Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and NOTHING to show for it. - Linux

This is a discussion on Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and NOTHING to show for it. - Linux ; Here's a list of Google Acquisitions. What, if anything here has been a "success" for Google. Most of these seem to have died the minute Google touched them. September 20, 2001 Deja's Usenet archive Google Groups. undisclosed [1] September 20, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and NOTHING to show for it.

  1. Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and NOTHING to show for it.


    Here's a list of Google Acquisitions. What, if anything here has been a
    "success" for Google. Most of these seem to have died the minute Google
    touched them.


    September 20, 2001 Deja's Usenet archive Google Groups. undisclosed [1]
    September 20, 2001 Outride, Inc. Spin-off from Xerox PARC. undisclosed [2]
    February, 2003 Pyra Labs Blogger. undisclosed [3]
    April, 2003 Neotonic Software CRM technology. undisclosed [4]
    April, 2003 Applied Semantics Advertising technology. $102 million [5]
    September 30, 2003 Kaltix Search engine technology. undisclosed [6]
    October, 2003 Sprinks Paid listings unit of Primedia. undisclosed [7]
    October, 2003 Genius Labs Blogging undisclosed [8]
    May 10, 2004 Ignite Logic Website creation technology. undisclosed [9]
    July 13, 2004 Picasa Photo management software. undisclosed [13]
    October 27, 2004 Keyhole, Inc. Mapping software; used in Google Earth.
    undisclosed [14]
    October 2004 Where2 Mapping software; used in Google Maps. undisclosed [15]
    Sept.-Dec., 2004 ZipDash Used in Google Ride Finder. undisclosed [16]
    ca. 2005 2Web Technologies Web-based spreadsheet. undisclosed [17]
    ca. 2005 Phatbits Widgets engine. undisclosed [18]
    March 28, 2005 Urchin Software Corporation Web analysis. undisclosed [19]
    May 12, 2005 Dodgeball Social networking. undisclosed [20]
    July, 2005 Reqwireless Web browser and Mobile email. undisclosed [21]
    July 7, 2005 Current Communications Group Broadband internet. $100 million
    (partial investment) [22]
    August 17, 2005 Android Software for Handheld devices. undisclosed [23]
    November, 2005 Skia Graphics software. undisclosed [24]
    November 17, 2005 Akwan Information Technologies Latin American internet
    operations. undisclosed [25]
    December 20, 2005 AOL (5% stake) Internet. $1 billion [26]
    January 17, 2006 dMarc Broadcasting Radio advertising software and platform.
    $102 million [27]
    February 14, 2006 Measure Map Blog analysis. undisclosed [28]
    March 9, 2006 Upstartle Writely, online word processing. undisclosed [29]
    March 14, 2006 @Last Software SketchUp, 3-D modeling. undisclosed [30]
    April 9, 2006 Orion Advanced search method. undisclosed [31]
    August 15, 2006 Neven Vision Computer vision undisclosed [32]
    October 31, 2006 JotSpot Website applications undisclosed [33]
    November, 2006 YouTube Video sharing $1.65 billion [34]
    December, 2006 Endoxon Mapping solutions $28 million [35]
    January, 2007 Xunlei (partial acquisition) Network, file-sharing.
    undisclosed [36]
    February, 2007 Adscape Video game advertising $23 million [37]
    March, 2007 Trendalyzer Software undisclosed [38]
    April, 2007 Tonic Systems Presentation software undisclosed [39]
    April, 2007 Marratech video conferencing software Video conferencing
    undisclosed [40]
    April 13, 2007 DoubleClick Online Advertising $3.1 billion [41]
    May 11, 2007 GreenBorder Technologies Desktop enterprise security
    undisclosed [42]
    June 1, 2007 Panoramio Geospatial Photo-sharing Service undisclosed [43]
    June 3, 2007 FeedBurner Online RSS Feeds $100 million [44]
    June 5, 2007 PeakStream Parallel Processing undisclosed [45]
    June, 2007 Zenter Presentations Software undisclosed [46]
    July 2, 2007 GrandCentral VOIP Phone Aggregation $45 million [47]
    July, 2007 ImageAmerica High resolution aerial cameras undisclosed [48]
    July 9, 2007 Postini Communications Security $625 million [49]
    September, 2007 Tusli Google Blogger Api Engineering Team undisclosed
    [citation needed]
    September, 2007 Zingku Mobile social network and communication platform
    undisclosed [50]
    October, 2007 Jaiku An activity stream and presence sharing service that
    works from the Web and mobile phones undisclosed [51]



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


  2. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Micoshaft Asstroturfer Cletus Spencer flatly wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    Corporation:

    >
    > Here's a list of Google Acquisitions. What, if anything here has been a
    > "success" for Google. Most of these seem to have died the minute Google
    > touched them.
    >
    >
    > September 20, 2001 Deja's Usenet archive Google Groups. undisclosed [1]
    > September 20, 2001 Outride, Inc. Spin-off from Xerox PARC. undisclosed [2]
    > February, 2003 Pyra Labs Blogger. undisclosed [3]
    > April, 2003 Neotonic Software CRM technology. undisclosed [4]
    > April, 2003 Applied Semantics Advertising technology. $102 million [5]
    > September 30, 2003 Kaltix Search engine technology. undisclosed [6]
    > October, 2003 Sprinks Paid listings unit of Primedia. undisclosed [7]
    > October, 2003 Genius Labs Blogging undisclosed [8]
    > May 10, 2004 Ignite Logic Website creation technology. undisclosed [9]
    > July 13, 2004 Picasa Photo management software. undisclosed [13]
    > October 27, 2004 Keyhole, Inc. Mapping software; used in Google Earth.
    > undisclosed [14]
    > October 2004 Where2 Mapping software; used in Google Maps. undisclosed
    > [15] Sept.-Dec., 2004 ZipDash Used in Google Ride Finder. undisclosed [16]
    > ca. 2005 2Web Technologies Web-based spreadsheet. undisclosed [17]
    > ca. 2005 Phatbits Widgets engine. undisclosed [18]
    > March 28, 2005 Urchin Software Corporation Web analysis. undisclosed [19]
    > May 12, 2005 Dodgeball Social networking. undisclosed [20]
    > July, 2005 Reqwireless Web browser and Mobile email. undisclosed [21]
    > July 7, 2005 Current Communications Group Broadband internet. $100 million
    > (partial investment) [22]
    > August 17, 2005 Android Software for Handheld devices. undisclosed [23]
    > November, 2005 Skia Graphics software. undisclosed [24]
    > November 17, 2005 Akwan Information Technologies Latin American internet
    > operations. undisclosed [25]
    > December 20, 2005 AOL (5% stake) Internet. $1 billion [26]
    > January 17, 2006 dMarc Broadcasting Radio advertising software and
    > platform. $102 million [27]
    > February 14, 2006 Measure Map Blog analysis. undisclosed [28]
    > March 9, 2006 Upstartle Writely, online word processing. undisclosed [29]
    > March 14, 2006 @Last Software SketchUp, 3-D modeling. undisclosed [30]
    > April 9, 2006 Orion Advanced search method. undisclosed [31]
    > August 15, 2006 Neven Vision Computer vision undisclosed [32]
    > October 31, 2006 JotSpot Website applications undisclosed [33]
    > November, 2006 YouTube Video sharing $1.65 billion [34]
    > December, 2006 Endoxon Mapping solutions $28 million [35]
    > January, 2007 Xunlei (partial acquisition) Network, file-sharing.
    > undisclosed [36]
    > February, 2007 Adscape Video game advertising $23 million [37]
    > March, 2007 Trendalyzer Software undisclosed [38]
    > April, 2007 Tonic Systems Presentation software undisclosed [39]
    > April, 2007 Marratech video conferencing software Video conferencing
    > undisclosed [40]
    > April 13, 2007 DoubleClick Online Advertising $3.1 billion [41]
    > May 11, 2007 GreenBorder Technologies Desktop enterprise security
    > undisclosed [42]
    > June 1, 2007 Panoramio Geospatial Photo-sharing Service undisclosed [43]
    > June 3, 2007 FeedBurner Online RSS Feeds $100 million [44]
    > June 5, 2007 PeakStream Parallel Processing undisclosed [45]
    > June, 2007 Zenter Presentations Software undisclosed [46]
    > July 2, 2007 GrandCentral VOIP Phone Aggregation $45 million [47]
    > July, 2007 ImageAmerica High resolution aerial cameras undisclosed [48]
    > July 9, 2007 Postini Communications Security $625 million [49]
    > September, 2007 Tusli Google Blogger Api Engineering Team undisclosed
    > [citation needed]
    > September, 2007 Zingku Mobile social network and communication platform
    > undisclosed [50]
    > October, 2007 Jaiku An activity stream and presence sharing service that
    > works from the Web and mobile phones undisclosed [51]



    So are you telling is micoshaft corporation is now so
    afraid of google that they have commissioned asstroturfers
    like you to go piddle in Linux newsgroups with anti-google slogans?



  3. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions laterand Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Jan 11, 5:14*pm, 7 wrote:
    > Micoshaft Asstroturfer Cletus Spencer flatly wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    > Corporation:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Here's a list of Google Acquisitions. What, if anything here has been a
    > > "success" for Google. Most of these seem to have died the minute Google
    > > touched them.

    >
    > > September 20, 2001 Deja's Usenet archive Google Groups. undisclosed [1]
    > > September 20, 2001 Outride, Inc. Spin-off from Xerox PARC. undisclosed [2]
    > > February, 2003 Pyra Labs Blogger. undisclosed [3]
    > > April, 2003 Neotonic Software CRM technology. undisclosed [4]
    > > April, 2003 Applied Semantics Advertising technology. $102 million [5]
    > > September 30, 2003 Kaltix Search engine technology. undisclosed [6]
    > > October, 2003 Sprinks Paid listings unit of Primedia. undisclosed [7]
    > > October, 2003 Genius Labs Blogging undisclosed [8]
    > > May 10, 2004 Ignite Logic Website creation technology. undisclosed [9]
    > > July 13, 2004 Picasa Photo management software. undisclosed [13]
    > > October 27, 2004 Keyhole, Inc. Mapping software; used in Google Earth.
    > > undisclosed [14]
    > > October 2004 Where2 Mapping software; used in Google Maps. undisclosed
    > > [15] Sept.-Dec., 2004 ZipDash Used in Google Ride Finder. undisclosed [16]
    > > ca. 2005 2Web Technologies Web-based spreadsheet. undisclosed [17]
    > > ca. 2005 Phatbits Widgets engine. undisclosed [18]
    > > March 28, 2005 Urchin Software Corporation Web analysis. undisclosed [19]
    > > May 12, 2005 Dodgeball Social networking. undisclosed [20]
    > > July, 2005 Reqwireless Web browser and Mobile email. undisclosed [21]
    > > July 7, 2005 Current Communications Group Broadband internet. $100 million
    > > (partial investment) [22]
    > > August 17, 2005 Android Software for Handheld devices. undisclosed [23]
    > > November, 2005 Skia Graphics software. undisclosed [24]
    > > November 17, 2005 Akwan Information Technologies Latin American internet
    > > operations. undisclosed [25]
    > > December 20, 2005 AOL (5% stake) Internet. $1 billion [26]
    > > January 17, 2006 dMarc Broadcasting Radio advertising software and
    > > platform. $102 million [27]
    > > February 14, 2006 Measure Map Blog analysis. undisclosed [28]
    > > March 9, 2006 Upstartle Writely, online word processing. undisclosed [29]
    > > March 14, 2006 @Last Software SketchUp, 3-D modeling. undisclosed [30]
    > > April 9, 2006 Orion Advanced search method. undisclosed [31]
    > > August 15, 2006 Neven Vision Computer vision undisclosed [32]
    > > October 31, 2006 JotSpot Website applications undisclosed [33]
    > > November, 2006 YouTube Video sharing $1.65 billion [34]
    > > December, 2006 Endoxon Mapping solutions $28 million [35]
    > > January, 2007 Xunlei (partial acquisition) Network, file-sharing.
    > > undisclosed [36]
    > > February, 2007 Adscape Video game advertising $23 million [37]
    > > March, 2007 Trendalyzer Software undisclosed [38]
    > > April, 2007 Tonic Systems Presentation software undisclosed [39]
    > > April, 2007 Marratech video conferencing software Video conferencing
    > > undisclosed [40]
    > > April 13, 2007 DoubleClick Online Advertising $3.1 billion [41]
    > > May 11, 2007 GreenBorder Technologies Desktop enterprise security
    > > undisclosed [42]
    > > June 1, 2007 Panoramio Geospatial Photo-sharing Service undisclosed [43]
    > > June 3, 2007 FeedBurner Online RSS Feeds $100 million [44]
    > > June 5, 2007 PeakStream Parallel Processing undisclosed [45]
    > > June, 2007 Zenter Presentations Software undisclosed [46]
    > > July 2, 2007 GrandCentral VOIP Phone Aggregation $45 million [47]
    > > July, 2007 ImageAmerica High resolution aerial cameras undisclosed [48]
    > > July 9, 2007 Postini Communications Security $625 million [49]
    > > September, 2007 Tusli Google Blogger Api Engineering Team undisclosed
    > > [citation needed]
    > > September, 2007 Zingku Mobile social network and communication platform
    > > undisclosed [50]
    > > October, 2007 Jaiku An activity stream and presence sharing service that
    > > works from the Web and mobile phones undisclosed [51]

    >
    > So are you telling is micoshaft corporation is now so
    > afraid of google that they have commissioned asstroturfers
    > like you to go piddle in Linux newsgroups with anti-google slogans?


    The only difference between Google and Infoseek is that Google shows
    you how fast it found the results. Raise your hand if you had serious
    trouble finding things with a search engine before Google. Anyone?

  4. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On 2008-01-12, cc wrote:
    > On Jan 11, 5:14*pm, 7 wrote:
    >> Micoshaft Asstroturfer Cletus Spencer flatly wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    >> Corporation:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > Here's a list of Google Acquisitions. What, if anything here has been a
    >> > "success" for Google. Most of these seem to have died the minute Google
    >> > touched them.

    >>
    >> > September 20, 2001 Deja's Usenet archive Google Groups. undisclosed [1]
    >> > September 20, 2001 Outride, Inc. Spin-off from Xerox PARC. undisclosed [2]
    >> > February, 2003 Pyra Labs Blogger. undisclosed [3]
    >> > April, 2003 Neotonic Software CRM technology. undisclosed [4]
    >> > April, 2003 Applied Semantics Advertising technology. $102 million [5]
    >> > September 30, 2003 Kaltix Search engine technology. undisclosed [6]
    >> > October, 2003 Sprinks Paid listings unit of Primedia. undisclosed [7]
    >> > October, 2003 Genius Labs Blogging undisclosed [8]
    >> > May 10, 2004 Ignite Logic Website creation technology. undisclosed [9]
    >> > July 13, 2004 Picasa Photo management software. undisclosed [13]
    >> > October 27, 2004 Keyhole, Inc. Mapping software; used in Google Earth.
    >> > undisclosed [14]
    >> > October 2004 Where2 Mapping software; used in Google Maps. undisclosed
    >> > [15] Sept.-Dec., 2004 ZipDash Used in Google Ride Finder. undisclosed [16]
    >> > ca. 2005 2Web Technologies Web-based spreadsheet. undisclosed [17]
    >> > ca. 2005 Phatbits Widgets engine. undisclosed [18]
    >> > March 28, 2005 Urchin Software Corporation Web analysis. undisclosed [19]
    >> > May 12, 2005 Dodgeball Social networking. undisclosed [20]
    >> > July, 2005 Reqwireless Web browser and Mobile email. undisclosed [21]
    >> > July 7, 2005 Current Communications Group Broadband internet. $100 million
    >> > (partial investment) [22]
    >> > August 17, 2005 Android Software for Handheld devices. undisclosed [23]
    >> > November, 2005 Skia Graphics software. undisclosed [24]
    >> > November 17, 2005 Akwan Information Technologies Latin American internet
    >> > operations. undisclosed [25]
    >> > December 20, 2005 AOL (5% stake) Internet. $1 billion [26]
    >> > January 17, 2006 dMarc Broadcasting Radio advertising software and
    >> > platform. $102 million [27]
    >> > February 14, 2006 Measure Map Blog analysis. undisclosed [28]
    >> > March 9, 2006 Upstartle Writely, online word processing. undisclosed [29]
    >> > March 14, 2006 @Last Software SketchUp, 3-D modeling. undisclosed [30]
    >> > April 9, 2006 Orion Advanced search method. undisclosed [31]
    >> > August 15, 2006 Neven Vision Computer vision undisclosed [32]
    >> > October 31, 2006 JotSpot Website applications undisclosed [33]
    >> > November, 2006 YouTube Video sharing $1.65 billion [34]
    >> > December, 2006 Endoxon Mapping solutions $28 million [35]
    >> > January, 2007 Xunlei (partial acquisition) Network, file-sharing.
    >> > undisclosed [36]
    >> > February, 2007 Adscape Video game advertising $23 million [37]
    >> > March, 2007 Trendalyzer Software undisclosed [38]
    >> > April, 2007 Tonic Systems Presentation software undisclosed [39]
    >> > April, 2007 Marratech video conferencing software Video conferencing
    >> > undisclosed [40]
    >> > April 13, 2007 DoubleClick Online Advertising $3.1 billion [41]
    >> > May 11, 2007 GreenBorder Technologies Desktop enterprise security
    >> > undisclosed [42]
    >> > June 1, 2007 Panoramio Geospatial Photo-sharing Service undisclosed [43]
    >> > June 3, 2007 FeedBurner Online RSS Feeds $100 million [44]
    >> > June 5, 2007 PeakStream Parallel Processing undisclosed [45]
    >> > June, 2007 Zenter Presentations Software undisclosed [46]
    >> > July 2, 2007 GrandCentral VOIP Phone Aggregation $45 million [47]
    >> > July, 2007 ImageAmerica High resolution aerial cameras undisclosed [48]
    >> > July 9, 2007 Postini Communications Security $625 million [49]
    >> > September, 2007 Tusli Google Blogger Api Engineering Team undisclosed
    >> > [citation needed]
    >> > September, 2007 Zingku Mobile social network and communication platform
    >> > undisclosed [50]
    >> > October, 2007 Jaiku An activity stream and presence sharing service that
    >> > works from the Web and mobile phones undisclosed [51]

    >>
    >> So are you telling is micoshaft corporation is now so
    >> afraid of google that they have commissioned asstroturfers
    >> like you to go piddle in Linux newsgroups with anti-google slogans?

    >
    > The only difference between Google and Infoseek is that Google shows
    > you how fast it found the results. Raise your hand if you had serious
    > trouble finding things with a search engine before Google. Anyone?


    Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while I
    used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only reason
    I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    fastest on my old dial-up connection

    --
    Tom Shelton

  5. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:

    > Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >
    >> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >> fastest on my old dial-up connection

    >
    > I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    > a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >
    > Up until then, it was quite good.


    I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.

    --
    Kier


  6. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Kier writes:

    > On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >
    >> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>
    >>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>> fastest on my old dial-up connection

    >>
    >> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>
    >> Up until then, it was quite good.

    >
    > I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.


    Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?

    Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.

  7. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Kier writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>
    >>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>
    >>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>
    >>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>
    >>> Up until then, it was quite good.

    >>
    >> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.

    >
    > Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?


    Does it do anything worse?

    >
    > Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.


    No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.

    --
    Kier


  8. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Kier writes:

    > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Kier writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>
    >>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>
    >>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>
    >>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.

    >>
    >> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?

    >
    > Does it do anything worse?
    >


    No idea. See below :-;


    >>
    >> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.

    >
    > No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    > always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    > but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    > everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    > balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.


    I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    their HW.

  9. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:01:48 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Kier writes:
    >
    >> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Kier writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>>
    >>>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.
    >>>
    >>> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?

    >>
    >> Does it do anything worse?
    >>

    >
    > No idea. See below :-;
    >
    >
    >>>
    >>> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.

    >>
    >> No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    >> always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    >> but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    >> everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    >> balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.

    >
    > I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    > into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    > enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    > too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    > write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    > their HW.


    Exactly. People are mainly too lazy to seek an alternative, even when it
    may be better, or at the bvery least just as good.

    --
    Kier


  10. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Kier writes:

    > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:01:48 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Kier writes:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.
    >>>>
    >>>> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?
    >>>
    >>> Does it do anything worse?
    >>>

    >>
    >> No idea. See below :-;
    >>
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.
    >>>
    >>> No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    >>> always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    >>> but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    >>> everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    >>> balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.

    >>
    >> I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    >> into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    >> enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    >> too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    >> write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    >> their HW.

    >
    > Exactly. People are mainly too lazy to seek an alternative, even when it
    > may be better, or at the bvery least just as good.


    The question is, while we're being serious for a change, does better
    mean it's required? Answer : no. A Ferrari is "better" than a Mazda MX5
    in most areas. But does Haridresser Girl need it to drive to her
    Salon. No. You know I think LInux is the superior OS. It does not
    however have superior desktop and gaming SW. It does not have superior
    support. (end user support that is). It does not have superior install
    base. People want what they are used to and what runs the SW they
    need. For someone who ONLY browses the web and uses email, yes, they
    COULD use Linux. But why bother? All that works on Windows too. And the
    best OSS SW works on Windows too.

    Contrary to the lies spread in here, XP does not BSOD every 10
    minutes. And as soon as people here start being honest then maybe, just
    maybe, other will start to listen to them.

  11. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:47:56 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Kier writes:
    >
    >> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:01:48 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Kier writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>>>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?
    >>>>
    >>>> Does it do anything worse?
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> No idea. See below :-;
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.
    >>>>
    >>>> No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    >>>> always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    >>>> but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    >>>> everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    >>>> balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.
    >>>
    >>> I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    >>> into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    >>> enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    >>> too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    >>> write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    >>> their HW.

    >>
    >> Exactly. People are mainly too lazy to seek an alternative, even when it
    >> may be better, or at the bvery least just as good.

    >
    > The question is, while we're being serious for a change, does better
    > mean it's required? Answer : no. A Ferrari is "better" than a Mazda MX5
    > in most areas. But does Haridresser Girl need it to drive to her
    > Salon. No. You know I think LInux is the superior OS. It does not
    > however have superior desktop and gaming SW. It does not have superior


    The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say, yet
    Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you use Ubuntu,
    which is all about GUI software

    > support. (end user support that is). It does not have superior install
    > base. People want what they are used to and what runs the SW they
    > need. For someone who ONLY browses the web and uses email, yes, they
    > COULD use Linux. But why bother? All that works on Windows too. And the
    > best OSS SW works on Windows too.


    Because Windows can be a pain in the arse.

    >
    > Contrary to the lies spread in here, XP does not BSOD every 10
    > minutes. And as soon as people here start being honest then maybe, just
    > maybe, other will start to listen to them.


    Why, then, does anyone switch to using it? And no, the answer is not that
    it's free (that may have a bearing, but it's seldom the primary reason.

    I didn't mind XP, but as soon as I started using Linux, I saw how
    restrictive it could be.

    --
    Kier


  12. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Kier writes:

    > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:47:56 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Kier writes:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:01:48 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>>>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>>>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>>>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>>>>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Does it do anything worse?
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> No idea. See below :-;
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    >>>>> always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    >>>>> but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    >>>>> everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    >>>>> balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.
    >>>>
    >>>> I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    >>>> into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    >>>> enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    >>>> too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    >>>> write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    >>>> their HW.
    >>>
    >>> Exactly. People are mainly too lazy to seek an alternative, even when it
    >>> may be better, or at the bvery least just as good.

    >>
    >> The question is, while we're being serious for a change, does better
    >> mean it's required? Answer : no. A Ferrari is "better" than a Mazda MX5
    >> in most areas. But does Haridresser Girl need it to drive to her
    >> Salon. No. You know I think LInux is the superior OS. It does not
    >> however have superior desktop and gaming SW. It does not have superior

    >
    > The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say, yet
    > Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you use Ubuntu,
    > which is all about GUI software


    No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but
    mostly not. e.g I use Iceweasel. I use VMWare to run XP to play some
    games rather than bother to dual boot. I also use Debian more than
    Ubuntu these days. Why? Because I installed it on my best PC.. Linux is
    a superior OS. It doesn't make it a superior platform though
    (platform=OS+applications) in all cases. I wouldnt use it if I were a
    graphics designer or a musician or an animator or an accountant or
    ... anything else where the OSS equivalent of my Windows apps were not
    good enough. But I am a techy. I write SW on Linux. I love Linux tools
    generally.


    >> support. (end user support that is). It does not have superior install
    >> base. People want what they are used to and what runs the SW they
    >> need. For someone who ONLY browses the web and uses email, yes, they
    >> COULD use Linux. But why bother? All that works on Windows too. And the
    >> best OSS SW works on Windows too.

    >
    > Because Windows can be a pain in the arse.
    >


    So can LInux. DOn't be so silly.

    >>
    >> Contrary to the lies spread in here, XP does not BSOD every 10
    >> minutes. And as soon as people here start being honest then maybe, just
    >> maybe, other will start to listen to them.

    >
    > Why, then, does anyone switch to using it? And no, the answer is not that
    > it's free (that may have a bearing, but it's seldom the primary reason.
    >
    > I didn't mind XP, but as soon as I started using Linux, I saw how
    > restrictive it could be.


    How did XP restrict you?

    --
    How do Crays and Alphas handle the POSIX problem?
    -- Larry Wall in <199709050042.RAA29379@wall.org>

  13. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:41:06 +0100,
    Hadron wrote:
    > Kier writes:


    > No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but
    > mostly not. e.g I use Iceweasel. I use VMWare to run XP to play some
    > games rather than bother to dual boot. I also use Debian more than



    what games?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHjAVVd90bcYOAWPYRAj29AJ9T4oT1uQOkWP1woNEq1o C3EoY/KQCeOzuQ
    ltCnCKVya4qWujKfSi42cdc=
    =4MYp
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    "Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States.
    Ask any Indian. "
    --- Robert Orben

  14. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:41:06 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Kier writes:
    >
    >> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:47:56 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Kier writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:01:48 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:20 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Kier writes:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:19:50 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Hmmm, I used to use yahoo and altavista a lot - oh, and for a while
    >>>>>>>>>> I used dogpile. I used to find everything I needed then. The only
    >>>>>>>>>> reason I use google now is pretty much habbit. There page loaded the
    >>>>>>>>>> fastest on my old dial-up connection
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I stopped using Yahoo the day they changed their front page from
    >>>>>>>>> a simple search box to a "portal" site infested by advertising.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Up until then, it was quite good.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I mostly use Google, but occasionally Ask.com.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Why would you use ask.com? Does it do somethings better?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Does it do anything worse?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No idea. See below :-;
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Whichever way you cut it, Google is a damn impressive service.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> No doubt. It's generally my first port of call, but its ubiquity is not
    >>>>>> always a totally good thing, IMO. I don't say Google is evil or anything,
    >>>>>> but naturally, once they're pretty much everywhere as they are now,
    >>>>>> everything tends to go the Google way. I prefer a bit more in the way of
    >>>>>> balance and variety - it's healthier in the long run.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I agree with you. But unfortunately I am lazy. I have plugged google
    >>>>> into emacs and have my "google bar" on Iceweasel. I simply have not
    >>>>> enough ethics to bother to use another search engine. They did their job
    >>>>> too well. It's similar to many people for Windows. Despite what people
    >>>>> write here, XP works for them. It has the SW they want. It works with
    >>>>> their HW.
    >>>>
    >>>> Exactly. People are mainly too lazy to seek an alternative, even when it
    >>>> may be better, or at the bvery least just as good.
    >>>
    >>> The question is, while we're being serious for a change, does better
    >>> mean it's required? Answer : no. A Ferrari is "better" than a Mazda MX5
    >>> in most areas. But does Haridresser Girl need it to drive to her
    >>> Salon. No. You know I think LInux is the superior OS. It does not
    >>> however have superior desktop and gaming SW. It does not have superior

    >>
    >> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say, yet
    >> Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you use Ubuntu,
    >> which is all about GUI software

    >
    > No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but


    Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is aboutmaking
    it accessible to the ordinary user, who expects, and will generally
    demand, a GUI.

    > mostly not. e.g I use Iceweasel. I use VMWare to run XP to play some
    > games rather than bother to dual boot. I also use Debian more than
    > Ubuntu these days. Why? Because I installed it on my best PC.. Linux is
    > a superior OS. It doesn't make it a superior platform though
    > (platform=OS+applications) in all cases. I wouldnt use it if I were a
    > graphics designer or a musician or an animator or an accountant or


    These are all professional people, with specialist needs. Ubuntu, as far
    as I'm aware, is not geared towards them. Ordinary users don't need or
    want any of that fancy stuff.

    > .. anything else where the OSS equivalent of my Windows apps were not
    > good enough. But I am a techy. I write SW on Linux. I love Linux tools
    > generally.


    Well, I am an ordinary everyday computer user, and I love Linux too. There
    is no reason why an average user should not use Linux, and those home
    users tend to be in the majority, I would say.

    >
    >
    >>> support. (end user support that is). It does not have superior install
    >>> base. People want what they are used to and what runs the SW they
    >>> need. For someone who ONLY browses the web and uses email, yes, they
    >>> COULD use Linux. But why bother? All that works on Windows too. And the
    >>> best OSS SW works on Windows too.

    >>
    >> Because Windows can be a pain in the arse.
    >>

    >
    > So can LInux. DOn't be so silly.


    But with Linux, it's eminently more fixable, and it isn't the same kind of
    pain. Stupid pop-ups, for instance, and unnecessary reminders, and strange
    glitches that seem to have no reason for appearing.

    >
    >>>
    >>> Contrary to the lies spread in here, XP does not BSOD every 10
    >>> minutes. And as soon as people here start being honest then maybe, just
    >>> maybe, other will start to listen to them.

    >>
    >> Why, then, does anyone switch to using it? And no, the answer is not that
    >> it's free (that may have a bearing, but it's seldom the primary reason.
    >>
    >> I didn't mind XP, but as soon as I started using Linux, I saw how
    >> restrictive it could be.

    >
    > How did XP restrict you?


    You can't get under the hood without a lot more effort. No virtual
    desktops without goiong to third-party tools. No easy way to customise a
    lot of stuff without third-party tools (and some of those were flaky at
    best). Once I'd tried Linux, it just felt different when I went back to XP
    at any time, like it was less flexible; it didn't do what *I* wanted. I
    don't want MS telling me what I can and can't do with something I own.

    I found XP Pro to be better than Home, but I really don't miss Windows.
    Linux has an abundance of software to suit all my needs (video editing
    could be slightly better, but that is now improving rapidly). As far as
    looks go, Linux beats Windows hands down.

    --
    Kier


  15. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitionslater and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    [snips]

    On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:47:30 +0000, Kier wrote:

    >>> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say, yet
    >>> Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you use
    >>> Ubuntu, which is all about GUI software

    >>
    >> No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but

    >
    > Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is
    > aboutmaking it accessible to the ordinary user


    No, it's about making it accessible, as much as possible, to
    *everybody*. Which includes users who don't want or need GUIs.

    You might, for example, note that Ubuntu offers a server version, which
    does *not* install a GUI by default. If, as you assert, Ubuntu is all
    about GUI software, how can this be reconciled? Oh, right, it can't.

    Next.


  16. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:32:40 +0000, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:

    > [snips]
    >
    > On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:47:30 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >
    >>>> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say, yet
    >>>> Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you use
    >>>> Ubuntu, which is all about GUI software
    >>>
    >>> No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but

    >>
    >> Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is
    >> aboutmaking it accessible to the ordinary user

    >
    > No, it's about making it accessible, as much as possible, to
    > *everybody*. Which includes users who don't want or need GUIs.


    But its main focus is GUI-led.

    >
    > You might, for example, note that Ubuntu offers a server version, which
    > does *not* install a GUI by default. If, as you assert, Ubuntu is all
    > about GUI software, how can this be reconciled? Oh, right, it can't.


    I wasn't taking about a server edition, which obviously by definition is
    usually GUI-less. We're on about the desktop.

    --
    Kier


  17. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitionslater and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:08:42 +0000, Kier wrote:

    > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:32:40 +0000, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >
    >> [snips]
    >>
    >> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:47:30 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >>
    >>>>> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say,
    >>>>> yet Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you
    >>>>> use Ubuntu, which is all about GUI software
    >>>>
    >>>> No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but
    >>>
    >>> Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is
    >>> aboutmaking it accessible to the ordinary user

    >>
    >> No, it's about making it accessible, as much as possible, to
    >> *everybody*. Which includes users who don't want or need GUIs.

    >
    > But its main focus is GUI-led.


    It's main focus is providing a distro _for the people_.

    >> You might, for example, note that Ubuntu offers a server version, which
    >> does *not* install a GUI by default. If, as you assert, Ubuntu is all
    >> about GUI software, how can this be reconciled? Oh, right, it can't.

    >
    > I wasn't taking about a server edition, which obviously by definition is
    > usually GUI-less. We're on about the desktop.


    No, you were talking about Ubuntu, which has *both* server and desktop
    editions. And you were merrily asserting complete and utter bull****
    about it, such how how it's focus us GUI-led.


  18. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    Kelsey Bjarnason writes:

    > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:08:42 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:32:40 +0000, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >>
    >>> [snips]
    >>>
    >>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:47:30 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>>> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say,
    >>>>>> yet Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you
    >>>>>> use Ubuntu, which is all about GUI software
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but
    >>>>
    >>>> Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is
    >>>> aboutmaking it accessible to the ordinary user
    >>>
    >>> No, it's about making it accessible, as much as possible, to
    >>> *everybody*. Which includes users who don't want or need GUIs.

    >>
    >> But its main focus is GUI-led.

    >
    > It's main focus is providing a distro _for the people_.
    >
    >>> You might, for example, note that Ubuntu offers a server version, which
    >>> does *not* install a GUI by default. If, as you assert, Ubuntu is all
    >>> about GUI software, how can this be reconciled? Oh, right, it can't.

    >>
    >> I wasn't taking about a server edition, which obviously by definition is
    >> usually GUI-less. We're on about the desktop.

    >
    > No, you were talking about Ubuntu, which has *both* server and desktop


    Kier knows that. And you know he knows it. But Kier was talking desktop
    as well you know.

    > editions. And you were merrily asserting complete and utter bull****
    > about it, such how how it's focus us GUI-led.
    >


    It is you moron. The MAIN aim for Ubuntu was for the desktop and the
    masses, NOT server editions. Any arsehole can make a "server edition"
    from the normal desktop - just take out the video card and uninstall
    heaps of crap ...

    It's another example of distro hell and general confusion.

    Release ONE Ubuntu and make them choose KDE/Gnome/No GUI at install
    time. Simple.

  19. Re: Google - If you can't innovate then buy. FIFTY acquisitions later and Micoshaft Corporation Has NOTHING to show for it.

    On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:23:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Kelsey Bjarnason writes:
    >
    >> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:08:42 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:32:40 +0000, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> [snips]
    >>>>
    >>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:47:30 +0000, Kier wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> The what, for you, makes it superior? YOu are a gamer, so you say,
    >>>>>>> yet Linux is bad at games, and you hate the GUI software, yet you
    >>>>>>> use Ubuntu, which is all about GUI software
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> No it isn't. Who told you that? I *DO* use GUI for some things but
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Of course it is. The whole 'Linux For Human Beings' thing is
    >>>>> aboutmaking it accessible to the ordinary user
    >>>>
    >>>> No, it's about making it accessible, as much as possible, to
    >>>> *everybody*. Which includes users who don't want or need GUIs.
    >>>
    >>> But its main focus is GUI-led.

    >>
    >> It's main focus is providing a distro _for the people_.
    >>
    >>>> You might, for example, note that Ubuntu offers a server version, which
    >>>> does *not* install a GUI by default. If, as you assert, Ubuntu is all
    >>>> about GUI software, how can this be reconciled? Oh, right, it can't.
    >>>
    >>> I wasn't taking about a server edition, which obviously by definition is
    >>> usually GUI-less. We're on about the desktop.

    >>
    >> No, you were talking about Ubuntu, which has *both* server and desktop

    >
    > Kier knows that. And you know he knows it. But Kier was talking desktop
    > as well you know.
    >
    >> editions. And you were merrily asserting complete and utter bull****
    >> about it, such how how it's focus us GUI-led.
    >>

    >
    > It is you moron. The MAIN aim for Ubuntu was for the desktop and the
    > masses, NOT server editions. Any arsehole can make a "server edition"
    > from the normal desktop - just take out the video card and uninstall
    > heaps of crap ...
    >
    > It's another example of distro hell and general confusion.
    >
    > Release ONE Ubuntu and make them choose KDE/Gnome/No GUI at install
    > time. Simple.


    How true.
    Kelsey is just not too bright.

+ Reply to Thread