Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux - Ubuntu ; On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > The Value of Free It depends upon what your time is worth. For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

  1. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > The Value of Free


    It depends upon what your time is worth.

    For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.

    For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.

    The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.


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

  2. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "Moshe Goldfarb." wrote in message
    news:1vpl04eicju66$.4syd6poxyys8.dlg@40tude.net...
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> The Value of Free

    >
    > It depends upon what your time is worth.
    >
    > For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    > Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.
    >
    > For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.
    >
    > The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.
    >

    I think most of the confusion here is due to the early days where the OSSers
    were wont to say "Free as in freedom, not free as in beer!". Now I don't
    really understand that even to this day, but free as in beer is just plain
    wrong. For one thing, that isn't any kind of well-understood comparison.
    Beer is rarely free.

    I think that it should be more like "Free as in fish!" You can catch your
    own fish for free if you have the skills and the equipment, just like you
    can get Linux for free and make beneficial use of it if you have the skills
    and the equipment. As you note, it may be much more effective to use your
    time to work at some other job and use the wages to purchase a commercial
    program (or fish) and probably have a lot left over to take a trip to Vegas
    or some other interesting place.

    Try to avoid going through Atlanta, though, I spent some 14 hours there
    Sunday and ended up having to dirve home
    (http://seanramblings.blogspot.com/20...artsfield.html)


  3. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    Q. How worth is Ubuntu linux?
    A. Ubuntu is a shuttle worth.

    ;-)

    Laszlo



    --
    Ein Optimist ist in der Regel der Zeitgenosse, der am ungenügensten
    informiert ist. - John Priestley

  4. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> The Value of Free

    >
    > It depends upon what your time is worth.
    >
    > For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    > Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.
    >
    > For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.
    >
    > The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.
    >
    >


    Linux is just learning something new. Yes, you will use time looking for
    solutions to problems until you've learned how to use the OS. And then
    you're set.

    If you can't be bothered to learn this "new thing", then you're lazy,
    and Linux isn't an OS for you. If you're open minded to learning new
    ways of doing things, Linux may be a good OS for you to try out.

  5. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:

    >An time sorting out the blue screen of death is not worth it either.


    The time installing the dozen or so utilities and programs required to
    make Windows actually useful for doing anything is not worth it.


  6. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:


    > Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.




    Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning anecdotal
    evidence proving...whatever.


    -Thufir

  7. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

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

    ____/ Ben on Wednesday 16 July 2008 16:22 : \____

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> The Value of Free

    >>
    >> It depends upon what your time is worth.
    >>
    >> For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    >> Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.
    >>
    >> For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.
    >>
    >> The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Linux is just learning something new. Yes, you will use time looking for
    > solutions to problems until you've learned how to use the OS. And then
    > you're set.
    >
    > If you can't be bothered to learn this "new thing", then you're lazy,
    > and Linux isn't an OS for you. If you're open minded to learning new
    > ways of doing things, Linux may be a good OS for you to try out.


    Gary M "Flatfish" Stewart (fake name "Moshe Goldfarb") is a troll and Microsoft
    Munchkins. Criminals like him needn't be convinced; they need to be convicted.
    And thrown to jail, not Linux advocacy newsgroups.

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    "Monopoly raises two classes of problems for a free society. First, the
    existence of monopoly means a limitation on voluntary exchange through a
    reduction in the alternatives available to individuals. Second, the existence
    of monopoly raises the issue of “social responsibility”, as it has come to be
    called, of the monopolist."
    --Milton Friedman
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkh+RlQACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4RrwCcCniNLiBG5x FdkAfyhH+BX0zD
    rkUAnjE5V2TaMsmyfrQ6IJF1a2/py563
    =JVPU
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  8. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux



    Ben wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> The Value of Free

    >>
    >> It depends upon what your time is worth.
    >>
    >> For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    >> Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.
    >>
    >> For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.
    >>
    >> The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Linux is just learning something new. Yes, you will use time looking
    > for solutions to problems until you've learned how to use the OS. And
    > then you're set.
    >
    > If you can't be bothered to learn this "new thing", then you're lazy,


    While I like and use Ubuntu I would not agree they are lazy. They are
    just not interested enough and prefer to put up with copy protection,
    registry issues, poor security, crappy antivirus, bloated software and
    Windows Genuine Disadvantage.
    > and Linux isn't an OS for you. If you're open minded to learning new
    > ways of doing things, Linux may be a good OS for you to try out.


  9. FACT: Cost vs. Worthlessness of Ubuntu Linux

    measher****head, the oem ink drinking loser wrote:
    -----------------------------------
    Hey measher****head...invite everyone over to your hangout,
    comp.periphs.printers so they can all be witness to how everyone over
    there, and I mean everyone, totally hates your stupid, ignorant,
    condescending guts for the lies you've told and all of the disruption
    you've caused.
    I told you I would get your sorry sick ass for all the problems you've
    cause over there you austrian fascist atheist asshole pig!
    But you didn't care about that did you? You only care about your stupid
    POS self!
    Well loser, payback is such a bitch ain't it loser!...LOL!

  10. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "thufir" wrote in message
    news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.

    >
    >
    >
    > Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning anecdotal
    > evidence proving...whatever.


    But when statistics show that linux is at 0.6% of the desktop people are
    expected to throw those statistics out the window and believe some anonymous
    poster that linux marketshare is "much higher" because the person has a
    "hunch" that it is.

    And precisely what "statistics" do you have proving that XP is not rock
    solid?

    >
    > -Thufir



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  11. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > "thufir" wrote in message
    > news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.

    >>
    >>
    >> Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning anecdotal
    >> evidence proving...whatever.

    >
    > But when statistics show that linux is at 0.6% of the desktop people are
    > expected to throw those statistics out the window and believe some anonymous
    > poster that linux marketshare is "much higher" because the person has a
    > "hunch" that it is.
    >


    They are NOT statistics, they are limited market research. Not the same
    thing at all.

    Cheers

    Ian

  12. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> "thufir" wrote in message
    >> news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    >>> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning
    >>> anecdotal
    >>> evidence proving...whatever.

    >>
    >> But when statistics show that linux is at 0.6% of the desktop people
    >> are expected to throw those statistics out the window and believe some
    >> anonymous poster that linux marketshare is "much higher" because the
    >> person has a "hunch" that it is.
    >>

    >
    > They are NOT statistics, they are limited market research. Not the same
    > thing at all.
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > Ian


    Not to mention that these statistics are quickly invalidated as the
    market develops. Just 2-3 years and the market share can look totally
    different. We know that Linux is getting more and more popular, and
    maybe the next time they perform research like that on a large scale,
    they'll find that Linux's market share has risen considerably, which I
    believe it has, but I won't claim it as fact so don't try to quote me as
    having said it's a definite fact.

  13. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "Ben" wrote in message
    news:g5l78d$6ev$1@news.mixmin.net...

    >
    > Linux is just learning something new. Yes, you will use time looking for
    > solutions to problems until you've learned how to use the OS. And then
    > you're set.
    >
    > If you can't be bothered to learn this "new thing", then you're lazy, and
    > Linux isn't an OS for you. If you're open minded to learning new ways of
    > doing things, Linux may be a good OS for you to try out.


    The way of Linsux is not new. Using linus is like going back in time 20
    years.



  14. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "chrisv" wrote in message
    news:ucbs74l4sje2k3d1j5o5nc6nfef4c0156l@4ax.com...
    > Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
    >
    >>An time sorting out the blue screen of death is not worth it either.

    >
    > The time installing the dozen or so utilities and programs required to
    > make Windows actually useful for doing anything is not worth it.
    >


    And you spend time installing software for Linsux so that is a totally
    assinine statement you Linturd



  15. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "thufir" wrote in message
    news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.

    >
    >
    >
    > Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning anecdotal
    > evidence proving...whatever.
    >
    >
    > -Thufir

    You better throw your stats out if your going to try and make any
    comparisons to Windows. Market share says it all a**hole. .61% for Linsux.
    That's point 6 1 dummy



  16. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "Roy Schestowitz" wrote in message
    news:3029031.uKbxbYYJYs@schestowitz.com...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > ____/ Ben on Wednesday 16 July 2008 16:22 : \____
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:23 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>
    >>>> The Value of Free
    >>>
    >>> It depends upon what your time is worth.
    >>>
    >>> For people like you Roy Sdchestowitz, who are professional students, ala
    >>> Van Wilder, Linux may be just the thing.
    >>>
    >>> For people whose time is expensive, Linux is a total waste of resources.
    >>>
    >>> The time googling to make Linux work is just not worth it.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Linux is just learning something new. Yes, you will use time looking for
    >> solutions to problems until you've learned how to use the OS. And then
    >> you're set.
    >>
    >> If you can't be bothered to learn this "new thing", then you're lazy,
    >> and Linux isn't an OS for you. If you're open minded to learning new
    >> ways of doing things, Linux may be a good OS for you to try out.

    >
    > Gary M "Flatfish" Stewart (fake name "Moshe Goldfarb") is a troll and
    > Microsoft
    > Munchkins. Criminals like him needn't be convinced; they need to be
    > convicted.
    > And thrown to jail, not Linux advocacy newsgroups.
    >

    Does your mommy ever let you out of the basement?



  17. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "measekite" wrote in message
    news:Bisfk.5073$np7.3766@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
    >
    >


    >
    > While I like and use Ubuntu I would not agree they are lazy. They are
    > just not interested enough and prefer to put up with copy protection,
    > registry issues, poor security, crappy antivirus, bloated software and
    > Windows Genuine Disadvantage.

    Another linsucker



  18. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "Ezekiel" wrote in message
    news:2b3eb$487e62ca$12942@news.teranews.com...
    >
    > "thufir" wrote in message
    > news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning anecdotal
    >> evidence proving...whatever.

    >
    > But when statistics show that linux is at 0.6% of the desktop people are
    > expected to throw those statistics out the window and believe some
    > anonymous poster that linux marketshare is "much higher" because the
    > person has a "hunch" that it is.


    There you go. Someone with a brain and not some lying Linturd.

    >
    > And precisely what "statistics" do you have proving that XP is not rock
    > solid?
    >
    >>
    >> -Thufir

    >
    >
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **




  19. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux


    "Ian Thompson-Bell" wrote in message
    news:g5lqif$1844$1@energise.enta.net...

    >>

    >
    > They are NOT statistics, they are limited market research. Not the same
    > thing at all.
    >

    And you're a stupid f*cking idiot if you believe the sh*t that you write.
    Another Linturd.



  20. Re: [News] Cost vs. Worth of Ubuntu Linux

    On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 22:16:39 +0000, WhøKñèw wrote:

    > "thufir" wrote in message
    > news:KTqfk.7824$nD.5348@pd7urf1no...
    >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:16:26 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Windows XP is rock solid on all of my systems that run it.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Throw statistics out the window, now that we have this stunning
    >> anecdotal evidence proving...whatever.
    >>
    >>
    >> -Thufir

    > You better throw your stats out if your going to try and make any
    > comparisons to Windows. Market share says it all a**hole. .61% for
    > Linsux. That's point 6 1 dummy



    I have never heard of an OS named Linsux.


    OTOH, for Linux based systems, w3c schools says 3.8%
    and Netapplications
    says .8% , based on
    analysis of web page hits.

    And, as I am sure you know, "market share" (the percentages of systems
    SOLD) is a highly inaccurate way to measure market penetration of OSS in
    general because so much of it is downloaded and installed.

    --
    Rick

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast