> it.
    >>

    >
    > It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of code
    > without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    > test/change their products.
    > In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    > their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    > 3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    > The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a clearly
    > worded (it's apple users, after all) warning


    I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via Torrent).
    How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?

    One might suggest that APIs/hooks were not sufficiently robust (well-designed)
    in Tiger if a third-party application was able to cause some chaos without
    simply being separated from the system, which should be modular and
    self-correcting. It still doesn't give a decent excuse for those that 'hack'
    around hooks (if it all). This might explain why Apple gave developers the
    boot as far as iPhone is concerned. The phone was designed very poorly (it's
    hard to see this because it's closed-source) if it runs as root _all the
    time_. Apple was able to hide this fact for _months_, but the bonnet wasn't
    think enough.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Anonymous posters are more frequently disregarded
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    run-level 2 2007-10-16 15:14 last=
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  6. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >
    >> Peter K?hlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>
    >>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>
    >>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts

    >>
    >> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>
    >> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>
    >> http://unsanity.org/

    >
    > You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not test the
    > build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and resolve it.
    >


    Ie., it has everything to do with Apple, since they failed to integrate
    properly, which is one of their major claims to fame. Still, it's good
    to see that they're as willing to run away from responsibility as every
    other proprietary vendor.

    Advice? Stick with linux - people address problems and fix them, they
    don't bother with the blame game.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  7. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 09:35 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    >>>>
    >>>> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>>>
    >>>> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://unsanity.org/
    >>>
    >>> You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    >>> test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and
    >>> resolve it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of
    >> code without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    >> test/change their products.
    >> In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    >> their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    >> 3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    >> The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a
    >> clearly worded (it's apple users, after all) warning

    >
    > I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    > Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?


    Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code

    < snip >
    --
    "The number of Unix installations has grown to ten, with more expected"
    -- The Unix programmers handbook, 1972


  8. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 09:35 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    >>>>>
    >>>>> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://unsanity.org/
    >>>>
    >>>> You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    >>>> test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and
    >>>> resolve it.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of
    >>> code without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    >>> test/change their products.
    >>> In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    >>> their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    >>> 3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    >>> The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a
    >>> clearly worded (it's apple users, after all) warning

    >>
    >> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    >> Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?

    >
    > Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >
    > < snip >


    Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a multi-billion dollar
    company that is so arrogant...?

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: 21978 x 4 = 21978 backwards
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  9. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 09:35 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://unsanity.org/
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    >>>>> test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and
    >>>>> resolve it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of
    >>>> code without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    >>>> test/change their products.
    >>>> In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    >>>> their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    >>>> 3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    >>>> The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a
    >>>> clearly worded (it's apple users, after all) warning
    >>>
    >>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    >>> Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?

    >>
    >> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>
    >> < snip >

    >
    > Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a multi-billion
    > dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >


    Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?

    --
    Try to be the best of whatever you are, even if what you are is
    no good.


  10. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    In article ,
    Peter Kohlmann wrote:
    > http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >
    > So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >
    > They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts


    Are you claiming that no Linux upgrade has ever got stuck?

  11. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Peter Kohlmann wrote:
    >> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>
    >> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>
    >> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts

    >
    > Are you claiming that no Linux upgrade has ever got stuck?


    Show me where I implied that, Tim Hadron Funkenbusch
    --
    Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
    Let it get in YOUR way. The problem for your problem.


  12. Re: Ubuntu Installation appears stuck on a orange progress bar


    "Peter KŲhlmann" wrote in message
    news:ffv39v$9cl$01$1@news.t-online.com...
    > http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >
    > So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >
    > They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    > --
    > Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware
    >



    "So much for the "superior" quality of OSS software"


    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=3643308
    October 2007
    Ubuntu 7.10 Install - Stuck at Logo Screen

    Hi,

    Trying to install Ubuntu 7.10 but it fails. It basically just stops at the
    Ubuntu logo screen with the orange progress bar, bouncing back and forth.


    http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...irq-14-593703/
    10-22-2007, 12:19 PM
    Installation stuck at irq 14

    I press to install in GUI mode.
    In the half way. It stuck/hang at the line below:

    'ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14'



    http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/red...-starting.html
    Hi,
    I have a P4 system having intel D915GAV board with 1GB RAM. I tried to
    install Fedore Core 4. Just after I press Enter at the boot prompt, I get a
    series of error codes and everything is stuck. Even the Ctrl-Alt-Del is not
    responding.



    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=84822
    Install Stuck at 83% - ide-disk
    Hello all, I just got this Ubuntu CD from my teacher and wanted to install
    it onto an older computer for my cousin. I formatted the old os and wanted
    to clean install this one. I've tried the disks on my current computer and
    they work great. Here's the problem, when I try to install it onto my old
    computer, it hangs at 83% - Loading module 'ide-disk' for 'Linux ATA
    DISK'...




    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=145577
    2007-01-24, 09:45 AM PST
    cannot install FC6, "DWARF2 unwinder stuck at error"

    However, just after the installation started, the installation halted and I
    got this message which I thought would give you an idea of what's happening:

    DWARF2 unwinder stuck at error_code+0x39/0x40
    Leftover inexact backtrace:




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  13. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 09:35 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> ____/ Gene Jones on Monday 29 October 2007 06:05 : \____
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> http://discussions.apple.com/thread....95031&tstart=0
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> So much for the "superior" quality of apple software
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> They are every bit as incompetent as their Redmond counterparts
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> sorry peter, it had nothing to do with apple.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> the company Unsanity has now apologized:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://unsanity.org/
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You're actually right on this one, but it's a shame that Apple did not
    >>>>>> test the build sufficiently in order to identify the conflict and
    >>>>>> resolve it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It is a shame also that apparently they changed significant amounts of
    >>>>> code without providing the changes to 3rd-party developers to let them
    >>>>> test/change their products.
    >>>>> In either case, apple is responsible. They should make sure that
    >>>>> their "upgrade" does not cripple the machine just because a widely used
    >>>>> 3rd-party "enhancer" is installed.
    >>>>> The "upgrade" should check for it and disable it or at least give a
    >>>>> clearly worded (it's apple users, after all) warning
    >>>>
    >>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    >>>> Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?
    >>>
    >>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>
    >>> < snip >

    >>
    >> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a multi-billion
    >> dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>

    >
    > Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?


    Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Linux + tax = Mac OS = (Windows - functionality)
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    21:20:04 up 1:31, 2 users, load average: 1.67, 1.65, 1.63
    http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

  14. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>

    < snip >

    >>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    >>>>> Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?
    >>>>
    >>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>
    >>>> < snip >
    >>>
    >>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a multi-billion
    >>> dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>

    >>
    >> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?

    >
    > Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >


    Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    amounting to something "coherent"?
    It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less
    with "intelligence"

    In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like "linux-sux"
    or OxRetard exhibited

    So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have got as
    a "brain", as useless as it may be
    --
    There are two kinds of people in this world: the kind that divides
    everybody into two kinds of people, and everybody else


  15. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>

    > < snip >
    >
    >>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed via
    >>>>>> Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the release?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>
    >>>>> < snip >
    >>>>
    >>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a multi-billion
    >>>> dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?

    >>
    >> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>

    >
    > Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    > amounting to something "coherent"?
    > It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less
    > with "intelligence"
    >
    > In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like "linux-sux"
    > or OxRetard exhibited
    >
    > So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have got as
    > a "brain", as useless as it may be


    Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is a lot
    going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not modular in the
    sense that it comes in just a single form and public testers have no access to
    the code.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | BadVista? I guess it makes Vista a dog.
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  16. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:54:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>>

    >> < snip >
    >>
    >>>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed
    >>>>>>> via Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the
    >>>>>>> release?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a
    >>>>> multi-billion dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?
    >>>
    >>> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    >> amounting to something "coherent"?
    >> It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less with
    >> "intelligence"
    >>
    >> In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like
    >> "linux-sux" or OxRetard exhibited
    >>
    >> So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have
    >> got as a "brain", as useless as it may be

    >
    > Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    > identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is
    > a lot going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not
    > modular in the sense that it comes in just a single form and public
    > testers have no access to the code.



    SO why does Linux still suck?
    The many eyes approach does not work any better than the closed source
    beta test approach.

    --
    flatfish+++

    "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
    "Is this the year of Linux?"
    "Linux is free only when your time has no value"

  17. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, flatfish+++

    wrote
    on Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:22:15 +0000 (UTC)
    :
    > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:54:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter KŲhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Peter KŲhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> ____/ Peter KŲhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>>>
    >>> < snip >
    >>>
    >>>>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed
    >>>>>>>> via Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the
    >>>>>>>> release?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a
    >>>>>> multi-billion dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?
    >>>>
    >>>> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    >>> amounting to something "coherent"?
    >>> It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less with
    >>> "intelligence"
    >>>
    >>> In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like
    >>> "linux-sux" or OxRetard exhibited
    >>>
    >>> So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have
    >>> got as a "brain", as useless as it may be

    >>
    >> Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    >> identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is
    >> a lot going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not
    >> modular in the sense that it comes in just a single form and public
    >> testers have no access to the code.

    >
    >
    > SO why does Linux still suck?
    > The many eyes approach does not work any better than the closed source
    > beta test approach.
    >


    Of course Linux sucks; it doesn't implement Windows Vista
    Aero. ;-) Clearly, that Beryl stuff is overrated, as it:

    (a) is far prettier than Aero,
    (b) is less resource-intensive,
    (c) allows for more flexibility, and
    (d) is easier to demo.

    Or perhaps you can clarify as to why Linux, quote,
    "sucks", end quote. Just want to be sure I've got my
    Microsoft cue cards straight...

    I do have a quibble or two about microphone audio, but
    am not sure if it's hardware related, Linux related,
    or ALSA related.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows. When it absolutely, positively, has to crash.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  18. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>>

    >> < snip >
    >>
    >>>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed
    >>>>>>> via Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the
    >>>>>>> release?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a
    >>>>> multi-billion dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?
    >>>
    >>> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    >> amounting to something "coherent"?
    >> It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less
    >> with "intelligence"
    >>
    >> In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like
    >> "linux-sux" or OxRetard exhibited
    >>
    >> So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have got
    >> as a "brain", as useless as it may be

    >
    > Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    > identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is a
    > lot going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not modular
    > in the sense that it comes in just a single form and public testers have
    > no access to the code.
    >


    You can't even stick to a simple discussion.
    This wasn't about "OSX not being modular" or "access to code"

    It was about it having beta testers or not. You assumed it does not,
    as "apple found no slave testers"

    Idiot

    You are not a tiny little bit better than flatfish. Or OxRetard
    --
    Tact, n.:
    The unsaid part of what you're thinking.


  19. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Wednesday 31 October 2007 06:50 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>>>
    >>> < snip >
    >>>
    >>>>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed
    >>>>>>>> via Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the
    >>>>>>>> release?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a
    >>>>>> multi-billion dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?
    >>>>
    >>>> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    >>> amounting to something "coherent"?
    >>> It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less
    >>> with "intelligence"
    >>>
    >>> In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like
    >>> "linux-sux" or OxRetard exhibited
    >>>
    >>> So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have got
    >>> as a "brain", as useless as it may be

    >>
    >> Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    >> identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is a
    >> lot going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not modular
    >> in the sense that it comes in just a single form and public testers have
    >> no access to the code.
    >>

    >
    > You can't even stick to a simple discussion.
    > This wasn't about "OSX not being modular" or "access to code"
    >
    > It was about it having beta testers or not. You assumed it does not,
    > as "apple found no slave testers"
    >
    > Idiot
    >
    > You are not a tiny little bit better than flatfish. Or OxRetard


    No, you were just being unspecific with your accusation. Had you politely
    pointed out the problem you were having with my arguments, my response would
    have been more satisfactory.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | X-No-Archive: No. Stand behind what you say
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    08:00:01 up 12:11, 2 users, load average: 1.04, 1.21, 1.45
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  20. Re: Leopard Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Wednesday 31 October 2007 06:50 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Tuesday 30 October 2007 21:54 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 13:32 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Monday 29 October 2007 10:41 : \____
    >>>>>>>
    >>>> < snip >
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I think there was an open test version (several even, distributed
    >>>>>>>>> via Torrent). How come nobody spotted this conflict before the
    >>>>>>>>> release?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Because apple changed so much between the last RC and the gold code
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Or maybe no-one was willing to be the slave (tester) of a
    >>>>>>> multi-billion dollar company that is so arrogant...?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Do you actually try sometimes to generate some coherent thoughts?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Be specific, Peter. You're being rude.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Do you actually think that assuming that apple has no beta testers is
    >>>> amounting to something "coherent"?
    >>>> It certainly has nothing to do with "thought", and even less
    >>>> with "intelligence"
    >>>>
    >>>> In fact, it is a sign of a stupidity until now only cretins like
    >>>> "linux-sux" or OxRetard exhibited
    >>>>
    >>>> So stop this display of being a dimwit and start to use what you have
    >>>> got as a "brain", as useless as it may be
    >>>
    >>> Consider the fact that hundreds of Linux distributions have testers who
    >>> identify bugs in separate /packages/ and the fixes go upstream. There is
    >>> a lot going on in terms of feedback and it's fast. Mac OS X is not
    >>> modular in the sense that it comes in just a single form and public
    >>> testers have no access to the code.
    >>>

    >>
    >> You can't even stick to a simple discussion.
    >> This wasn't about "OSX not being modular" or "access to code"
    >>
    >> It was about it having beta testers or not. You assumed it does not,
    >> as "apple found no slave testers"
    >>
    >> Idiot
    >>
    >> You are not a tiny little bit better than flatfish. Or OxRetard

    >
    > No, you were just being unspecific with your accusation.
    >


    So yes, you are an idiot

    > Had you politely pointed out the problem you were having with my
    > arguments, my response would have been more satisfactory.


    Like your last one?

    By now you've lost nearly all my respect. I have difficulties to regard you
    as a poster whose opinions I would consider. Same as Mark Kent, BTW

    He too has lost all credibility in my book

    Too bad. You both started with good intentions. And now you both are just
    screeching GPL3-jihadis, without coherent thought worth mentioning
    --
    If you had any brains, you'd be dangerous.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast