Desktop - Slackware

This is a discussion on Desktop - Slackware ; Ivar Rosquist says: >On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:37:45 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote: >>> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own? >> Well, that's really relevant to the argument, isn't it? >It's not. Unless there is universal ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Desktop

  1. Re: Desktop

    Ivar Rosquist says:
    >On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:37:45 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:
    >>> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?


    >> Well, that's really relevant to the argument, isn't it?


    >It's not. Unless there is universal agreement that Gnome is a piece
    >of crap that nobody should use, that's not relevant. Since there
    >isn't such an agreement, your pathetic attempt to get external
    >protection is irrelevant.


    Fewer and fewer persons, especially in the slackware world, are
    using Gnome. It's a fact. Now you can sit around and whine about
    it and you can pretend it isn't happening, but that won't change the
    facts. We appreciate the fact that you have a good deal of time
    invested in Gnome, but it's time to cut your losses. Our favourite
    OS was always OS/2. But we had to let go. Now it's time for you to
    let go.

    >If you have an opinion on something, you should be courageous
    >enough to stand by it on yor own. If you can't, go back to mommy.


    Where have we ever backed off from giving our opinion on anything?

    >> Who is Eliza? Your mom? You still have issues with mom?


    >You are even more ignorant than I thought. Do yourself a favor and
    >use Google to search for Eliza and Weizenbaum and learn a little
    >bit, for a change. Not only are you ignorant, you seem to be
    >indolent to boot.


    Maybe we will and maybe we won't. But we assure you that we know
    quite a bit more than you do about any and all products of human
    endeavour.

    >Strike three! Yet again an unwarranted assumption. My views on the
    >relative strengths of Gnome and any other desktop system are
    >irrelevant. If you examine this thread, you will notice that I just
    >pointed out that, contrary to your assertions, installing Gnome in
    >Slackware is a painless exercise.


    Perhaps it is easy to install for someone like you who has done it
    hundreds of times, in order to get it to work. But most of the rest
    of us have better things to do with our time besides wasting it
    installing an outmoded, inferior, windowmanager.

    >> Here is a hint: make up a list of the applications that you
    >> usually run, and then test the running of those applications
    >> against the various windowmanagers you're considering.


    >Still learning grammar? It is "window managers", not
    >"windowmanagers".


    Actually it's ok spelled either way. To what grammar error are you
    referring?

    >Does your ignorance know no limits? Apparently not, for you don't
    >even know that we are not talking about window managers, but
    >desktop environments. You'll find window managers as components of
    >desktop environments - not the other way around.


    "Desktop Environment" is a phrase cooked up by some of the
    windowmanager authors to make their product sound more complete.
    The genesis of "windowmanager", or "window manager" if you prefer,
    is found in the title of X Window. Any system from twm to KDE
    manages X Window, thus, these systems are X Window managers. Or more
    easily, windowmanagers.

    Now, run along and play.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  2. Re: Desktop

    Ivar Rosquist wrote:
    > On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 22:46:21 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:
    >> Ivar Rosquist says:
    >>
    >>> As for telling you - what for? You have proven time and again
    >>> to be impervious to learning and to dropping your own little
    >>> prejudices based on your inveterate ignorance.

    >>
    >> We think that anyone who still uses gnome,

    >
    > We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?


    Realto (== rm) is a known troll. Ignore it.

    --
    Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.



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


  3. Re: Desktop

    On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:21:09 -0400, CBFalconer wrote:

    > Ivar Rosquist wrote:
    >> On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 22:46:21 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:
    >>> Ivar Rosquist says:
    >>>
    >>>> As for telling you - what for? You have proven time and again to be
    >>>> impervious to learning and to dropping your own little prejudices
    >>>> based on your inveterate ignorance.
    >>>
    >>> We think that anyone who still uses gnome,

    >>
    >> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?

    >
    > Realto (== rm) is a known troll. Ignore it.


    I know. Let me just have a bit of fun with the worm.

  4. Re: Desktop

    On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:10:55 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:

    > Ivar Rosquist says:
    >>On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:37:45 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:
    >>>> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?

    >
    >>> Well, that's really relevant to the argument, isn't it?

    >
    >>It's not. Unless there is universal agreement that Gnome is a piece of
    >>crap that nobody should use, that's not relevant. Since there isn't such
    >>an agreement, your pathetic attempt to get external protection is
    >>irrelevant.

    >
    > Fewer and fewer persons, especially in the slackware world, are using
    > Gnome. It's a fact.


    Oh, I see. That of course implies that installing it in Slackware
    must be painful. Now I see your logic ;-) No, I don't, for there isn't
    any to see.

    > Now you can sit around and whine about it and you
    > can pretend it isn't happening, but that won't change the facts. We
    > appreciate the fact that you have a good deal of time invested in Gnome,
    > but it's time to cut your losses. Our favourite OS was always OS/2.
    > But we had to let go. Now it's time for you to let go.


    Sure, Butterino, sure.

    >>If you have an opinion on something, you should be courageous enough to
    >>stand by it on yor own. If you can't, go back to mommy.

    >
    > Where have we ever backed off from giving our opinion on anything?
    >
    >>> Who is Eliza? Your mom? You still have issues with mom?

    >
    >>You are even more ignorant than I thought. Do yourself a favor and use
    >>Google to search for Eliza and Weizenbaum and learn a little bit, for a
    >>change. Not only are you ignorant, you seem to be indolent to boot.

    >
    > Maybe we will and maybe we won't.


    Of course you won't: You are too stupid for that, and you
    obviously revel in your ignorance.

    > But we assure you that we know quite
    > a bit more than you do about any and all products of human endeavour.


    Royal "we" again. As you know - who am I kidding, of course you
    don't - only the Queen and people with tapeworms are really entitled to
    such usage. You are not the Queen, are you.

    >>Strike three! Yet again an unwarranted assumption. My views on the
    >>relative strengths of Gnome and any other desktop system are irrelevant.
    >>If you examine this thread, you will notice that I just pointed out
    >>that, contrary to your assertions, installing Gnome in Slackware is a
    >>painless exercise.

    >
    > Perhaps it is easy to install for someone like you who has done it
    > hundreds of times, in order to get it to work.


    Well you obviously have not tried recently - how could you,
    unable to abandon your preconceptions? I'll grant you this though: Your
    three brain cells might not be able to cope with it.

    > But most of the rest of
    > us have better things to do with our time besides wasting it installing
    > an outmoded, inferior, windowmanager.


    Strike four! You are out! Not only do you persist in your
    ignorance about the difference between a desktop environment and a window
    manager, but you also still don't know that it is "window manager." You
    are so delightfully incompetent.

    >>> Here is a hint: make up a list of the applications that you usually
    >>> run, and then test the running of those applications against the
    >>> various windowmanagers you're considering.

    >
    >>Still learning grammar? It is "window managers", not "windowmanagers".

    >
    > Actually it's ok spelled either way. To what grammar error are you
    > referring?


    It is two words, you idiot. You might run them together in
    German, but not in English.

    >>Does your ignorance know no limits? Apparently not, for you don't even
    >>know that we are not talking about window managers, but desktop
    >>environments. You'll find window managers as components of desktop
    >>environments - not the other way around.

    >
    > "Desktop Environment" is a phrase cooked up by some of the windowmanager
    > authors to make their product sound more complete. The genesis of
    > "windowmanager", or "window manager" if you prefer, is found in the
    > title of X Window. Any system from twm to KDE manages X Window, thus,
    > these systems are X Window managers. Or more easily, windowmanagers.


    I wonder what it is that you call window managers like, say,
    metacity, sawfish, etc. that run in desktop environments? Well, never
    mind; I don't want for you to strain your three brain cells. I have had
    enough fun with you, useless Butterino (I bet you don't get this one
    either enjoy your permanent stay in my garbage bin.


  5. Re: Desktop

    Ivar Rosquist says:
    >On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:10:55 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:


    >> Ivar Rosquist says:
    >>>On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:37:45 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote:
    >>>>> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?

    >>
    >>>> Well, that's really relevant to the argument, isn't it?

    >>
    >>>It's not. Unless there is universal agreement that Gnome is a piece of
    >>>crap that nobody should use, that's not relevant. Since there isn't such
    >>>an agreement, your pathetic attempt to get external protection is
    >>>irrelevant.

    >>
    >> Fewer and fewer persons, especially in the slackware world, are using
    >> Gnome. It's a fact.


    >Oh, I see. That of course implies that installing it in Slackware
    >must be painful. Now I see your logic ;-) No, I don't, for there isn't
    >any to see.


    Actually, it is also a pain to use as well. Now there are packages
    available that are fairly easy to install. But real pros like to
    compile their own software. And compiling Gnome is a bitch.
    Everybody knows this. Now, since you have never compiled software,
    you would be unaware or at least uncaring about this situation. But
    there it is.

    >> Now you can sit around and whine about it and you can pretend it
    >> isn't happening, but that won't change the facts. We appreciate
    >> the fact that you have a good deal of time invested in Gnome, but
    >> it's time to cut your losses. Our favourite OS was always OS/2.
    >> But we had to let go. Now it's time for you to let go.


    >Sure, Butterino, sure.


    This kind of comment is not helpful, either to the argument or your
    reputation. You come across as a child.

    >>>If you have an opinion on something, you should be courageous enough to
    >>>stand by it on yor own. If you can't, go back to mommy.

    >>
    >> Where have we ever backed off from giving our opinion on anything?
    >>
    >>>> Who is Eliza? Your mom? You still have issues with mom?

    >>
    >>>You are even more ignorant than I thought. Do yourself a favor and use
    >>>Google to search for Eliza and Weizenbaum and learn a little bit, for a
    >>>change. Not only are you ignorant, you seem to be indolent to boot.

    >>
    >> Maybe we will and maybe we won't.


    >Of course you won't: You are too stupid for that, and you obviously
    >revel in your ignorance.


    Too stupid for what? To use google?

    >> But we assure you that we know quite a bit more than you do about
    >> any and all products of human endeavour.


    >Royal "we" again.


    Actually it is the editorial "we."

    >As you know - who am I kidding, of course you don't - only the
    >Queen and people with tapeworms are really entitled to such usage.
    >You are not the Queen, are you.


    Your ignorance is on display once more. We don't even have to try.
    We just have to be there.

    >Well you obviously have not tried recently - how could you, unable
    >to abandon your preconceptions? I'll grant you this though: Your
    >three brain cells might not be able to cope with it.


    We haven't tried to install Gnome in years. For one thing, we don't
    trust packages written by other people. If PV compiled a package,
    we would trust that. But he doesn't, so we can't. We could compile
    our own but it would be a lot of work, and ultimately pointless
    because so much better stuff already exists.

    >> But most of the rest of us have better things to do with our time
    >> besides wasting it installing an outmoded, inferior,
    >> windowmanager.


    >Strike four! You are out! Not only do you persist in your ignorance
    >about the difference between a desktop environment and a window
    >manager, but you also still don't know that it is "window manager."
    >You are so delightfully incompetent.


    The only effective difference is drag and drop. And we don't use
    that, although we wished that we did. Old habits. In any case,
    from our perspective what you call a "Desktop Environment" is just a
    windowmanager with a few more options.

    >> Actually it's ok spelled either way. To what grammar error are you
    >> referring?


    >It is two words, you idiot. You might run them together in German,
    >but not in English.


    Yes, but to what grammar error are you referring? Do you consider
    spelling errors to be grammar errors?

    >> "Desktop Environment" is a phrase cooked up by some of the
    >> windowmanager authors to make their product sound more complete.
    >> The genesis of "windowmanager", or "window manager" if you
    >> prefer, is found in the title of X Window. Any system from twm
    >> to KDE manages X Window, thus, these systems are X Window
    >> managers. Or more easily, windowmanagers.


    >I wonder what it is that you call window managers like, say,
    >metacity, sawfish, etc. that run in desktop environments? Well, never
    >mind; I don't want for you to strain your three brain cells. I have had
    >enough fun with you, useless Butterino (I bet you don't get this one
    >either enjoy your permanent stay in my garbage bin.


    What you are talking about is one windowmanager running inside of
    another. Or one gui running inside of another. Or you can call it
    anything you want. And we too, can call it anything we want. And
    if you don't understand our terminology, you can either ask for help
    or ignore us. It won't bother us either way.

    But to get back to the point at hand, slackware didn't lose a single
    customer when it dropped Gnome and there was very little bitching
    about it here or anywhere else. That's because slackware users tend
    to be rather intelligent and they know crap when they see it.

    And Gnome is crap.

    Now, g'nite Eliza,

    Go back to sleep.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  6. Re: Desktop

    Ivar Rosquist wrote:
    > CBFalconer wrote:
    >> Ivar Rosquist wrote:
    >>> Realto Margarino wrote:
    >>>> Ivar Rosquist says:
    >>>>
    >>>>> As for telling you - what for? You have proven time and again
    >>>>> to be impervious to learning and to dropping your own little
    >>>>> prejudices based on your inveterate ignorance.
    >>>>
    >>>> We think that anyone who still uses gnome,
    >>>
    >>> We? WE? Can't you make a stand on your own?

    >>
    >> Realto (== rm) is a known troll. Ignore it.

    >
    > I know. Let me just have a bit of fun with the worm.


    But meanwhile you are cluttering the group for serious users.

    --
    Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.




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


  7. Re: Desktop

    On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:24:19 -0400, CBFalconer wrote:

    > But meanwhile you are cluttering the group for serious users.


    You are not a "serious user". If you were, you'd have enough courtesy to
    fix your non-compliant signature block, which you have been asked to do by
    numerous people over a long period of time.

    > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)


    Bugger off, win-droid.


    --
    "Bother!" said Pooh, as Christopher Robin pleaded to be spanked again.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2