[News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X - Linux ; After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom: > Hadron wrote: > >> And here's another thing - why don't individual users have different >> xorg.conf files? > > Are you *really* asking such ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 83

Thread: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

  1. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> And here's another thing - why don't individual users have different
    >> xorg.conf files?

    >
    > Are you *really* asking such a question, "kernel hacker" Hadron Quark?
    >
    > xorg.conf describes the *hardware* of input devices and the display devices.
    > Those actually stay the same, regardless who uses them.
    >
    > If you want to change resolution for the display (pointless if you have LCD)
    > you can do that, and each user can take his preferred one.
    >
    > The keyboard and mouse settings *are* configurable per user outside of
    > xorg.conf, so what are you blubbering about... ?
    >
    > Why do you have to prove over and over again that you really don't have a
    > clue about linux?


    Hadron's an odd case. He does use Linux to some degree, and he's fairly
    normal, and sometimes helpful, in the debian group(s).

    But he has some odd gaps in his knowledge; he's still seems a bit wet behind
    the ears Linux-wise. Not that that is bad in and of itself. However,
    that should warrant a bit of caution in making claims about
    functionality.

    And when you deliberately piss people off, you're not going to get much
    solicitude.

    --
    You will always get the greatest recognition for the job you least like.

  2. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>> this.
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>> readily on tap.

    >>
    >> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >> rather well.
    >>
    >>
    >> Bob Says:
    >> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>
    >> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>
    >> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.

    >
    > Yeah, that would be nice, if you are content to stick with Apple
    > hardware and only Apple hardware.


    Many are. The HW does the job.

    >
    >> 2) Fonts. I have been using Linux best part of a decade now, the fonts have
    >> always looked rubbish and still do. Become more standardised but still
    >> rubbish in comparison to a mac or even Windows.

    >
    > Patent nonsense.


    Not really. Some distros still have font problems. Google it up. 2 years
    ago default Ubuntu looked like a dog IMO. Now my debian testing looks
    great.

    >
    >> 3) OSX Leopard GUI is just SOOOOOO much more nicer and productive to work
    >> in. Yes you will tell me how you can change anything you like in Gnome and
    >> (OSX copy cat) KDE4. If I go to a restaurant I expect the food to be ready
    >> on a plate, cooked to perfection and provide that gastronomical experience.
    >> I don't want to be redoing the seasoning to solve chefs inabilities or cook
    >> a meal myself.

    >
    > Good for him.
    >
    >> 4) Everything flows. Apple HCI guidelines really work., Everything is so
    >> well integrated. Linux is massively off here.

    >
    > Again, if you like the package, go for it. I'd be more interested in
    > how much you /can/ tailor OSX, myself.


    You are a hacker and a geek. Most people just want to do a job of work
    and its important that a UI is consistent across machines in the
    corporation too.

    > I didn't like being locked into one company's idea of a user interface
    > with Microsoft, and there's a good change I wouldn't like it with Apple,
    > either.


    Thats the small minded view IMO: you would soon learn and appreciate a
    well thought out UI IMO. FWIW, I agree with you because I like emacs for
    example. Doesnt mean I think its good for everyone.

    > But I've had this argument with Snit, so no need to rehash. Simply put,
    > I like the way I do things just fine.


    But the bigger picture is unequivocal. Consistency is best.

  3. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it
    >>> to, including OS X.

    >>
    >> Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    >> like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference is
    >> that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    >> seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux... this
    >> isn't going to happen.

    >
    > This is indeed true, and it is probably an issue for some people.
    >
    > However, I have a very mixed desktop, running gnome, kde, fox-toolkit,
    > wxwidgets, console, and other kinds of apps on a fluxbox desktop with
    > help from KDE, Gnome, and XFce theming items.
    >
    > Does it look as slick as a Mac, or even Win 2000/XP classic? Not
    > really. Does it do what I want? And how!


    Pretty poorly compared to an integrated consistent UI. You have
    different dialogs for the same actions across applications. Different
    hot keys. Etc. Sounds like a mess. You can deal with it - fine. But I
    wonder if you ever really tried a properly designed and integrated UI?

    --
    "XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
    over the advocacy newsgroups."
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  4. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Peter Köhlmann writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:55:13 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>>>>>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth
    >>>>>>>>>> realises this.
    >>>>>>>>>>

    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users
    >>>>>>>>> have ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros
    >>>>>>>>> have readily on tap.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums
    >>>>>>>> it up rather well.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Bob Says:
    >>>>>>>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of
    >>>>>>>> the Mac OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people
    >>>>>>>> consider a Mac over Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half
    >>>>>>>> dodgy drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a
    >>>>>>>> scenario where everything works as is often the case with my
    >>>>>>>> hardware.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >>>>>>> It just works.
    >>>>>>> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    >>>>>> important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    >>>>>> CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    >>>>>> problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    >>>>>> technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    >>>>>> have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    >>>>>> tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in
    >>>>>> how to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access
    >>>>>> to his data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many.
    >>>>>> They don't care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the
    >>>>> original iMacs that I purchased.
    >>>>> The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    >>>>> Unpack it.
    >>>>> Plug in the keyboard
    >>>>> Plug in the power cord and turn it on.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Done deal...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    >>>>> When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like
    >>>>> "You appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    >>>>> Bingo it worked.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Windows at the time?
    >>>>> It was a nightmare.
    >>>>> Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    >>>>> Another nightmare.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on
    >>>>> the Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the
    >>>>> applications and not tinker with the OS.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    >>>>> Linux is at the bottom of the pile.
    >>>>
    >>>> As far as networking goes, Debian now has WICD. Excellent. But in
    >>>> typical half arsed fashion no one tested the network upgrade and lots of
    >>>> wireless users ended up net less. it#s situations like that that make me
    >>>> realise how few people actually use Debian/Ubuntu on wireless
    >>>> laptops. Had there been more there would have been a far louder out cry
    >>>> and someone would have fixed the package by now.
    >>>
    >>> I sent a note to one of the Ubuntu developers asking why the
    >>> nvidia-settings program isn't automatically installed when the nvidia
    >>> driver is selected and installed.
    >>> Like Windows does.
    >>> Additionally, I asked why the program is allowed to be run as user when
    >>> root permission is required to actually save the settings to the
    >>> xorg.conf.
    >>>
    >>> The response I got back was "I don't understand what you are asking for
    >>> please explain further".
    >>>
    >>> I'm debating if I am even going to reply because obviously this person is
    >>> so far out of touch with reality he can't see the forest for the trees.
    >>>
    >>> I dunno, it seems rather simple to me.

    >>
    >> I had similar with default options for another package. It was as if the
    >> guy had never used it. I got the "because I do this for free and that's
    >> the way it is" response so common from little big men given some
    >> authority.

    >
    > He *has* authority. He has written that package. Nobody is pointing a gun to
    > your head to use it.


    My point exactly. And what's so wrong. A jobs worth (maybe it was you?
    You sound like the petty little Hitler type who would have it your way
    and only your way).

    And he had not written the package. He was maintaining it. And
    regardless - had he written it he could and should listen to legitimate
    feedback if he wishes to retain control. if he doesn't want to and he is
    really interested in OSS he should release it to others to maintain and
    improve.

  5. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Chris Ahlstrom" stated in post
    x4rKk.48603$kh2.17532@bignews3.bellsouth.net on 10/18/08 12:51 PM:

    ....
    >> 4) Everything flows. Apple HCI guidelines really work., Everything is so
    >> well integrated. Linux is massively off here.

    >
    > Again, if you like the package, go for it. I'd be more interested in
    > how much you /can/ tailor OSX, myself.
    >
    > I didn't like being locked into one company's idea of a user interface
    > with Microsoft, and there's a good change I wouldn't like it with Apple,
    > either.
    >
    > But I've had this argument with Snit, so no need to rehash. Simply put,
    > I like the way I do things just fine.


    You act as if I argued that you should change how you do thing. I did no
    such thing. I *have* noted the benefit of a consistent and well designed
    UI, and predicted that Linux would move in that direction (it has a long way
    to go, after all). My predictions, via Mark Shuttleworth and others, seem
    to be coming true. Heck, if Shuttleworth has his way the changes will come
    even more quickly than I predicted. I think that would be grand... no doubt
    it would be a very large benefit to the Linux community.


    --
    .... something I'm committed to work on, focusing increasing amounts of
    resources of Canonical on figuring out on how we actually move the desktop
    experience forward to compete with Mac OS X.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  6. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    > like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference
    > is that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    > seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux...
    > this isn't going to happen.


    Not true!

    Only the application written for the Cocoa API will have the Mac OS X look &
    feel, all others will *not*.

    Many application that run on the Mac OS X where written for POSIX, Java,
    wxWidgets, older Mac APIs, etc, and will *not* "work together seamlessly",
    at least not as seamlessly as if they where all based on one API.

    By the way, the above is true for GNU/Linux, GNU/*BSD, Windows and probably
    every other OS with more than one GUI API.

    Regards

    p.s. Most of the applications I use in Mac OS X do not use the Cocoa API so
    I don't usually have the "benefit" of a consistent GUI.

    p.p.s I really really dislike Aqua's look & feel, all those animation get on
    my nerves!


  7. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking
    > | for commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are
    > | looking at extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably
    > | even more than the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to
    > | future versions, Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for ease of use,
    > | Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for robustness and security,
    > | Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can be installed on all types of hardware and
    > | even on older hardware. Mac OS does not offer this flexibility.
    > |
    > | The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    > | OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac
    > | over Windows and not Ubuntu?



    I'd second that by saying go to www.youtube.com and search for
    Linux and compiz. I genuinely fail to see why windummies and appil retards
    have such a hard time accepting their osen are nowhere near as good!

    http://www.distrowatch.com
    http://www.livecdlist.com



    > `----
    >
    > http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/2008/10/17

    switch-to-ubuntu-linux-not-apple-mac-os/



  8. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Hadron wrote:

    > Pretty poorly compared to an integrated consistent UI. You have
    > different dialogs for the same actions across applications. Different
    > hot keys. Etc. Sounds like a mess. You can deal with it - fine. But I
    > wonder if you ever really tried a properly designed and integrated UI?


    Well, certainly not with Windows. It's good some good points, but
    consistency is only about 1/2-way there.

    I've only tinkered briefly with a Mac, for like a minute. Looked cool,
    but I didn't like it a lot. However, I'd need more time to try it.

    I'm running XFce as an experiment right now. It more easily gives
    a cooler look than fluxbox, but I can't tinker with the gui in quite
    the same way. Can get pseudo transparency, can't easily change the
    width of theme elements, can't toggle window decorations.

    I'll keep XFce on one machine, and fluxbox on the other. Time for a
    little change.

    As far as apps and dialogs go, I've always run a mixed bag of apps.
    Most of them act the same. The biggest gotcha for me has been which
    use Ctrl-Q, and which use Ctrl-W.




  9. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Snit wrote:
    > "Chris Ahlstrom" stated in post
    > x4rKk.48603$kh2.17532@bignews3.bellsouth.net on 10/18/08 12:51 PM:
    >
    > ...
    >> But I've had this argument with Snit, so no need to rehash. Simply put,
    >> I like the way I do things just fine.

    >
    > You act as if I argued that you should change how you do thing. I did no
    > such thing. I *have* noted the benefit of a consistent and well designed
    > UI, and predicted that Linux would move in that direction (it has a long way
    > to go, after all). My predictions, via Mark Shuttleworth and others, seem
    > to be coming true. Heck, if Shuttleworth has his way the changes will come
    > even more quickly than I predicted. I think that would be grand... no doubt
    > it would be a very large benefit to the Linux community.


    Correction: to the Ubuntu part of the Linux community.

    And he'd better get cracking with the advertising.

    [Can you tell I'm browsing from icedove and don't have filters on?]

  10. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Hadron wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >


    < snip >

    >>> I had similar with default options for another package. It was as if the
    >>> guy had never used it. I got the "because I do this for free and that's
    >>> the way it is" response so common from little big men given some
    >>> authority.

    >>
    >> He *has* authority. He has written that package. Nobody is pointing a gun
    >> to your head to use it.

    >
    > My point exactly. And what's so wrong. A jobs worth (maybe it was you?


    I would certainly not heed any "input" from everyone. It should be well
    thought, at the least

    > You sound like the petty little Hitler type who would have it your way
    > and only your way).


    That would be you. It is you who likes choice only if it is *your* choice

    > And he had not written the package. He was maintaining it.


    Irrelevant.

    > And
    > regardless - had he written it he could and should listen to legitimate
    > feedback if he wishes to retain control.


    Oh, control should be wrangled from him because he ignores *your* input?
    On what grounds exactly, "OSS culling committee chairman" Hadron Quark?

    > if he doesn't want to and he is
    > really interested in OSS he should release it to others to maintain and
    > improve.


    Thats not your decision.

    And what happened to your utterly idiotic moans and whines about "user
    xorg.conf"? Did you already find out now that it was just another one of
    your brainfarts, "kernel hacker" Hadron Quark?

    You silently just snipped it. Too embarrassing?
    --
    Warning: 10 days have passed since your last Windows reinstall.


  11. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "ahlstrom" stated in post
    e6sKk.49994$rD2.49825@bignews4.bellsouth.net on 10/18/08 2:00 PM:

    > Snit wrote:
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" stated in post
    >> x4rKk.48603$kh2.17532@bignews3.bellsouth.net on 10/18/08 12:51 PM:
    >>
    >> ...
    >>> But I've had this argument with Snit, so no need to rehash. Simply put,
    >>> I like the way I do things just fine.

    >>
    >> You act as if I argued that you should change how you do thing. I did no
    >> such thing. I *have* noted the benefit of a consistent and well designed
    >> UI, and predicted that Linux would move in that direction (it has a long way
    >> to go, after all). My predictions, via Mark Shuttleworth and others, seem
    >> to be coming true. Heck, if Shuttleworth has his way the changes will come
    >> even more quickly than I predicted. I think that would be grand... no doubt
    >> it would be a very large benefit to the Linux community.

    >
    > Correction: to the Ubuntu part of the Linux community.
    >
    > And he'd better get cracking with the advertising.
    >
    > [Can you tell I'm browsing from icedove and don't have filters on?]


    The work he is doing will effect far more than just Ubuntu... if he is
    successful.


    --
    God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?




  12. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    ahlstrom writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Pretty poorly compared to an integrated consistent UI. You have
    >> different dialogs for the same actions across applications. Different
    >> hot keys. Etc. Sounds like a mess. You can deal with it - fine. But I
    >> wonder if you ever really tried a properly designed and integrated UI?

    >
    > Well, certainly not with Windows. It's good some good points, but
    > consistency is only about 1/2-way there.


    Its far better than LInux - for one simple to understand reason. It
    tends (not always because of the mess thats java) to use less widget
    kits.

    >
    > I've only tinkered briefly with a Mac, for like a minute. Looked cool,
    > but I didn't like it a lot. However, I'd need more time to try it.


    of course.

    >
    > I'm running XFce as an experiment right now. It more easily gives
    > a cooler look than fluxbox, but I can't tinker with the gui in quite
    > the same way. Can get pseudo transparency, can't easily change the
    > width of theme elements, can't toggle window decorations.


    I played with some of that when beryl got stable enough. I soon got
    bored. I even browse the web 90% using W3m in emacs now. Was even
    considering removing X altogether.

    >
    > I'll keep XFce on one machine, and fluxbox on the other. Time for a
    > little change.
    >
    > As far as apps and dialogs go, I've always run a mixed bag of apps.
    > Most of them act the same. The biggest gotcha for me has been which
    > use Ctrl-Q, and which use Ctrl-W.


    I find theres not much choice in that. e.g KTorrent kicks the crap out
    of any gnome equivalent. I wanted to keep a "clean" gnome install but
    simply can not. Too many apps are rubbish on one and good on the
    other. I find it a waste of time and energy that so many apps are
    duplicated (with associated re-invent bugs and inconsistencies) for KDE
    and Gnome. Still, in COLA they call it choice. I call it fragmentation
    and waster effort to push Linux Desktop to the masses.


    --
    - "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
    some major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
    alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
    touchdown.": comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  13. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:02:08 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> And here's another thing - why don't individual users have different
    >>> xorg.conf files?

    >>
    >> Are you *really* asking such a question, "kernel hacker" Hadron Quark?
    >>
    >> xorg.conf describes the *hardware* of input devices and the display devices.
    >> Those actually stay the same, regardless who uses them.
    >>
    >> If you want to change resolution for the display (pointless if you have LCD)
    >> you can do that, and each user can take his preferred one.
    >>
    >> The keyboard and mouse settings *are* configurable per user outside of
    >> xorg.conf, so what are you blubbering about... ?
    >>
    >> Why do you have to prove over and over again that you really don't have a
    >> clue about linux?

    >
    > Hadron's an odd case. He does use Linux to some degree, and he's fairly
    > normal, and sometimes helpful, in the debian group(s).
    >
    > But he has some odd gaps in his knowledge; he's still seems a bit wet behind
    > the ears Linux-wise. Not that that is bad in and of itself. However,
    > that should warrant a bit of caution in making claims about
    > functionality.


    Not to Quack, the troll likes to stick both feet in his mouth.

    > And when you deliberately piss people off, you're not going to get much
    > solicitude.


    A few in that Debian group already know him from aolu.

    --
    Did you know?
    Hadron Quack & his wife divorced over religious differences.
    He thought he was God, but she didn't.


  14. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:47:25 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>
    >> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >> this.
    >>

    >
    > Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    > ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    > readily on tap.
    >
    > I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    > he needed to do was install some theme engines.


    Well he's just a stupid windroid, & M$ fanboi.

    There's nothing to stop you playing with the GNOME desktop to make it look
    how you want, unlike OSX & to an even lesser degree Vista.
    You can install AWN (Avant Windows Navigator) instead of the default
    GNOME panel(s), for one thing. With it, you can use quite a few effects &
    add all kinds of applets.
    https://launchpad.net/awn
    Also using gconf-editor, you can change almost anything.

    --
    Did you know?
    Hadron Quack & his wife divorced over religious differences.
    He thought he was God, but she didn't.


  15. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    48fa54ea$0$17395$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 10/18/08 2:28 PM:

    >> You sound like the petty little Hitler type who would have it your way
    >> and only your way).

    >
    > That would be you. It is you who likes choice only if it is *your* choice


    You, repeatedly, have argued against my view of wanting *more* and higher
    level choices for Linux. Do you now support my ideas of having such added
    choice for Linux users?


    --
    "Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
    be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates



  16. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 23:26:33 +0100, William Poaster wrote:

    > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:47:25 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>> this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >> readily on tap.
    >>
    >> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >
    > Well he's just a stupid windroid, & M$ fanboi.
    >
    > There's nothing to stop you playing with the GNOME desktop to make it look
    > how you want, unlike OSX & to an even lesser degree Vista.
    > You can install AWN (Avant Windows Navigator) instead of the default
    > GNOME panel(s), for one thing. With it, you can use quite a few effects &
    > add all kinds of applets.
    > https://launchpad.net/awn
    > Also using gconf-editor, you can change almost anything.


    It's a nightmare to get that stuff running and then even if you do, you are
    still stuck with the same Linux applications.

    You Linux boobs will never understand why OSX is a great system and why the
    Mac's market share is increasing while the Linux desktop market share is
    stagnant, despite Linux being free.

    I'll give you a hint, we don't need another iPod manager or compiler or
    editor.
    Fix the ones that are out there already instead of inventing new ones.

    Same goes for sound.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  17. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

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

    ____/ 7 on Saturday 18 October 2008 20:54 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking
    >> | for commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are
    >> | looking at extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably
    >> | even more than the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to
    >> | future versions, Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for ease of use,
    >> | Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for robustness and security,
    >> | Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can be installed on all types of hardware and
    >> | even on older hardware. Mac OS does not offer this flexibility.
    >> |
    >> | The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >> | OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac
    >> | over Windows and not Ubuntu?

    >
    >
    > I'd second that by saying go to www.youtube.com and search for
    > Linux and compiz. I genuinely fail to see why windummies and appil retards
    > have such a hard time accepting their osen are nowhere near as good!
    >
    > http://www.distrowatch.com
    > http://www.livecdlist.com


    Compiz is a big headache to Microsoft. It makes Windows look like the fugliest
    O/S, which it is.

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.86 0.91 0.95 5/242 6634
    http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkj6apAACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4vQACfSvkAOv6mAi TN2gvVD9oZf2Mq
    4+QAn1qfw22qsGArMkQn+KKkF5akSTW+
    =AXNw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  18. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

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

    ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 19:55 : \____

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it
    >>> to, including OS X.

    >>
    >> Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    >> like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference is
    >> that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    >> seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux... this
    >> isn't going to happen.

    >
    > This is indeed true, and it is probably an issue for some people.
    >
    > However, I have a very mixed desktop, running gnome, kde, fox-toolkit,
    > wxwidgets, console, and other kinds of apps on a fluxbox desktop with
    > help from KDE, Gnome, and XFce theming items.
    >
    > Does it look as slick as a Mac, or even Win 2000/XP classic? Not
    > really. Does it do what I want? And how!


    I must be doing something wrong. My KDE desktop is very nicely integrated
    overall. Drag-and-drop interfaces are a joy!

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.86 0.91 0.95 5/242 6634
    http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkj6augACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6Q2gCdFYvyh2eirt OnKMk2KAShRyoJ
    ZzoAoJBuc7LRJCRIU4lhvZcDkjqcKRlv
    =Y/Dw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  19. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 23:00:32 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > ____/ 7 on Saturday 18 October 2008 20:54 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS
    >>>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking
    >>> | for commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are
    >>> | looking at extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably
    >>> | even more than the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to
    >>> | future versions, Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for ease of use,
    >>> | Ubuntu offers that. If you are looking for robustness and security,
    >>> | Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can be installed on all types of hardware and
    >>> | even on older hardware. Mac OS does not offer this flexibility.
    >>> |
    >>> | The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >>> | OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac
    >>> | over Windows and not Ubuntu?

    >>
    >>
    >> I'd second that by saying go to www.youtube.com and search for
    >> Linux and compiz. I genuinely fail to see why windummies and appil retards
    >> have such a hard time accepting their osen are nowhere near as good!
    >>
    >> http://www.distrowatch.com
    >> http://www.livecdlist.com

    >
    > Compiz is a big headache to Microsoft. It makes Windows look like the fugliest
    > O/S, which it is.


    Until the person actually runs compiz and finds all the bugs.
    Like not playing nice with wine for one.
    Instability for another.
    A PITA to set up, at least with Ubuntu.
    Mandriva was better at it I will say.

    If you want eye candy that works, buy a Mac.

    If you want to tinker with stuff, use Linux.

    In the end, with Linux you are still stuck with the Linux applications and
    that's the primary reason why Linux is free, Mac and Windows are not and
    Linux is still stagnant on the desktop.

    Is Linux improving?
    Yes.
    Is it useable?
    Very much so IMHO.

    Still the fact remains that people ignore it.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  20. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 23:01:59 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


    > I must be doing something wrong. My KDE desktop is very nicely integrated
    > overall. Drag-and-drop interfaces are a joy!


    Yes they are.
    It's such a shame it's taken Linux so long to reach that stage.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast