Desktop Linux systems
Snit
desktop Linux.
With the OSS ecosystem, you have a bunch of different tools that - largely -
work together on a desktop Linux "system", but, as others have pointed out,
there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not really a
whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts - and
you cannot have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
What I would like to see from desktop Linux is *system* choice - which, to
be clear, is not a choice of systems, but a distro as a *system*. With OS X
and Windows, you do have systems - there are specific targets for developers
to work toward so everything (mostly) works as a system... though this is
more true for OS X than it is for Windows (and is not perfect on OS X).
The OSS model / ecosystem makes it harder to have system choice... though
not impossible. As it has been pointed out in COLA, KDE and Gnome do work
together to some extent, and the groups are, perhaps, learning the
importance to the ecosystem for them to work with the other group. As they
work together more, representing such a large chunk of what OSS is designed
for, it will become possible to make truly coordinated systems - or at least
get closer to that ideal.
And then you can have choice at the system level - and that opens up a whole
new level of choice which is currently very limited on desktop Linux... and
that would be excellent.
Choice is good.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
8<
> there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not
> really a whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum
> of its parts - and you cannot have real *system* choice without
> having a real *system*.
That's a bit of a challenging premise. You state as a fact that the
whole cannot be more than the sum of its parts, but you don't explain
why. So my question to you is: why?
You also may take into consideration that OSX is put together much
like your typical GNU/Linux distro:
You have the 'core OS' named Darwin, which is composed of the XNU
kernel (which itself is compsed of Mach and BSD components) and the
FreeBSD system utilities. This is very analogue to the concept of
coupling GNU with Linux. Only the name is slightly 'sexier' (GNU/Linux
vs. Darwin).
On top of that various components are layered to provide the framework
(APIs, services) on which the applications are run. This includes but
is not limited to the core services and application services such as
Quartz, Cocoa, OpenGL, Carbon... This is very analogue to the way
things are done in a typical GNU/Linux distro, using X.org, OpenGL,
Qt, GTK...
On top of all this, the Aqua GUI is stacked, just like is done with
eg. KDE and Gnome in a GNU/Linux distro.
So does your claim about the whole cannot be more than the sum of its
parts also applies to OSX? And if not, why not?
--
640K ought to be enough for anybody.
~ Bill Gates, 1981
7
So lets go over this again.
The law of diminishing returns does not apply to trolls.
Every rant is a 100% rant.
Snot will prove this chain can be broken by collecting
his most important gripes about desktops, and list the first five in
decending order of importance explaining his position and the
position held by developers who develop this stuff
so that any one of us non-developers can have a look
at it to comment.
Snot will not limit himself to the 1% wintel desktops
and will cover the entire spectrum of client desktops.
Lusotec
> Another way to explain some of my thoughts on choice / lack of choice with
> desktop Linux.
>
> With the OSS ecosystem, you have a bunch of different tools that - largely
> - work together on a desktop Linux "system", but, as others have pointed
> out,
> there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not really a
> whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts -
> and you cannot have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
Oh! What a load of complete nonsense!
> What I would like to see from desktop Linux is *system* choice - which, to
> be clear, is not a choice of systems, but a distro as a *system*. With OS
> X and Windows, you do have systems -
With OS X and Windows you have a bunch of different tools that - largely
work together on a desktop "system", but as others have pointed out, there
is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not really a whole. Thus
the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts - and you cannot
have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
> there are specific targets for
> developers to work toward so everything (mostly) works as a system...
> though this is more true for OS X than it is for Windows (and is not
> perfect on OS X).
Again nonsense,
> The OSS model / ecosystem makes it harder to have system choice... though
> not impossible.
The more "specific targets" you have as a developer the *less* choice you
have as a developer. Your statement is false, and a obvious fallacy!
With a OSS model, unlike a closed model, you have full and total choice to
make what ever customizations, changes and adaptation you want to the *real*
*system*.
> As it has been pointed out in COLA, KDE and Gnome do work
> together to some extent, and the groups are, perhaps, learning the
> importance to the ecosystem for them to work with the other group.
Unlike OS X and Windows, GNU/Linux has a modular and open approach from top
to bottom, and almost all components can be replaced with others. In
particular, this applies to the desktop environment where GNU/Linux provides
a far wider array of choice than Windows and OS X.
GNU/Linux provides real system real choice!
> As they work together more, representing such a large chunk of what OSS is
> designed for, it will become possible to make truly coordinated systems -
> or at least get closer to that ideal.
Gnome, KDE and other desktop environments are mostly interchangeable in a
GNU/Linux system, but they should not be just a kind of desktop theme on top
of a "truly coordinated systems". That would obviously just reduce choice
and would miss the point of multiple desktop environments that provide very
distinct user experiences.
> And then you can have choice at the system level - and that opens up a
> whole new level of choice which is currently very limited on desktop
> Linux... and that would be excellent.
GNU/Linux, Windows and OS X, of these three operating systems, OS X has the
most inflexible desktop environment and the one that provides the least
choice to the users, while GNU/Linux has the most flexible desktop
environment and the one that provides most choice to the user.
This is a obvious truth that your not a "real system" nonsense is completely
incapable of hiding.
> Choice is good.
Yes, choice is good.
Regards.
Snit
> Snit wrote:
>> Another way to explain some of my thoughts on choice / lack of choice with
>> desktop Linux.
>>
>> With the OSS ecosystem, you have a bunch of different tools that - largely
>> - work together on a desktop Linux "system", but, as others have pointed
>> out,
>> there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not really a
>> whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts -
>> and you cannot have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
>
> Oh! What a load of complete nonsense!
Man, what a powerful counter!
It is why there is a problem beteen KDE and Gnome over the term "System
Settings" - *neuter* is really handling the settings for the *system*.
And it is why TomB said this:
-----
Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
hangs together. That perception is wrong.
-----
And he is right - a distro is not really a "system"... it is many systems.
Hence you do not have choice over the whole system, just over each of the
parts.
For what it is worth, I argued against TomB with the above quote... but I
think there is a lot of truth to what he says. I think he should have said
something like "coherent system" and not just "system" - for Ubuntu (for
example) is a system, just not a *coherent* system. Hence why there is no
real choice at the system level - you need coherence in a unit to have any
real choice over that unit as a coherent whole.
>> What I would like to see from desktop Linux is *system* choice - which, to
>> be clear, is not a choice of systems, but a distro as a *system*. With OS
>> X and Windows, you do have systems -
>
> With OS X and Windows you have a bunch of different tools that - largely
> work together on a desktop "system", but as others have pointed out, there
> is no real "system"
Who? What are you talking about?
> - there are the separate parts. Not really a whole. Thus
> the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts - and you cannot
> have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
Right: desktop Linux does not offer a coherent system - and hence there is
no real choice over the system (as a whole, you do, of course, have choice
over what components go into the system).
>> there are specific targets for
>> developers to work toward so everything (mostly) works as a system...
>> though this is more true for OS X than it is for Windows (and is not
>> perfect on OS X).
>
> Again nonsense,
The power of your argument is amazing!
>> The OSS model / ecosystem makes it harder to have system choice... though
>> not impossible.
>
> The more "specific targets" you have as a developer the *less* choice you
> have as a developer.
I do not follow.
> Your statement is false, and a obvious fallacy!
What statement?
> With a OSS model, unlike a closed model, you have full and total choice to
> make what ever customizations, changes and adaptation you want to the *real*
> *system*.
How can you have system level choice when you, as a developer, only control
your tiny part of it? That makes no sense.
>> As it has been pointed out in COLA, KDE and Gnome do work
>> together to some extent, and the groups are, perhaps, learning the
>> importance to the ecosystem for them to work with the other group.
>
> Unlike OS X and Windows, GNU/Linux has a modular and open approach from top
> to bottom, and almost all components can be replaced with others.
Hence part of the reason it is not seen as a coherent system. Agreed.
> In
> particular, this applies to the desktop environment where GNU/Linux provides
> a far wider array of choice than Windows and OS X.
>
> GNU/Linux provides real system real choice!
You are conflating the idea of choices on a system with choices for the
system as a whole.
>> As they work together more, representing such a large chunk of what OSS is
>> designed for, it will become possible to make truly coordinated systems -
>> or at least get closer to that ideal.
>
> Gnome, KDE and other desktop environments are mostly interchangeable in a
> GNU/Linux system, but they should not be just a kind of desktop theme on top
> of a "truly coordinated systems". That would obviously just reduce choice
> and would miss the point of multiple desktop environments that provide very
> distinct user experiences.
Not even sure how this relates to my comments... other than an implied
agreement that there is no coordinated system on desktop Linux when you
speak of different components giving "distinct user experiences".
So far you have not really shown any understanding of the argument you are
trying to refute.
>> And then you can have choice at the system level - and that opens up a
>> whole new level of choice which is currently very limited on desktop
>> Linux... and that would be excellent.
>
> GNU/Linux, Windows and OS X, of these three operating systems, OS X has the
> most inflexible desktop environment and the one that provides the least
> choice to the users, while GNU/Linux has the most flexible desktop
> environment and the one that provides most choice to the user.
Again: you conflate options in components on a system with choices for the
system as a whole.
> This is a obvious truth that your not a "real system" nonsense is completely
> incapable of hiding.
It is not related. The fact you have lots of choices for the components of
the different system that make a distro is not in question. Remember: I am
talking about choices on the system level - which requires a coherent
system.
And this is what desktop Linux distros lack.
>> Choice is good.
>
> Yes, choice is good.
>
> Regards.
>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
Please try to show some understanding of the comments you reply to.
Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> Snit wrote:
8<
>> What I would like to see from desktop Linux is *system* choice -
>> which, to be clear, is not a choice of systems, but a distro as a
>> *system*. With OS X and Windows, you do have systems -
>
> With OS X and Windows you have a bunch of different tools that -
> largely work together on a desktop "system", but as others have
> pointed out, there is no real "system" - there are the separate
> parts. Not really a whole.
And this is equally true for GNU/Linux distributions, OSX and Windows.
> Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts - and
> you cannot have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
Well, if that's his opinion, he should think the same of OSX. I
however do not agree with that premise. Both OSX and the various
GNU/Linux distributions are more than just the sum of their parts.
8<
>> The OSS model / ecosystem makes it harder to have system choice...
>> though not impossible.
>
> The more "specific targets" you have as a developer the *less*
> choice you have as a developer. Your statement is false, and a
> obvious fallacy!
I absolutely agree, and this is so obvious I'm surprised anyone would
even /try/ to argue against it.
8<
>> As it has been pointed out in COLA, KDE and Gnome do work together
>> to some extent, and the groups are, perhaps, learning the
>> importance to the ecosystem for them to work with the other group.
>
> Unlike OS X and Windows, GNU/Linux has a modular and open approach
> from top to bottom, and almost all components can be replaced with
> others.
Absolutely true. From the kernel all the way up to the graphical user
environment, every component has a number of alternatives. There
simply is no such choice on other offerings such as Windows and OSX.
It is really simple: if one want choice, one has to go with GNU/Linux
or other Free operating systems using a similar modular approach.
Not that this topic hasn't been beaten to death already of course ;-)
8<
--
The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope.
~ Karl Marx
tactical
> With OS X and Windows, you do have systems - there are specific targets
> for developers to work toward so everything (mostly) works as a system
Exactly. This is what desktop GNU/Linux badly needs. Until there is a
standard GUI API for GNU/Linux, Microsoft has very little to worry about.
> Choice is good.
This statement, which is chanted like a mantra in the GNU/Linux
community, has some problems:
1) Some choices are bad.
I could give a baby the choice between playing with a rattle and playing
with a loaded gun. Alternatively, I could give the baby no choice but
the rattle. According to the "Choice is good" mantra, the former would
be better than the latter.
2) Too much choice is confusing for users.
Humans aren't really equipped to deal with too many choices. Our brains
just can't handle it.
3) Choice often entails duplicate development.
Consider KDE and GNOME: two projects that aim to solve exactly the same
problem, but in slightly different ways. Imagine the amazing desktop
environment we could have if the KDE and GNOME developers -- our main
GUI developers -- weren't divided into two camps.
4) Too much choice is the enemy of standards.
If we had a standard desktop environment, programmers could, as you say,
simply target a particular system. It would be simple, and it would
work. Right now, programmers have to choose a particular environment,
and those using different environments don't get a native look and feel
for that app (assuming the app even works on those environments).
7
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>
> 8<
>
>> there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not
>> really a whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum
>> of its parts - and you cannot have real *system* choice without
>> having a real *system*.
>
> That's a bit of a challenging premise.
To put it mildly.
Snot is trying to prove a chasm can be crossed it two small leaps.
2 small leaps == 1 big leap.
Chris Ahlstrom
> ... is trying to prove a chasm can be crossed it two small leaps.
> 2 small leaps == 1 big leap.
I'd never seen that aphorism before. Thanks.
--
Don't put off for tomorrow what you can do today because if you enjoy it today,
you can do it again tomorrow.
Chris Ahlstrom
> If we had a standard desktop environment, programmers could, as you say,
> simply target a particular system. It would be simple, and it would
> work. Right now, programmers have to choose a particular environment,
> and those using different environments don't get a native look and feel
> for that app (assuming the app even works on those environments).
Bullshit. Qt and gtk belie your statement.
Besides, Windows has the same range of GUI APIs, including Qt, gtk, and many
others.
And do you want some of the Win 7 look on your XP box? Install
one of many third party apps that override the native look and feel.
Such obvious silliness!
--
Ten persons who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent.
-- Napoleon I
tactical
> tactical wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> If we had a standard desktop environment, programmers could, as you say,
>> simply target a particular system. It would be simple, and it would
>> work. Right now, programmers have to choose a particular environment,
>> and those using different environments don't get a native look and feel
>> for that app (assuming the app even works on those environments).
>
> Bullshit. Qt and gtk belie your statement.
If you use Qt, your app will look/behave a certain way; if you use GTK+, it
will look/behave a different way. This is the exact problem I'm talking
about.
> Besides, Windows has the same range of GUI APIs, including Qt, gtk, and many
> others.
Windows has a standard theme. Sure, this theme changes a little over time
(e.g., Aero), but in Windows there is always a strong attempt for GUI
consistency.
7
No.
You have forgotten you are a troll again.
Snit
AM:
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>
> 8<
>
>> there is no real "system" - there are the separate parts. Not
>> really a whole. Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum
>> of its parts - and you cannot have real *system* choice without
>> having a real *system*.
>
> That's a bit of a challenging premise. You state as a fact that the
> whole cannot be more than the sum of its parts, but you don't explain
> why. So my question to you is: why?
I had to do a bit of searching to find at least part of the genesis of this
thinking, and it came down to what you said:
-----
Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
hangs together. That perception is wrong.
-----
Now I still think you were wording things poorly here, but I pretty much
agree with the concept. There is no *coherent* system when you are talking
about desktop Linux - it is made up of many systems...
Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that making of
a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of its parts. In
the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system level choices -
because there is no coherent system to make choices about!
You cannot make choices about that which does not exist. And, as you argued
well, there is no real "system" with a desktop Linux distro. There are many
systems - and, to be clear, there is a lot of choice in each (or at least
most) of those sub-systems and even choice as to which ones you want to use.
> You also may take into consideration that OSX is put together much
> like your typical GNU/Linux distro:
No, it is not. In fact, more so than any other system, it *also* includes
the hardware - Apple controls the full widget. They can integrate things in
ways that Windows and Linux cannot. This also means the users choices can
be limited... the system level choices have already been made and in many
cases cannot really be changed (or at least not without jumping through some
pretty major hoops).
This is why there can be system level goodies on OS X that do not exist on
desktop Linux: Services (as in adding ROT13 and All Caps to almost all
programs), PDF Services, proxy icons, universal color selector, media
browser, post-processing changes to video components in a screencast, etc.
> You have the 'core OS' named Darwin, which is composed of the XNU
> kernel (which itself is compsed of Mach and BSD components) and the
> FreeBSD system utilities. This is very analogue to the concept of
> coupling GNU with Linux. Only the name is slightly 'sexier' (GNU/Linux
> vs. Darwin).
Unlike with desktop Linux, the components you list for OS X are all
controlled by Apple. Nobody controls all the desktop Linux components.
> On top of that various components are layered to provide the framework
> (APIs, services) on which the applications are run. This includes but
> is not limited to the core services and application services such as
> Quartz, Cocoa, OpenGL, Carbon... This is very analogue to the way
> things are done in a typical GNU/Linux distro, using X.org, OpenGL,
> Qt, GTK...
All of the OS X techs are controlled by Apple.
Who controls the desktop Linux components you listed.
On OS X you have one coherent system... where these things are made to work
together to make *a* system. As you pointed out, there is no such thing
for desktop Linux.
And you are right.
> On top of all this, the Aqua GUI is stacked, just like is done with
> eg. KDE and Gnome in a GNU/Linux distro.
>
> So does your claim about the whole cannot be more than the sum of its
> parts also applies to OSX? And if not, why not?
Because on OS X Apple works toward making a coherent system. Even when it
gets third party things it does not control (such as Apache), it integrates
them and offers its own GUI for them to tie into the rest of the system.
Hmmm, I have not checked this at all: but on desktop Linux distros do you
have a setting which ties together all the sharing forms and allows users to
make sensible choices for their *system*... something along the lines of
this: <http://goo.gl/nlovf>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of Lusotec:
>> Snit wrote:
>
> 8<
>
>>> What I would like to see from desktop Linux is *system* choice -
>>> which, to be clear, is not a choice of systems, but a distro as a
>>> *system*. With OS X and Windows, you do have systems -
>>
>> With OS X and Windows you have a bunch of different tools that -
>> largely work together on a desktop "system", but as others have
>> pointed out, there is no real "system" - there are the separate
>> parts. Not really a whole.
>
> And this is equally true for GNU/Linux distributions, OSX and Windows.
Not at all. Apple provides a system - a very coherent one. So does MS,
though the one they provide is not as coherent.
>> Thus the whole cannot really be more than the sum of its parts - and
>> you cannot have real *system* choice without having a real *system*.
>
> Well, if that's his opinion, he should think the same of OSX. I
> however do not agree with that premise. Both OSX and the various
> GNU/Linux distributions are more than just the sum of their parts.
As you have said:
-----
Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
hangs together. That perception is wrong.
-----
And, assuming you meant a coherent system, you were right.
There is no coherent desktop Linux system - hence, no *system level choice*
(or much less than there would be if there was a more coherent system.) I
have offered examples of things where there choices and features are limited
on desktop Linux because of this. Here is the list, again:
* Services (as in adding ROT13 and All Caps to almost all programs)
* PDF Services, proxy icons
* Universal color selector
* Media browser
* Proxy icons
* Path on task bar
* True System Preferences (Not KDE or Gnome preferences
calling themselves that)
* Integrated backup like TimeMachine - at both file browser
and application levels (restore things "in", say, your image
organizer)
* Consistent hotkeys for preferences, etc.
* Consistent menu placement for preferences, etc.
* QuickLook throughout system
* AppleScript / Automator
And maybe even having screencast and image tools which can isolate
individual elements on the screen. Not sure that is possible with desktop
Linux. Is it?
It is not as though this is just theoretical - there are many real world
examples. I am sure I am leaving some out.
> 8<
>
>>> The OSS model / ecosystem makes it harder to have system choice...
>>> though not impossible.
>>
>> The more "specific targets" you have as a developer the *less*
>> choice you have as a developer. Your statement is false, and a
>> obvious fallacy!
>
> I absolutely agree, and this is so obvious I'm surprised anyone would
> even /try/ to argue against it.
And as a Linux developer, you have many, many "targets"... every distro is,
pretty much, a different target - though many can be grouped. But having so
many targets does reduce choice. Sure. Not exactly the point I was making,
but fair enough.
> 8<
>
>>> As it has been pointed out in COLA, KDE and Gnome do work together
>>> to some extent, and the groups are, perhaps, learning the
>>> importance to the ecosystem for them to work with the other group.
>>
>> Unlike OS X and Windows, GNU/Linux has a modular and open approach
>> from top to bottom, and almost all components can be replaced with
>> others.
>
> Absolutely true. From the kernel all the way up to the graphical user
> environment, every component has a number of alternatives. There
> simply is no such choice on other offerings such as Windows and OSX.
Right: hence the reason why system level choices are limited on desktop
Linux - it is more like a stack of legos where each part can be replaced
than a coherent system designed as one.
> It is really simple: if one want choice, one has to go with GNU/Linux
> or other Free operating systems using a similar modular approach.
>
> Not that this topic hasn't been beaten to death already of course ;-)
>
> 8<
But, in the case of *system level* choices, desktop Linux lacks even having
one (as you have said), and hence one cannot have choice for something one
does not have.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
You do not like what I have said... you have no counter... so you call me
names.
It is what you do. And what many in COLA will do. So be it: you are not
secure in your beliefs. No problem.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
> On 31/07/2011 04:30, Snit wrote:
>
>> With OS X and Windows, you do have systems - there are specific targets
>> for developers to work toward so everything (mostly) works as a system
>
> Exactly. This is what desktop GNU/Linux badly needs. Until there is a
> standard GUI API for GNU/Linux, Microsoft has very little to worry about.
It is funny how TomB jumped in to disagree with me... after he had already
said:
-----
Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
hangs together. That perception is wrong.
-----
As his "out", he wants to pretend that OS X and Windows share the same lack
of a coherent system - but they do not.
>> Choice is good.
>
> This statement, which is chanted like a mantra in the GNU/Linux
> community, has some problems:
Sure... but it is fun to point out where the "advocates" are for the status
quo and *not* really for choice, as they claim. The reality it choice has
tradeoffs - some good and some bad.
> 1) Some choices are bad.
>
> I could give a baby the choice between playing with a rattle and playing
> with a loaded gun. Alternatively, I could give the baby no choice but
> the rattle. According to the "Choice is good" mantra, the former would
> be better than the latter.
Right. And even when talking about adults, there are choices which are far
more likely to lead them into getting into trouble... a well designed OS has
certain limits to reduce the chance of loss of data, for example.
> 2) Too much choice is confusing for users.
>
> Humans aren't really equipped to deal with too many choices. Our brains
> just can't handle it.
The Paradox of Choice is often discussed... and the counter in COLA is to
simply deny it as a reasonable argument for no reason or, as Homer recently
did, just out and out lie about it.
> 3) Choice often entails duplicate development.
>
> Consider KDE and GNOME: two projects that aim to solve exactly the same
> problem, but in slightly different ways. Imagine the amazing desktop
> environment we could have if the KDE and GNOME developers -- our main
> GUI developers -- weren't divided into two camps.
In the end they will have to work together more and more if they want
desktop Linux to mature into having a unified system. This was made very
apparent with their little spat over who gets to use the term "System" for
their preferences - the answer, really, is that *neither* should, being that
neither really is setting *system* level settings. There is no coherent
system to set settings for.
Still, I am not for any outside force eliminating either of them... and
there are benefits to having different groups exercise their "takes" on
things. Just the "advocates" are blind to the downsides.
> 4) Too much choice is the enemy of standards.
>
> If we had a standard desktop environment, programmers could, as you say,
> simply target a particular system. It would be simple, and it would
> work. Right now, programmers have to choose a particular environment,
> and those using different environments don't get a native look and feel
> for that app (assuming the app even works on those environments).
Many in COLA talk about how desktop Linux is better because it is based on
open standards... then they ignore the fact that, as you note, choice is in
many ways counter to those very standards.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gary Stewart
He doesn't understand what you said.
You used words with more than 3 letters in them and it went right
over his head.
> It is what you do. And what many in COLA will do. So be it: you are not
> secure in your beliefs. No problem.
He's not secure in life either.
It's obvious.
--
7/31/2011 11:47:11 AM
Gary Stewart
Please visit our hall of Linux idiots.
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Watching Linux Fail:
http://limuxwatch.blogspot.com/
Come laugh at Linux "advocacy" with us!
http://www.youtube.com/social/blog/techrights-org
Linux's dismal desktop market share:
http://royal.pingdom.com/2011/05/12/the-top-20-strongholds-for-desktop-linux/
Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead
"By the time Microsoft released the Windows 7 beta
in January 2009, Linux had clearly lost its chance at desktop
glory."
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/207999/desktop_linux_the_dream_is_dead.html
Desktop Linux on Life Support:
http://www.techradar.com/news/software/operating-systems/is-linux-on-the-desktop-dead--961508
When I use the term Linux I am speaking of desktop Linux unless
otherwise stated.
7
Your inconsistent premises lead to invalid arguments.
I liked what you said on behalf of all trolls that are out there
proving yet again all trolls are idiots, therefore you were not being called
names, you were being labeled correctly as a troll, and its not what COLA
does to you that you should be afraid of
but what you do to yourself by posting inconsistent
premises that lead to your invalid arguments.
Marti Van Lin
> tactical wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> If we had a standard desktop environment, programmers could, as you say,
>> simply target a particular system. It would be simple, and it would
>> work. Right now, programmers have to choose a particular environment,
>> and those using different environments don't get a native look and feel
>> for that app (assuming the app even works on those environments).
>
> Bullshit. Qt and gtk belie your statement.
>
> Besides, Windows has the same range of GUI APIs, including Qt, gtk, and many
> others.
>
> And do you want some of the Win 7 look on your XP box? Install
> one of many third party apps that override the native look and feel.
>
> Such obvious silliness!
Oh pffft, It's clearly a Snot-Sock, yammering about his (years ago
solved) GUI inconsistencies.
What a nutter.
--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin, alias ML2MST
|_|_|0| Registered GNU/Linux user 513040
|0|0|0| http://www.soundclick.com/martivanlin
tactical
> It is funny how TomB jumped in to disagree with me... after he had already
> said:
>
> -----
> Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
> Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
> is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
> hangs together. That perception is wrong.
> -----
>
> As his "out", he wants to pretend that OS X and Windows share the same lack
> of a coherent system - but they do not.
Yes, desktop Linux could learn from OS X and Windows here.
Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
standard GUI is great -- for users and developers. (Sure, there aren't any
100% strict standards, and there are different approaches like WinForms and
WPF, but there's certainly more GUI consistency in the Windows world than
in the Linux world.)
>>> Choice is good.
>>
>> This statement, which is chanted like a mantra in the GNU/Linux
>> community, has some problems:
>
> Sure... but it is fun to point out where the "advocates" are for the status
> quo and *not* really for choice, as they claim. The reality it choice has
> tradeoffs - some good and some bad.
Yeah, sorry, I got your point. I just used it as a bootstrap to go off on
a rant. :) I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who
are totally blind to the downsides of choice, and who think that I must be
crazy to ever criticise the notion that choice is always good.
<...>
Gary Stewart
>
> What a nutter.
Do nuts excite you sMarti?
--
7/31/2011 11:55:05 AM
tactical
> Oh pffft, It's clearly a Snot-Sock, yammering about his (years ago
> solved) GUI inconsistencies.
Nope. I'm a Windows user who used to be a Linux user (but who switched
back to Windows a few years back, mainly for programming-related reasons).
I badly want Linux to be a great desktop OS, because it could be great, and
because free(dom) software is a good thing. But it seems to me that there
are too many problems right now. As mentioned, I think one of the biggest
problems is the lack of GUI standardisation.
I've had many arguments with Linux advocates on this topic, and there seem
to be two main replies:
1) "Linux has no such problems. You're wrong!"
2) "Maybe you're right, but Linux shouldn't ever become big on the desktop
anyway. I prefer it the way it is."
I think attitude #1 is just denial, while attitude #2 worries me a little.
High Plains Thumper
> There is no *coherent* system when you are talking about desktop Linux
> - it is made up of many systems...
>
> Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that
> making of a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of
> its parts. In the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system
> level choices - because there is no coherent system to make choices
> about!
You seem to confuse operating system with applications. Or is this
another example of you arguing a point on the head of a needle by
creating new definitions such as "system" and "coherent"?
[quote]
7.6 Trespasser Disinformation Tactics
41. Use of Undefined Terminology
Use terms such as "indoctrinated" as a substitute for "educated"
or "experienced" when referring to a Linux Advocate. Use
"pedantic" in place of "correct", "precise", or "accurate" when
referring to a Linux Advocate. Create and use personal
definitions such as "commercial quality" for impressive sounding
terms to mislead the unwary. But never share your definitions
for your inappropriate terminology. This is commonly known as
Troll-speak.
[/quote]
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
> Unlike with desktop Linux, the components you list for OS X are all
> controlled by Apple. Nobody controls all the desktop Linux components.
Really? Your point is so generalised it makes no sense.
[quote]
Since 2000, the GNOME Foundation has acted as the custodian of the
project. The Foundation is GNOME’s legal body. It supports the project
through the collection and distribution of funds, acts as the interface
between the project and its partners and provides strategic guidance.
[/quote]
[quote]
Any team of substantial size requires mechanisms in place to ensure
smooth operations, and KDE is no exception. The KDE community is
organized around a large number of semi-independent teams, and has a few
over-arching groups which take care of coordination and communication.
KDE Core [...]
The KDE Core group decides on the overall direction of the KDE Platform.
Contrary to the development of other free software projects, most notably
the Linux Kernel, KDE does not have a single 'benevolent dictator' who
can veto important decisions. Instead, at KDE the core team consisting of
several dozen contributors takes decisions on the basis of merit and
consensus building.
[/quote]
http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/management.php
Linux desktop has governance yet operates in the form of committees, in
an organised manner similar to professional engineering and manufacturing
organisations (IEEE, NACE, ASME, NEMA, and etc.)
--
HPT
Gary Stewart
> Marti Van Lin wrote:
>
>> Oh pffft, It's clearly a Snot-Sock, yammering about his (years ago
>> solved) GUI inconsistencies.
>
> Nope. I'm a Windows user who used to be a Linux user (but who switched
> back to Windows a few years back, mainly for programming-related reasons).
> I badly want Linux to be a great desktop OS, because it could be great, and
> because free(dom) software is a good thing. But it seems to me that there
> are too many problems right now. As mentioned, I think one of the biggest
> problems is the lack of GUI standardisation.
>
> I've had many arguments with Linux advocates on this topic, and there seem
> to be two main replies:
>
> 1) "Linux has no such problems. You're wrong!"
Classic Linux loon behavior. Deny, deny and deny. Over the years the
Linux freetards have denied
.font problems
.Wireless Networking problems.
.SATA problems
.Printing problems
.Audio problems
. and a whole host of other dificulties.
Oddly enough, when the above problems finally get solved over the
years, all of a sudden these same people are squawking that the
problem "no longer exists"...
Hmmm, very odd.
> 2) "Maybe you're right, but Linux shouldn't ever become big on the desktop
> anyway. I prefer it the way it is."
Those are the words of losers and failures.
They know they have failed so all of a sudden they "don't care" if
Linux ever makes it big because they are "content" the way Linux is.
> I think attitude #1 is just denial, while attitude #2 worries me a little.
It certainly is troublesome.
--
7/31/2011 12:05:39 PM
Ala
"tactical" <1@2.3> wrote in message
news:1jhp6xdmh0d1v$.1ejb284die236.dlg@40tude.net...
wishing
Snit
9:06 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> There is no *coherent* system when you are talking about desktop Linux
>> - it is made up of many systems...
>>
>> Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that
>> making of a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of
>> its parts. In the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system
>> level choices - because there is no coherent system to make choices
>> about!
>
> You seem to confuse operating system with applications.
Nope. And, frankly, I cannot even see where you would get that idea.
> Or is this another example of you arguing a point on the head of a needle by
> creating new definitions such as "system" and "coherent"?
Huh? Oh, you are just trolling.
...
>> Unlike with desktop Linux, the components you list for OS X are all
>> controlled by Apple. Nobody controls all the desktop Linux components.
>
> Really? Your point is so generalised it makes no sense.
I accept that it does not make sense to *you*. No argument here!
>
> [quote]
> Since 2000, the GNOME Foundation has acted as the custodian of the
> project. The Foundation is GNOME�s legal body. It supports the project
> through the collection and distribution of funds, acts as the interface
> between the project and its partners and provides strategic guidance.
> [/quote]
>
> http://www.gnome.org/about/
>
> [quote]
> Any team of substantial size requires mechanisms in place to ensure
> smooth operations, and KDE is no exception. The KDE community is
> organized around a large number of semi-independent teams, and has a few
> over-arching groups which take care of coordination and communication.
>
> KDE Core [...]
>
> The KDE Core group decides on the overall direction of the KDE Platform.
> Contrary to the development of other free software projects, most notably
> the Linux Kernel, KDE does not have a single 'benevolent dictator' who
> can veto important decisions. Instead, at KDE the core team consisting of
> several dozen contributors takes decisions on the basis of merit and
> consensus building.
> [/quote]
>
> http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/management.php
>
> Linux desktop has governance yet operates in the form of committees, in
> an organised manner similar to professional engineering and manufacturing
> organisations (IEEE, NACE, ASME, NEMA, and etc.)
So where are the system settings? Not KDE or Gnome settings - but system
settings?
LOL!
Poor HPT... so far over his head he has no idea what is even being
discussed.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
7/31/11 8:53 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> It is funny how TomB jumped in to disagree with me... after he had already
>> said:
>>
>> -----
>> Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
>> Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it
>> is perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem
>> hangs together. That perception is wrong.
>> -----
>>
>> As his "out", he wants to pretend that OS X and Windows share the same lack
>> of a coherent system - but they do not.
>
> Yes, desktop Linux could learn from OS X and Windows here.
>
> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
> anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
> standard GUI is great -- for users and developers. (Sure, there aren't any
> 100% strict standards, and there are different approaches like WinForms and
> WPF, but there's certainly more GUI consistency in the Windows world than
> in the Linux world.)
It is... but it is far behind OS X. Then again, Windows has improved a lot
- Windows users are no longer faced with this:
<http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/interface/dialogs/>
Even Linux users do not have it quite that bad.
>>>> Choice is good.
>>>
>>> This statement, which is chanted like a mantra in the GNU/Linux
>>> community, has some problems:
>>
>> Sure... but it is fun to point out where the "advocates" are for the status
>> quo and *not* really for choice, as they claim. The reality it choice has
>> tradeoffs - some good and some bad.
>
> Yeah, sorry, I got your point. I just used it as a bootstrap to go off on
> a rant. :)
Fair enough.
> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who
> are totally blind to the downsides of choice, and who think that I must be
> crazy to ever criticise the notion that choice is always good.
Always good - and has no downsides.
Completely blind...
>
> <...>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
>>
>> You do not like what I have said... you have no counter... so you call me
>> names.
>>
>> It is what you do. And what many in COLA will do. So be it: you are not
>> secure in your beliefs. No problem.
>
>
> Your inconsistent premises lead to invalid arguments.
>
> I liked what you said on behalf of all trolls that are out there
> proving yet again all trolls are idiots, therefore you were not being called
> names, you were being labeled correctly as a troll, and its not what COLA
> does to you that you should be afraid of
> but what you do to yourself by posting inconsistent
> premises that lead to your invalid arguments.
See how you prove me right over and over and over.
You have no counter - so you call me names, just claim my comments are
"invalid", etc.
In other words: you fold.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
7/31/11 8:48 AM:
>>>>> Snot will prove this chain can be broken by collecting
>>>>> his most important gripes about desktops, and list the first five in
>>>>> decending order of importance explaining his position and the
>>>>> position held by developers who develop this stuff
>>>>> so that any one of us non-developers can have a look
>>>>> at it to comment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Snot will not limit himself to the 1% wintel desktops
>>>>> and will cover the entire spectrum of client desktops.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Please try to show some understanding of the comments you reply to.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> You have forgotten you are a troll again.
>>>
>>
>> You do not like what I have said... you have no counter... so you call me
>> names.
>
> He doesn't understand what you said.
> You used words with more than 3 letters in them and it went right
> over his head.
>
>
>> It is what you do. And what many in COLA will do. So be it: you are not
>> secure in your beliefs. No problem.
>
> He's not secure in life either.
> It's obvious.
I would agree, but his personal life is not my concern.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gary Stewart
> High Plains Thumper stated in post j13uir$r01$1...@dont-email.me on 7/31/11
> 9:06 AM:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> There is no *coherent* system when you are talking about desktop Linux
>>> - it is made up of many systems...
>>>
>>> Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that
>>> making of a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of
>>> its parts. In the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system
>>> level choices - because there is no coherent system to make choices
>>> about!
>>
>> You seem to confuse operating system with applications.
>
> Nope. And, frankly, I cannot even see where you would get that idea.
Same place he gets all his other "material" from.
He simply makes it up.
>> Or is this another example of you arguing a point on the head of a needle by
>> creating new definitions such as "system" and "coherent"?
>
> Huh? Oh, you are just trolling.
He's one of the worst trolls in the group.
He just isn't very good at it, but he keeps trying anyway.
Maybe some day he will improve.
I doubt it though.
> Poor HPT... so far over his head he has no idea what is even being
> discussed.
HPT is limited to posting and re-posting the same stalker crap
he has been posting for years.
Remove a box on the flowchart and he completely falls apart.
--
7/31/2011 1:07:15 PM
Snit
7/31/11 10:09 AM:
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 09:57:13 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> High Plains Thumper stated in post j13uir$r01$1...@dont-email.me on 7/31/11
>> 9:06 AM:
>>
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no *coherent* system when you are talking about desktop Linux
>>>> - it is made up of many systems...
>>>>
>>>> Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that
>>>> making of a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of
>>>> its parts. In the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system
>>>> level choices - because there is no coherent system to make choices
>>>> about!
>>>
>>> You seem to confuse operating system with applications.
>>
>> Nope. And, frankly, I cannot even see where you would get that idea.
>
> Same place he gets all his other "material" from.
> He simply makes it up.
I mean, really... does *anyone* see where he could have possibly gotten that
idea? He is just lost.
>>> Or is this another example of you arguing a point on the head of a needle by
>>> creating new definitions such as "system" and "coherent"?
>>
>> Huh? Oh, you are just trolling.
>
> He's one of the worst trolls in the group.
> He just isn't very good at it, but he keeps trying anyway.
> Maybe some day he will improve.
> I doubt it though.
I give him too much attention.
>> Poor HPT... so far over his head he has no idea what is even being
>> discussed.
>
> HPT is limited to posting and re-posting the same stalker crap
> he has been posting for years.
>
> Remove a box on the flowchart and he completely falls apart.
Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls apart. His
freak-out against me started when he accused me for forging videos and
screenshots - and when I pointed out he had *no* evidence for this and how
others had even replicated what he claimed was "forged", he completely
freaked out.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gary Stewart
He's a joke.
He likes to plant messages in other groups only to "discover" them,
post some incorrect conjecture about headers and blame flatfish or
some other person for the posts.
Ever notice how HPT seems to be the only one who "finds" these
things?
Talk about stalking.
Indeed!
He's stalking himself most of the time :)
When confronted with his poor header reading ability, like his
claims about cnntp for example, he disappears only to re-surface in
a couple of hours as another nym, usually from a re-mailer, playing
sock puppet with himself.
And then when he gets caught, he goes underground again for a while,
posts on Roy's irc looking for acceptance and then starts the
process all over again.
The most hysterical part is when he calls *us* stalkers.
Now that's a riot!
Let's see, he maintains a database of all this crap we have
supposedly posted and *we* are the stalkers?
That's pretty funny!
If I didn't suspect he is unstable I would reply to his drivel but
something is just not right with the boy. Maybe too much CO got
trapped in his helmet or something so thus I ignore replying to him
for the most part.
--
7/31/2011 1:41:23 PM
Snit
7/31/11 10:49 AM:
He is, without doubt, complete and utter scum.
But the "advocates" will not call him out in it.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Ala
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:CA5ABF63.A0E26%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>
> But, in the case of *system level* choices, desktop Linux lacks even
> having
> one (as you have said), and hence one cannot have choice for something one
> does not have.
>
>
thank you and bless you!>
Snit
10:56 AM:
Thanks. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chris Ahlstrom
<sniff sniff> I smell fish.
--
My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
Chris Ahlstrom
> Snit wrote:
>
>> There is no *coherent* system when you are talking about desktop Linux
>> - it is made up of many systems...
>>
>> Hence there is no coherent system, and it is that coherence - that
>> making of a "real" system - which makes a whole more than the sum of
>> its parts. In the case of desktop Linux, it means there are few system
>> level choices - because there is no coherent system to make choices
>> about!
>
> You seem to confuse operating system with applications. Or is this
> another example of you arguing a point on the head of a needle by
> creating new definitions such as "system" and "coherent"?
>
> [quote]
> 7.6 Trespasser Disinformation Tactics
>
> 41. Use of Undefined Terminology
> Use terms such as "indoctrinated" as a substitute for "educated"
> or "experienced" when referring to a Linux Advocate. Use
> "pedantic" in place of "correct", "precise", or "accurate" when
> referring to a Linux Advocate. Create and use personal
> definitions such as "commercial quality" for impressive sounding
> terms to mislead the unwary. But never share your definitions
> for your inappropriate terminology. This is commonly known as
> Troll-speak.
> [/quote]
'nuff said.
--
Appendix:
A portion of a book, for which nobody yet has discovered any use.
Ala
"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@xzoozy.com> wrote in message
news:j14878$6r5$2...@dont-email.me...
>
>
> <sniff sniff> I smell fish.
>
Genius!
--
"Towering genius disdains a beaten path.
It seeks regions hitherto unexplored."
Abraham Lincoln
Snit
AM:
About what? HPT made up some bizarre claim about confusing OSs with apps...
a claim that is not even related to the topic.
And you just accept that and his other drivel.
Yeah, "'nuff said" indeed!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gary Stewart
I smell an idiot.
You.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 97.81.255.88
I've been to Alabama once in my entire life.
I never went back. For obvious reasons.
--
7/31/2011 3:25:55 PM
Gary Stewart
Chris Ahlstrom must be lonely again.
--
7/31/2011 3:26:41 PM
Ala
"Gary Stewart" <stewart...@oohay.com> wrote in message
news:4avj2ka22kss.1pdvi6lpkyqoi$.dlg@40tude.net...
>
> I've been to Alabama once in my entire life.
> I never went back. For obvious reasons.
>
You don't know how much I'd love to get outta here
Gary Stewart
Having seen the place I can understand why......
--
7/31/2011 3:58:59 PM
Chris Ahlstrom
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@xzoozy.com> wrote in message
> news:j14878$6r5$2...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> <sniff sniff> I smell fish.
>
> Genius!
Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 plus lightweight idiocy == PLONNNNNK.
--
Hello. Just walk along and try NOT to think about your INTESTINES
being almost FORTY YARDS LONG!!
Gary Stewart
> Ala wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@xzoozy.com> wrote in message
>> news:j14878$6r5$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> <sniff sniff> I smell fish.
>>
>> Genius!
>
> Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 plus lightweight idiocy == PLONNNNNK.
I wouldn't use Windows Mail if it was the only client on earth.
It truly sucks.
--
7/31/2011 4:18:32 PM
High Plains Thumper
> Chris Ahlstrom stated:
Hmmm? Do I hear an echo?
75- Lusotec (COLA): "You have started threads on this subject many times,
and many times it has been explained to you how X copy & paste should
work and how bugs in a application are not bugs in the system, but still
you return to this subject and post the same false statements." 09 Mar
2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/37032133fbe9db92
93- notlisted (COLA): "I actually like Apple. But I see you as an
asshole who spends an embarassing percentage of your life posting
derogatory comments about a computer operating system you obviously
detest, and insulting those who defend it in a newsgroup dedicated its
advocacy. That's almost the definition of being an asshole, and you have
half a dozen buddies who do the same thing. You excuse what you do by
pretending that you're merely pointing out problems in the hope that the
system will be improved, but that's an obvious lie whether it's you
saying it or one of your buds. You do it because you enjoy the feeling
it gives you, whatever that is." 07 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/90b57eaa796e8b14
> And you just accept that and his other drivel. Yeah, "'nuff said"
> indeed!
41- Henry Flam: "You on the other hand must be a deeply troubled
individual who has a fragile ego. I needn't agree nor disagree with the
points above. I don't care about them. Your constant complaints, whines,
rages, etc., wars with the regular Mac advocates, whom you mislabel as
trolls, arise from your sense that any conversation or thread must orbit
around you. People have pointed that out to you but you don't accept
that. Snit I feel sorry for you. Please go and see a doctor about your
solipsism. There must be a cure for you deep psychological travail." 18
Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b9bb48e6e6da75c8
--
HPT
Snit
1:48 PM:
Who cares what you hear. Can you explain your bizarre claim.
Of course not.
But given your inability to understand what you read, it is not surprising
you would make such a bizarre claim.
...
>> And you just accept that and his other drivel. Yeah, "'nuff said"
>> indeed!
...
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gary Stewart
Those are all his nyms talking to each other :)
Too much firewater again!
> Can you explain your bizarre claim.
>
> Of course not.
He just spews canned crap hoping nobody will take the time to
actually check what he is saying.
It's the same technique Schestowitz uses.
And remember how Schestowitz ran away when you had the nerve to ask
for proof of his claims.
Same with HPT only he returns under another nym.
> But given your inability to understand what you read, it is not surprising
> you would make such a bizarre claim.
Too much Co leaking in under his helmet has rotted his brain.
Remove a block from the flowchart and the preacher goes off the
rails.
--
7/31/2011 5:01:16 PM
TomB
8<
> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
> anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
> standard GUI is great
Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI consistency
in MS Windows is a mess:
http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
8<
> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who are
> totally blind to the downsides of choice,
I'm sure that pretty much every GNU/Linux user in this group realizes
that the immense amount of choice does have a number of downsides, and
that not all computer users need those choices.
A while back I had a talk with Snit about the possibility to have
categories in the package manager that split up programs in three
categories: the 'good', the 'bad' and the 'ugly'. The 'good' group
would list only those package that have a very high degree of
consistency with the default desktop environment of the distro in
question. The 'bad' category would contain package with a certain
degree of consistency, but with some clear issues. The 'ugly' group
would list packages that are completely out of place (eg. pure X-based
programs, or KDE programs on a Gnome-based distro).
For me personally a system like that would not be useless, but the
less tech-savvy user would get a clear indication about which programs
are made for 'the system' and which are not, guiding them in making an
informed decision about what to install, or at least make them aware
of the consequences. It could even be a trigger for Free software
developers to make their program integrate better with one of the two
major desktop environments (which already is done to a large extent).
8<
--
There's this feeling I get when I look to the West.
~ Robert Plant
High Plains Thumper
> Gary Stewart stated:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> Gary Stewart stated:
>>>
>>>> HPT is limited to posting and re-posting the same stalker crap he has
>>>> been posting for years.
Shifting the goal posts, eh, Gary Stewart Flatfish? Explain why you
impersonated me in this post to rec.audio.pro:
WallysWorld <wall...@aus.org>: "Audition 1.5 is old news. It is buggy
and unstable compared to the CoolEdit program that pre-dated it. Try
Linux. The source code will set you free. Linux is the future. -- HPT"
7 Jun 2010, Message-ID: <xl7jzmyhabii.2mlf47woks7u$.d...@40tude.net>,
Subject: Re: Odd Adobe Audition 1.5 Problem
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/d4637b6122a18504
>>>> [snip ad hominem remark]
>>>
>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls apart.
>>> His freak-out against me started when he accused me for forging videos
>>> and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had *no* evidence for this
>>> and how others had even replicated what he claimed was "forged", he
>>> completely freaked out.
No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe with
your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair; but alas,
it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged "evidence". Again.
>> He's a joke.
>> He likes to plant messages in other groups only to "discover" them,
>> post some incorrect conjecture about headers and blame flatfish or some
>> other person for the posts.
This is called "spin". It was you, Gary Stewart Flatfish that
impersonated me to stalk Mr. Roy Schestowitz, then returning to the scene
of the crime to discover it:
One Shot. One Kill. <fr...@gmail.com>: "Wait till they discover that he is
some kind of a eunuch freak who had his balls cut off. That should really
open up a can of worms for the maggot. -- HPT" 30 Nov 2009, Subject: Re:
GIMP not dropped from Ubuntu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5H06/HkDJ4KgFo0gnKm6kg.user.aioe.org
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/fdc69a68a421d527
After planting your "evidence" then nymshifted again and falsely accused
me of posting as "One Shot One Kill":
Cager <dirtbiker...@hotmail.com>: "You really have to turn off the
automatic signature append function HPT. It's giving you away every time."
30 Nov 2009, Subject: HPT = One Shot One Kill. Caught nym shitting again.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5H06/HkDJ4KgFo0gnKm6kg.user.aioe.org
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/0c2c86b16aa7af55
It was you who also impersonated me in rec.audio.pro:
George: "I'm looking at moving my current mastering facility from
Protools/Sequoia to a total Harrison based Linux system. Any advice is
appreciated. ~~hpt" 2 Apr 2011, Subject: Migrating From Protools To
Linux. Advice Needed.
NNTP-Posting-Host: D0RC06drwH9yOJK5OoENPw.user.speranza.aioe.org
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/de8933330e6e3410
Threatened to contact my employer as Rick:
Rick <wonto...@hotmail.org>: "Do you deny working at [redacted]? I doubt
you will so I will tell you to get fucking lost right now you libelous
pile of shit. If you don't, your employer will be contacted and informed
of you activities on company time." 20 Apr 2011, Subject: Re: TROLL ALERT
- STALKER Migrating From Protools To Linux
NNTP-Posting-Host: D0RC06drwH9yOJK5OoENPw.user.speranza.aioe.org
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/d5f04269c8420849
and did your little Christmas dance:
Anna Banger: "With Wendy at the whorehouse and [Homer] smoking grass, HPT
had just settled down for a nice piece of ass. When out on the lawn George
heard such a clatter, he got off his sister to see what was the matter.
And what to his stoned-out eyes should appear, but a shitty old sleigh and
eight fucking reindeer. (Obviously a Linux model sifted from the garbage
bin) With a dirty old man who was beating his dick, George knew in a
moment, it must be St. Nick. (George Hostler is an ex'spurt in the area of
dicks) [...] He swore and cursed as he rode out of sight Linux sucks
dick,,, and piss on you freetards this cold xmas nite." 24 Dec 2010,
Subject "The Night Before Freetard Xmas...."
NNTP-Posting-Host: D0RC06drwH9yOJK5OoENPw.user.speranza.aioe.org
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c248af66c880d888
>> Ever notice how HPT seems to be the only one who "finds" these things?
This is called, spin and ignores 16 years of flatfish posts, best
summarised in:
[quote]
Name: flatfish+++ (in real life Gary Stewart)
Traits:
Nym shifting (see below)
[...]
Habitual liar
[...]
The flatfish troll nyms shifts an extraordinary amount often using the
nyms as sock puppets. Here is a list of some of the nyms the flatfish
troll has used (NB: flatfish will often use the names of other posters as
nyms):
1.ball.willy, Abbie Diaz, achmed.jones, Aftab Singh, alan.yunick, [snip
long list of alphabetised nyms], wm_walsh, Wobbles, wylbur.horseman,
Yanick Schmuley and zyklon_C. Plus many, many, many more.
[/quote]
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/flatfish-troll.html
>> Talk about stalking.
>> Indeed!
>> He's stalking himself most of the time :)
This is a tactic of a stalker, accusing the victim of stalking. <SNIP
rest of troll spin>
Please obtain medical counselling for your psychological illness, you
need it badly.
--
HPT
Snit
PM:
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>
> 8<
>
>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
>> anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
>> standard GUI is great
>
> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI consistency
> in MS Windows is a mess:
>
> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>
> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>
> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
Not found.
But, in any case, don't those pics show Windows in a non-default view where
there is more inconsistencies?
Do not get me wrong: I am not saying there is not a lot of room for
improvement on Windows (there is).
> 8<
>
>> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who are
>> totally blind to the downsides of choice,
>
> I'm sure that pretty much every GNU/Linux user in this group realizes
> that the immense amount of choice does have a number of downsides, and
> that not all computer users need those choices.
What do you think those downsides are? And who in COLA would be willing to
admit to them?
> A while back I had a talk with Snit about the possibility to have
> categories in the package manager that split up programs in three
> categories: the 'good', the 'bad' and the 'ugly'. The 'good' group
> would list only those package that have a very high degree of
> consistency with the default desktop environment of the distro in
> question. The 'bad' category would contain package with a certain
> degree of consistency, but with some clear issues. The 'ugly' group
> would list packages that are completely out of place (eg. pure X-based
> programs, or KDE programs on a Gnome-based distro).
It would help some - but it is hard to rate "consistency"... and even harder
to rate arbitrary inconsistencies. Look at how you and I have gone back and
forth on which is worse in this area: Windows or Ubuntu (or some other
distro). Heck, Roy even was under the mistaken impression PCLOS had caught
up to OS X in that area.
> For me personally a system like that would not be useless, but the
> less tech-savvy user would get a clear indication about which programs
> are made for 'the system' and which are not, guiding them in making an
> informed decision about what to install, or at least make them aware
> of the consequences.
You imply that consistency is beneficial only to less tech savvy folks -
where the data support that while it helps such folks it helps tech savvy
folks *more*. A common myth in COLA is that ease-of-use, productivity
enhancements, error reduction, etc. applies to less savvy people... and not
*us*.
> It could even be a trigger for Free software developers to make their program
> integrate better with one of the two major desktop environments (which already
> is done to a large extent).
Yes: if this could be used to make the software better that would be great -
even if the rating system, by the nature of such, would not be perfect.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
2:55 PM:
...
>>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls apart.
>>>> His freak-out against me started when he accused me for forging videos
>>>> and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had *no* evidence for this
>>>> and how others had even replicated what he claimed was "forged", he
>>>> completely freaked out.
>
> No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe with
> your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair; but alas,
> it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged "evidence". Again.
You accused me of forging evidence... though when challenged on that
accusation your folded and cried like a baby... never producing a shred of
evidence nor explaining why so many others were able to replicate what I
showed in at least some of the material you called forged. You were proved
wrong about your accusations and wrong about your ability to follow simple
directions.
And, yes, you freaked out: posting irrelevant and forged quotes about me,
going on the offensive instead of accepting and admitting to your error.
You acted like a small child having a tantrum.
And you have yet to really get over it.
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>
>>>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls apart.
>>>>> His freak-out against me started when he accused me for forging
>>>>> videos and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had *no* evidence
>>>>> for this and how others had even replicated what he claimed was
>>>>> "forged", he completely freaked out.
>>
>> No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe
>> with your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair; but
>> alas, it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged
>> "evidence". Again.
>
> You accused me of forging evidence... though when challenged on that
> accusation your folded and cried like a baby...
More of your ad hominem accusations, you worthless sorry sod of a man.
<SNIP repetitive lies>
Latest addition to the Snit Circus:
155- White Spirit (COLA): "It would interest me a lot more if both the
participants were honest and intelligent. Snit is lacking at least one
of those characteristics." 25 Jul 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ba8beed91bca6bfa
The other 154 Poster Quotes on the Snit Circus of Pathological Lies:
1- Adam Kesher: "Steve, IIRC Sandman's website has a member area and a
login. If you forget your password, you can ask it to e-mail it to you,
and a bot will send an e-mail. *That* is the e-mail Snit got from
Sandman's website, and yes he's that fucked in the head and starved for
attention that he'd claim it to be an e-mail from Sandman himself. So,
don't get sucked into his little circus. The e-mail, in this particular
instance, did probably originate from Sandman.net." 27 Feb 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/dac74355552b4cc7
2- Alan Baker: "People's perceptions of you are *formed* by behaviour and
not withstanding your occasional on topic posts, I wish you'd leave too.
Please note that despite the amazing silliness that is Edwin, I have
never made the same wish of him." 27 Feb 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/4a7c3ebf3fc10221
3- Andrew J. Brehm: "You are not flamed because you speak the truth, you
are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting the
newsgroup." 27 Feb 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/52eab53a559e00ce
4- AZ Nomad: "The fact that you routinely change your headers to weasel
out of killfiles proves that you're an asshole." 25 Jun 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/51b43d6c9613c9da
5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not just
let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you are? You
could show your enemies up by being better than them, rise above the low
level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just stop...." 26 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d6ffb6b06aa237e5
6- B.B.: "Does the From: header contain the string "Snit"? If yes, then
troll. Otherwise, maybe. Dunno why I had my KF on you set to expire, but
it's fixed now." 13 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8a98d179b2ff9578
7- BaJoRi: "You know it, and I know it, and everyone else who has read
your idiocy knows it. I took your statement, showed it to be wrong, then
added even more, just to be a dick and REALLY show you to be a fool. You
need to judiciously snip out pertinent points because you are an
intellectually dwarfed turd-burglar." 11 Nov 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.vacation.las-vegas/msg/647944511b74b82f
8- bobinnv: "I learned some time ago how much better this group can be if
you kill file Snit. I have never understood why more people don't do the
same.." 5 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0706dbef8ce1f903
9- Bob B.: "This has always been pretty much a free-for-all group, but
since Snit showed up, its become almost impossible to have a decent
discussion about anything. The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for
some reason, some people just can't stop feeding him." 27 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3d2f1dff196ca190
10- °b° unny: Subject "snit makes me sad", Text "really actually =:-("
9 Oct 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/4e31cb49c1e2d432
11- Brian: "LOL, Has anyone ever been more universally hated on the
USENET than Snit? Too bad he craves the hatred and negative attention. We
will read about him in the news some day soon going on a shooting
rampage. Somebody should get the pychopath some help before he VT's a
bunch of people. 29 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/66a89e4f5c89f489
12- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill, but you and Steve don't
help. You encourage him to post, which he doesn't need to do. We would
all be better off if you just ignore him. 17 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2ed879f256677548
13- Carlo Coggi: "He must believe he is surrounded by 'trolls' ... in the
groups he trolls in, that is. I wondered if the idiotrollers like snit
would reply to this thread. Of course, I didn't see his posts, only your
reply". 07 Aug 2006 (available only in reply)
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5ea48f7a84115fd1
14- C Lund: "Snit is not my responsibility. Maybe it's time for you to
learn how to use your kill-filter. I am assuming, of course, that your
Usenet browser has a kill-filter." 5 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2c390a34b05b24a9
15- cc (COLA): "You are incapable of letting anything go. In fact, I
guarantee you will respond to this post in under 3 hours. Hell, I'd be
surprised if it takes longer than 30 minutes. If I really wanted to, I
could make this little side topic go on forever, because you are a
complete moron who just has to respond to anything written about or to
you, even if it just means repeating yourself." 1 Feb 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/3712090033411605
16- Chance Furlong: "HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim
Adams are not trolls and do not troll. You, on the other hand, are a
troll." 27 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/28c267f26965b43f
17- Chris Ahlstrom (COLA): "I try to go more by the contents of the
posts. Although some clowns (e.g. Snit) spew out so much chaff it is not
worth the effort." 14 Feb 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/8b6a982957c7c9d5
Chris Ahlstrom (COLA): "Actually, many of the advocates are sick to death
of Snit's never-ending puerile blather about trivialities. The
occasional reasonable conversations are too few and far between." 6 Mar
2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/811326833ba71864
18- Chris Clement: "ugh....geez man.....let it go" 5 Jul 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ed093996df6547b2
19- chrisv (cola): "No, she called him 'shit', and rightly so, for they
way he was so ignominiously birthed into a toilet at the bus depot, and
simply refused to die, despite repeated flushes. It's now far too late
to *flush* him, but we can still *plonk* him..." 12 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/18099f8aa067f4a5
20- Code Orange: "Then why post it? What need is there for you to "win"
an argument? They don't like you, you don't like them. Why must you keep
this up? What results are you expecting?"
21- CozmicDebris: "I'm done with your three year old games. The archives
show my answers and your inability to process them. Keep posting your
list and proving that you are an idiot troll. I will not address it any
further- you being too stupid to realize and accept that is not my
problem". 22 Nov 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.cellular.attws/msg/0aa65b7a132dbfe8
22- cshenk: "I happen to believe him over you... and I doubt I'd be the
only person in this ng to do so. You have given people a lot of
'evidence' that you are dishonest... as 'evidenced' by the quotes
list." .... "Why stop with Jonas? Why not call the entire list of people
on your quotes list 'liars'? After all, they have all labeled you a liar,
troll or worse." 27 Nov 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/909a59de04850ef5
23- Dave Fritzinger: "[snip of stuff I really don't care to read] Snit,
please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do something, but please,
please, please, GO AWAY!!!!" 2 Jun 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/57bb2fc42ec0f290
24- Dawg Tail: "PC advocates, Mac advocates, Linux advocates. Almost all
of them are making similar claims about Snit. When you have so many
diverse people who share a common perception where do you think the
problem lies? With Snit? Or almost everyone else? The answer doesn't
require an advanced degree to figure out." 30 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/73edac32c3ad530b
25- Donald L McDaniel: "Jesus, snit. You're a teacher. I thought you knew
what a metaphor was, and could recognize one when it was presented to
you. I guess I had too much confidence in you." 30 Nov 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3254ec7af27bfb0f
26- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and loser
you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i stop
responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for the
magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's sharpness
when i stop responding to you. you almost always start responding back in
a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's once again that time.
i can only ask that you pass my condolences to your wife and unborn child
for having to put up with such a dishonest fool as yourself. (well, if
your wife is a loser as well, just pass those condolences to the rug-rat
to be; if not, double condolences to her). " 30 Apr 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/71f74dd6d806ce77
27- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to honest and
honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is the biggest liar
in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to prove Snit was using sock
puppets and he still is. Snit can not give up his socks puppets and
shills. They are the only ones who ever support him." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5b52494d96d12229
28- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought it
would make people look at you." 18 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/37e4a720619642a0
29- Elijah Baley: "Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see a
doctor." 24 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/6f6c88356b54fc15
30- Elizabot v2.0.2: "I see you were unable to respond to the points in
my post and you are back to your repetitious regurgitation mode. How
childishly typical of you, Snit." 16 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/55214ccfb7414fe5
31- Fa-groon: "I don't read Snit period. He's been killfiled since the
first day I posted here. [....] I don't want to 'do like Snit'. As far as
I'm concerned, Snit doesn't even exist." 15 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/dcfbff305ba8b7f0
32- fibercut: "That is the problem. In the years I have been coming to
CSMA I have seen in the past year a real hatred among people, besides the
typical Mac vs. Windows typical argument. I feel that it is like being in
a room of really young children trying there best to best the other
person. The one common thing among all of this seems to be you. I hate to
be like this, but facts are facts. You seem to be in the middle of a
great percentage of arguments. CSMA has become less about Macs and more
about "look everybody, I think he lied". Is there no end then all this
picking at each other on such a personal level. CSMA has always been al
little adversarial but you have personally crank it up to the point that
this place is no longer fun. Congratulations on stopping CSMA and making
this place your own personal circus." 12 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/bbe695bbc3424ab6
33- Geezer:
Snit: "Steve Carroll has no sense of morality"
Geezer: "Whined the guy who cannot directly address those who uncover his
lies and deceit;)"
Snit: "and no clue about the law."
Geezer: 'Said the guy who believes his unsupported opinions are "proof".
LOL! (snip more of Snit's unsupported lies)' 1 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d0517ced5134934d
34- Geoff M. Fitton (COLA): "The Prescott Computer Guy *still* showing
how stupid he is... What a mar00n". 30 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f9401b4b57c59865
35- George Graves: "Jason. You have started an argument with the Snit
(AKA Michael Glasser), this should not be done. He will drive you crazy
with his twisted logic, his deep-rooted need to be ALWAYS right at any
cost. He will move goalposts, set up strawmen, and bore you into
submission with his endless pedanticism. The only way to engage him is to
hit and run. NEVER engage him, it's a futile, empty procedure that will
only anger you and feed him. Take my advice and STAY AWAY!" 27 Oct 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3d3af33ce25a11fd
36- gimme_this_gimme_that: "Hitting the vodka tonight Snit?" 4 Mar 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b457a7b378264794
37- Glenn Hall (COLA): "That person is like a constantly running toilet
that won't stop. Does he ever stop talking about UI consistency? No
matter what anyone replies, he adds a few more branches to the spider web
as it grows and grows. It's a waste of time." 31 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c8dd8a244fe1eb2c
38- Greycloud: "You really shouldn't lie like that. Everyone else notices
that you are not honest and you have no honor." 21 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3b92f11a1ab00f91
39- H: "Your crappy posts are still showing up in seperate threads, are
you doing this on purpose to piss people off? I dont ever censor people
cause that's just retarded but if you dont fix it I'm gonna have to cause
I dont wanna see your name 40 times in a row. So uh, change your client
or something". 12 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f36ee6b458c86499
40- Hadron (COLA): "Would you please stop the whining. FFS he has you
jumping to his every post. How many more fucking times are you going to
post the same repetitive garbage? Please ..at least change the record
sometimes!!!!!!!" 13 Aug 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/1e0ecbb776623473
41- Henry Flam: "You on the other hand must be a deeply troubled
individual who has a fragile ego. I needn't agree nor disagree with the
points above. I don't care about them. Your constant complaints, whines,
rages, etc., wars with the regular Mac advocates, whom you mislabel as
trolls, arise from your sense that any conversation or thread must orbit
around you. People have pointed that out to you but you don't accept
that. Snit I feel sorry for you. Please go and see a doctor about your
solipsism. There must be a cure for you deep psychological travail." 18
Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b9bb48e6e6da75c8
42- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*" Aug 19 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d8afd909a308b97f
43- -hh: 'Perversion has utterly nothing to do with the definition of
"synonymous". It is, however, a very clear example of how you attempt to
maliciously debase against anyone who disagrees with you. As such, I
consider this to be a purposeful attempt by you to try to libel me. This
is your only warning to consider rescinding your remark, with the
reminder that you, and you alone are responsible for that accusation,
both in the ethical as well as the full legal meaning of the word
"responsible".' 25 Feb 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5496641a3426293a
44- High Plains Thumper: "Agreed except for Snit and socks (Joe Crump and
ad nauseum). I've got Snit kill binned, because he is the classic ad
hominem troll. At first he seems reasonable, but then it always degrades
into name calling bullying, the responder is a liar, etc. AKA the Snit
Circus of Pathological Lies. Perhaps the times he seems reasonable are
when he is properly controlled by medication." 21 Sep 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/249a598ec5aafe85
45- Homer (COLA): "I don't mean this as a personal insult, but I'm
perfectly serious when I say 'Snit' (Michael Glasser) is obviously
mentally ill, and needs help. I was going to suggest that someone alerts
his wife to the problem, but I have to assume she's already aware of his
condition, if she is in fact still living with him. It's possible, I
suppose, that he's already undergoing counselling and/or on medication,
but if he is then it doesn't seem to be helping much. Maybe he just
missed his 'meds' today (again, I mean that sincerely)." 26 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e061874ea94e9ce8
Homer: "Word of advice for anyone concerned: don't be tempted to get
drawn into a Snit circus, it's literally a waste of time. He's just an
attention seeker who'll keep stringing you along, in a never-ending
circle of obtuse questions, for which he has no genuine interest in the
answers." 14 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/0d06eb2e900e3058
46- hophead: "I have been reading and occasionally posting to CSMA for a
long time now, since 1995 at least. There have always been trolls and
morons, but I've never seen anything quite so disruptive as the Snit
circus. Snit will *never* back down or stop, and neither will most of his
opponents. A good kill file is your only hope." 20 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3161a78667e299eb
47- Jamie Hart (cola): "It seems that since you are unable to offer
support for your statements, you're reduced to personal attacks on me.
Incidentally, anyone reading this post can see that I have offered no
straw men, and have only asked you to explain how the things you state as
facts can be true. I'm really sorry that you're taking this attitude, the
topic is an interesting one and I thought you might have some insights.
I've snipped the rest, since you dislike long posts and avoid answering
any of the questions I asked by saying everything was just repeated." 6
Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8e07cde31f4eecf6
48- Jason McNorton: "You're one of the many, many paranoid people on
usenet that should be confined most likely. You sit there and refresh
your screen endlessly. You post the same nonsense over and over. Either
you're a super troll, or you're a super mess." 1 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7a8e091c0b248eb0
49- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of shit." 27 Feb 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cdddf5fd04d9afcb
50- Jeff B.: "Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git." 23 Dec
2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0ec649345d433a2d
51- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me achieve
a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from it and those
kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as this." 18 Nov
2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/947a2cc0301a2862
52- Jesus: "Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you accomplishing
besides being annoying? Is that your goal?" 25 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e3d5029d34cde243
53- Jim Lee Jr.: "Snit, read the thread's title, is Bush mentioned in it?
You (and Carroll) ought to learn to stay on topic and not hijack threads."
54- Jim Polaski: "Why is it that nearly every thread you're involved in
seems like it turns into some tit-for-tat, dozens of responses to OT
things and garbage? Cmon there Snit. Someone has to take the lead and
stop this crap. Try. How about it?" 25 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5b5c22490ab9649b
55- Jim Richardson (cola): "And yet again, Snit runs away, rather than
actually provide evidence for his claims. Par for the course I suppose."
"Evasion noted. Snit runs away again rather than produce evidence for his
claims. At least come up with some original insults Snit! I mean, you
*are* capable of original thoughts! Right? Snit?" 8 Feb 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e33321cc3343fc44
56- Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo: "and Snithead has even farther to fall -
in a few weeks he'll be out on the street after midnight, yelling at
passersby 'sucky sucky, $2...'" 23 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/57cf69f66571a5a7
57- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
bitching about?" 1 Dec 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/12ba528be5ad2665
58- JohnOfArc (cola): "I'm not sure "troll" does it justice- more like a
black hole! But hey, if we all promise to never again even entertain an
unkind thought re Apple, will you take it back and lock it up? Please??"
11 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e2891b1f3984e121
59- John Q. Public: "I have not been bothered to read Snit's postings
since I figured out who he is. I don't bother to filter his posts, I just
consider the source and skip to the next one when I see his name." 7 Jan
2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7d34c1bd05c877d2
60- John Slade: "I don't get posts from Snit. I wouldn't be shocked that
he has some kind of disorder. He made up stuff about being a computer
repairman and teacher. He's just plain loony and best ignored. Let him
deal with his disorder by medication. He's here to do one thing, get
attention from people. He says the crazy stuff just to get a reaction.
You say you like to beat him over the head. Well that's what he's
counting on, he says stuff he knows isn't true in hopes to get a rise out
of people like you. Ignore him, you won't regret it." 3 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/394a53a65c28d314
John Slade: "Snit, you have a enough problems as it is without adding
drinking booze to the list. How the hell did you manage to get out of my
killfile? Oh well back into the cage you go, PLONK." 13 Oct 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.food.wine/msg/992a796786a541d8
61- Josh McKee: "I have no strawman so therefore it has to be in your
mind. .... What is obnoxious are your posts." 26 Jul 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3665b9e002d27c44
62- K E: "I haven't read this board for awhile but I see that even though
the trolls still roam free at least the worst troll of the lot is mostly
being ignored by readers on this bb. If the few stragglers that keep
replying to him would just stop responding to Snit at all this place
could be worth coming back to. There's a good chance he'll pack up and
take his trolling to more fertile ground." 22 Oct 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0b9dca7df1f677f4
63- KK: 'Whoa there, ad hominem man. You started off your sentence with
"Ah" like you'd just realized something profound.' 29 Oct 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.howard-stern/msg/6a89029a5b5be5f8
64- Kelsey Bjarnason (cola): "Funny how you simply don't bother reading
the posts that rip your entire thesis to bleeding gobbets of putrid
excrescence. Maybe some day you'll learn how to support your position,
instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, hoping it'll
all go away." 7 Mar 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/96d064a7a5c6074a
65- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks. You
make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
liar and a hypocrite and you always have been." 14 Jul 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d1e3f9ac5c72c6ee
66- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid." 7 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a9bedf6689f9a54f
67- Lawrence D'Oliveiro (COLA): "You seem to be full of complaints about
your inability to hold up your end
of the argument, aren’t you?" 16 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/8ca5f48099696228
68- Lefty Bigfoot: "Okay, I tried to put up with it for a long time, but
the few times you post something worth reading just aren't worth it
anymore. *plonk*" 16 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5520adae01120e83
69- Liam Slider (cola): "Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been an
annoying little fuckwit lately. You started out with the pretense of
trying to be fair, but lately all there is from you in COLA is trashtalk
about Linux and you acting every bit the troll." 16 Jul 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad7d6c42c5e4cf2f
70-libcrushersmith: "Snit also thinks Dan Rather still anchors CBS News
and that Gitmo terrorists are innocent! Any time Snit is cornered, he
changes the subject and will never admit he's wrong." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/fbc516717f3b7ccf
71- libsnightmare: "You're a sore loser who has resorted to fifth grade
tactics. How fucking sad - all this clown has left is to edit posts and
post fake bullshit. You can't debate... so you lie. Once again, you have
proved Steve Carroll right about you. Sad..." 4 May 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a80c93f80bd6bc3e
72- Linonut (cola): "Snit may be the first retraction of my general
killfile amnesty. The volume of cavilling, whining, foot-stomping, back-
tracking, goal-post shifting, and petulance generated by that effete
candy-ass beggars belief". 30 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/cc4827fd7e8ad574
73- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous, I
would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-)" 18 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b6cd3ac4bf1e08d6
74- Lewis: "hasn't this fight been going on for like 8 years now? I don't
think anything is ever going to fix snit." 02 Mar 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/98ef8bca6b3a9b34
75- Lusotec (COLA): "You have started threads on this subject many times,
and many times it has been explained to you how X copy & paste should
work and how bugs in a application are not bugs in the system, but still
you return to this subject and post the same false statements." 09 Mar
2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/37032133fbe9db92
76- Marious Barrier (COLA): "I must recognize that it is the first time I
see that kind of troll, once that start asking moderately serious
questions and since the first answer, gradually starts to degenerate it
by, in many failed attempts of being sarcastic, inserting various
indirect insults and calling all people ignorant and unable to answer
what he asks for." 14 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c6607ea64f436821
77- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would be
impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual dishonesty
ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very keen on
proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story. Mr Glasser
could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to help him with
his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining if he's ever
telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has." 2 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f30aa1b65a972b3
78- Mayor of R'lyeh: "The fact is that he's probably pulling it to this
post since its all about him and he managed to make me think about him
today. A friend of mine has a toddler. I went over to her house and
videotaped her kid doing a bunch of cute toddler stuff then burned a DVD
of it for her. While we were watching the DVD her kid got mad. He got mad
because we quit making him the center of attention and made that kid on
the tv the center of attention. He even ran up to the tv and tried to
block our view of it. That's how Snit lives his whole life." 30 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9935f4154d5a290b
79- McGarnagle: "And you know when Snit is endorsed by two of the biggest
nutjobs in AGA - RichL and El Kabong - you know he's not very bright and
a loon." 31 Oct 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.guitar.amps/msg/e60a33341bff1309
80- Michelle Ronn: "The real topic here is that one someone refutes your
'facts', you run away and ignore them. Refuting your 'facts' is easily
done in this case. I did it, and you ignored it." 9 Feb 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c050c82720737b32
81- Mike: "Nonsense. I never see you "advocate" anything. All I see you
doing is engage in endless semantic arguments with everyone. You're the
TholenBot of CSMA. BTW, that's *not* a compliment!" 8 Jul 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7c5b72d70b87ffbd
82- Mike Dee: "I will no longer accuse you of lying here. Instead I can
only say that you are a complete and delusional kook that happens to
inhabit CSMA for the time being. That you are unaware of how deranged you
actually behave further reinforces this notion. Please seek professional
help."
"The point that keeps whooshing over your head Snit, is Elizabot made no
threat to you before you went to the police. She made a promise.
Admittedly, to your delusional spaced out paranoiac view point, Elizabot
was suddenly "threatening" to you. In so much as you had to take your
kooky self down to your local police shop and blub on their shoulders
about how much in danger you were in [sob, whine], and they had to waste
valuable policing time consoling you over your stupidity. I bet they have
Kook with a capital "K" written at the top of your profile, Snit." 2 Sep
2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9cf45bc88a324f40
83- mmoore321: "Snit is a human car-accident and we are all
rubbernecking. We know it is bad form, but yet strangely curious. Treat
him the same way, look but just keep moving on." 18 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f1c3041d89504c07
84- Mojo: "Actually, these facts piss everybody off because they are off-
topic, unnecessarily confrontational, extremely boring and clearly show
that you are crying out for attention." 20 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a38f07b9a4811a80
85- Mr. Blonde: "Lastly, I can't help but comment on the fact that your
obsession with Sandman has actually grown since you claimed to KF him.
Killfilling someone generally implies you're ignoring that person, yet
you piggyback onto virtually every reply to him here and and check his
website's validation status more often than most people check their e-
mail. These are not the actions of a mentally balanced individual." 19
Jan 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2b005666ab303e2b
86- MR_ED_of_Course: "Seriously, spend half a day at any pre-school or
kindergarten and see if the kids there can't teach you a thing or two
about social behavior." 16 May 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/55c03a6a0b7813a4
87- Muahman: "Ahhhh shit, another thread lost to the Snit retard
circus!!! I actually dread seeing Snit reply to a thread because that
automatically means it's in the toilet." 8 Jul 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/92e776d521dfa701
88- Mutley (AUK): "For the record ... I'll be done when I decide that
there's more shit on your face than there is on the sole of my shoe." 01
Nov 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/1802ad3aa000098b
89- Nashton/Nasht0n: "Oh for crying out loud, if I wasn't convinced that
snit is a total loser, and I rarely call people losers, I certainly am
now. Why bother responding to his stupidities anyway?" 29 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/be1a326a81441508
90- New Bee: "Honest and honorable? You? You've either got a wry sense of
humor, or you're completely nuts. Either way you're just a waste of time,
and you've done more than anybody to make this group a cesspool. Then you
revel in wallowing in your own filth." 14 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2856277b085d0274
91- none of your buisiness (COLA): "I am sorry, but I am going to have to
send you to the bin. You're perpetrating the Snit circus by responding to
all of his assinine posts. He is only here for one reason, to disrupt
this group, & you are helping him, as well as flatfish." 04 Jan 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/a9b40ce46612fdc4
92- Not Important: "I get this mental image of you and a sibling as
children in the back seat of the family car saying:
Mom, 'snits' touching me ... and you responding much as you do now ...
I'm not touching you, you're touching me! The problem is that by now you
should've grown out of that type of poke and complain interaction with
others. But, of course, you've haven't learned how to interact with
others in a more 'constructive' and mutually beneficial manner even
now." 03 Jul 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d16279e9003ca8f4
93- notlisted (COLA): "I actually like Apple. But I see you as an
asshole who spends an embarassing percentage of your life posting
derogatory comments about a computer operating system you obviously
detest, and insulting those who defend it in a newsgroup dedicated its
advocacy. That's almost the definition of being an asshole, and you have
half a dozen buddies who do the same thing. You excuse what you do by
pretending that you're merely pointing out problems in the hope that the
system will be improved, but that's an obvious lie whether it's you
saying it or one of your buds. You do it because you enjoy the feeling
it gives you, whatever that is." 07 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/90b57eaa796e8b14
94- OldCSMAer: "What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled
him?" 27 Nov 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/23b808d9646cd257
95- OldSage: "What drives me nuts is your unrelenting ability and desire
to argue on the head of a pin about the most trivial of things." 2 Oct
2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/88457f8e7c25273e
96- Oxford: "If you are using MT-Newswatcher: Select offending Author,
example Snit... Go to the Filters Menu, Choose 'Kill this Author' Click
'OK' Then Repeat with each annoying Author of your choice. Then to see
your work... Choose the Filter Menu again, Then 'Refilter Articles'...
Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing. Enjoy!!!!!" 14
Aug 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1d7f9181e95ed9ec
97- Owl (COLA): "You have interacted with me often enough to know that I
never initiate personal attacks. I generally respond in kind. It is you
who usually fall off the civility wagon first, with your ironically
condescending canned responses that do nothing for your argument and
generally shine a spotlight on the desperation that you are so fearful of
projecting." 5 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/8debf93e05da4d26
Owl (COLA): "You are a complete idiot and extremely dishonest. Consider
yourself permanently plonked." 29 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ba7797c5108b3c10
98- Patrick Nihill: "I mean, honestly, who would you rather discuss
something with; Dan, or someone like Zara? Or, for that matter, Snit, for
whom the work 'troll' seems so painfully inadequate?" 13 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f93db68e683ad769
99- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... <plonk> " 27 Jun 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/93afdfea4d4f491a
100- PC Guy: "Forget it Snit, you're a waste of time. For someone who
talks about everyone else not being "honest and honorable" you appear to
be the least honest and honorable of anyone here." 22 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/36bf51df2a2662a4
101- Peter: "I've never felt the need to use the filters in Newswatcher
but I thought Id try the Kill this Author.. option with Snit. Ten seconds
later and he's gone! Amazing." 30 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/011eef01d7bcd56c
102- Peter Bjorn Perlso: "Plonked for 60 days. Now stfu and take your
argument with sandman into the private room." 13 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ae4651ec99be3c77
103- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and someti...
err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon he has something
useful to say." 20 Mar 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8a31a47e26c5f5b7
104- Peter Jensen (cola): "Where has he ever said that they were not
different windowing environments? Message-ID, please. Experience has told
me not to trust you on anything without backing evidence." 30 Jun 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cfd5de2006d42fdc
105- Peter Kohlmann (cola): "Snot Glasser is invading this group with his
inane drivel, so he has to bear what people think about that dishonest
retard. And just for the record: You *are* a Glasser sock" 30 Jan 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f3166f6fda92641b
106- PeterBP: "Oh will you stfu". 30 Mar 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3e88e9a86cb5483e
107- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions." 1 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad24a97d5dc86277
108- Rapskat (cola): "For instance, your sig you reference a long
standing war you have going with some person from csma. It's like you
single out persons to target your attentions upon and then continuously
berate them with constant barbs and goads to perpetuate their acrimonious
responses, which in turn you respond in kind, etc. ad infinitum. Above
all things, your affinity for Macs and your overbearing pompous nature
aside, this is what convinces me that your primary purpose for
frequenting this and other groups is to troll." 07 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/a09c6b8e3e63f42d
109- RichardK: "Just killfile him already." 20 Jun 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1c9e7ded2e95a582
110- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
on." 06 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/fcad2955ac5cb03b
111- Rick G.: "Just to be plain here, I have no doubt that he is a troll.
I am tolerant of his nature, not blind to it. However, as a troll, he
is ... somewhat clumsy." 22 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/198b88e3d0064a92
112- Robert F.: "Um, perhaps you misunderstand. I don't care if you quote
Mayor McCheese claiming the Earth is a flat plate perched on the shell of
a tortoise, I was merely pointing out that you run the risk of looking
ridiculous when you quote something patently stupid. If that's your goal,
you're on the right track, and more power to you." 11 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/4dc22433eae8803d
113- RonB (COLA): "Snit is a crank fixated on one issue, who's thing is
twisting your words so he can win an argument against a straw man. That's
enough to killfile him." 1 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/ce8550d4cc5b1b42
RonB: (COLA): "Why do you bother responding to Snit? He makes no point,
he simply gainsays whatever you say. Just another version of Hadron's
'you're a liar' mantra, which is about all he can muster nowadays." 27
May 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/279210dd877d7aa0
RonB (COLA): "Original subject line now killfiled. You can only talk
about the freaking clipboard for so many million freaking messages. As I
said, Snit has no common-sense, STOP mechanism. He's a mechanically
obsessive super crank and will go on forever. I'm not kidding about this,
he will *NEVER* *ever* stop." 6 Mar 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/0df1e0164a8b586e
114- Rotten Apple: "You make trolls like me look like choir boys." 14 Sep
2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7a92988bcbce8fdb
115- Roy Culley (cola): "You appear to be in the latter category.
Starting crossposted threads for the simple purpose of hoping to generate
a flame war. If you truly want to learn more about Linux and how it can
help you and your supposed users why aren't you requesting help from a
more technical Linux newsgroup than an advocacy group? As the old saying
goes, those who can do, those who can't teach. Your posts seem to confirm
that saying IMHO." 12 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d521a80051e24d08
116- S'mee (Keith, rec.motorcycles): "Liar...forger and worthless. You
must be related to our resident racist troll, he lies as much as you."
29 Dec 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ab08c00330c8b58d
117- Sandman: "He is by far the most killfiled person in the -HISTORY- of
csma. I've never seen someone so disliked, almost hated, in a news group
before. He has the ability to turn just about any person against him in
just a few posts. On usenet, trolls do this daily, but the funny part
with Michael is that I actually think he DOESN'T consider himself be a
troll - damn what -EVERYONE ELSE- is calling him. Obviously they are
wrong. Only Tholen himself can match this behaviour." 18 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/51c0735c774215c2
118- sav: "You really need to take a rest somewhere nice. Honestly, even
the nutters who hang out down on Brighton seafront made more sense than
this. You been doing drugs or something?" 25 May 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1b251baa5c641370
119- Sean Burke: If you're dumb enough to respond to snit, you're
probably dumb enough to click on a spam attachment that promises to
remove smut from your harddrive." 21 Jan 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e166032d8959c0e1
120- Sermo Malifer (COLA):
Snit: "Why do so many people in COLA argue *against* me..."
Sermo Malifer: "Because you're a narcissistic troll who posts trash just
to get people talking about you." 21 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5ddf14f502e9b3f1
121- spike1: "As for the original post, there's plenty of reason thought
and criteria. The reason is snit's here. The thought is probably to show
everyone here just how bad a troll snit is." 03 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c797d640e3b9fc12
122- ShutterBugz: "so snit-zel has some kind of problem expressing anger,
i guess. he has to vent his frustrations in other ways. and he thinks
he's making sense: well the syntax is there and he figures he's pretty
smart. indeed, he tells us, he's done the personality tests and the iq
tests and he's okay! aaaaahhhhh, you see he's soooooooo well adjusted."
3 Mar 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7f9fa1cf90490298
123- Steel (COLA): "You may not like the game, but nevertheless, it's
just a game. You play a game yourself don't kid yourself." 14 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/be1f49165984c350
124- Steve Carroll: "Snit isn't much more than a one trick pony and not
telling the whole story is one of his two main tricks. His other main
trick is to outright lie. Sprinkle in a bit of denial and you've gone a
long way towards defining his MO. The idea that Snit admits to his
errors is one of the biggest jokes on usenet." 28 Feb 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0cc84ece10726aac
125- Steve Mackay: "Just killfile Snit, the dishonest piece of elephant
dung, and all would go away. Sure, I got caught up in the "Snit Circus",
but then the cotton candy began to sour, and CSMA begun to smell like
elephant dung." 18 Aug 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9fc11094133dfcdf
126- Steven de Mena: "Sorry, you have now lost all credibility with me
for your rediculous argument regarding this." 26 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1c8777d39c34e293
127- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost
all self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses'
when referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have
fallen so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)." 27 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3edd9ab69425a6c5
128- Stuart Krivis: "You might as well just give up and plonk him then. A
snit is a snit is a snit and always will be." 15 Aug 2006 (post not
available except in reply)
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5b382420a696f140
129- Tattoo Vampire (COLA): "In other words, in another attempt to troll,
you made yourself look like a fool. Again". 28 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b2676d3540e09f38
130- thanatoid: "Is business/personal life/etc. SO bad that you had to
create Snit? I really thought higher of you until Snit came in here, in
fact I find your site very nice and wish there was a shop like yours
where I live (well, I /think/...) Or is Snit really just someone whose HD
you accidentally wiped? Either way, it seems to have created a lot of,
for lack of a better word, unpleasantness - just from looking at today's
headers." 02 Jul 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/24hoursupport.helpdesk/msg/1c43a7415c97bfa1
131- The Lost Packet (COLA): "well, he's found a seat in my killbin, I
can't be doing with him." 27 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2007526a552b3322
132- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, Shit. You're the one
lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they provide
no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse still, you
fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to portray the
argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls that inhabit CSMA,
Shit. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than you are." 23 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d488596b57132124
133- Thufir: "You can "prove" that no one has disproved your "proof"?
Again, your assertion that no one has done so is even *less* convincing
than your claim that some PDF "proves" whatever point you're trying to
make precisely because I'm familiar with your MO. That is, you're a dumb-
ass who would claim that that something is proved when it's not, and who
would ignore counter-examples disproving your contention. I don't know
what this *ages old* thread is about, but I know that you're full of
shit." 21 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5114623055c01092
134-Tim Adams: "I'd kill file you but then I'd miss the fun. you see, you
never cease to amaze me at just how stupid you really are. Why just the
other day I had a great laugh when I saw you, the king of liars (in this
NG anyway) calling somebody else a liar." 13 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/40c7f9407179ff2a
135- Tim Crowley: "I don't know - I think you might have more compassion.
Snit is sick. He needs help. This is the only way the poor sick fool can
get attention. My fucking God, he's taken to hanging out with and
supporting racist pig fuckers like MuahMuah. It is true that no-one likes
him and those that pretend they do are just using him or don't know him -
but come on- it's not his fault. He's sick. Have some compassion, eh? All
these idiot trolls, Zara, Stew, Tommy, MuaaaahMuaaah, and Snit - they are
all so alike. I pity each and every one of them" 19 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/67f0f174110bfa0a
136- Tim Smith: "No, he didn't, and there is no reasonable way you could
actually believe he lied. You are purely trying to troll here." 14 Apr
2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/6e3cfd9240ac4871
137- Timberwoof: "Plonk, Snit." 23 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/40c8df070c3e776c
138- tom_elam: "Killfile Steve C. and Snit" 07 Jul 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b50d0c973d21d995
139- TomB (COLA): "No Snit, you were flat out lying in an attempt to make
me look bad. Do you really have to sink to that level in order to 'be
right'? If so, you're pathetic. And I don't say this because I like to
say it." 07 Feb 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/43263f575ac40353
140- Tom Bates: "Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of
your Circus acts?" 20 Feb 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/25f0e481b605e71f
141- Tommy: "In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop
polluting the world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You
give Mac advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded!
That also goes for all that bullshit on your website" 11 Jun 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/03610d2080321d33
142- Tony(UK) (COLA): "Your email address in your headers just about sums
the Linux world up. Nothing to do with the OS, it is the *uckwits
involved in the whole arena and have posted before on this. If in doubt,
deride, insult and attack. Look inwardly carefully before judging me."
10 Dec 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/533042ed18cefba3
143- TravelinMan: "I still can't figure out what's wrong with Snit. Most
people have him kill-filed and the few who don't mostly restrict their
responses to 'why don't you go away, no one wants you here'. Just what
would keep someone in this group with all of that animosity? Must be some
kind of severe mental illness." 17 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/45197fbb46d491df
144- Wally: "Because by your own admission "honor and honesty" are
nothing more than a "game" to you, as such not only do you wish to define
the rules, but no doubt you will also attempt to alter or bend the rules
when inevitably things do not go to your liking, for this reason I doubt
anyone would be foolish enough to play your game." 16 May 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b9b3ed1ee20e5220
145- WhoMe: "F michael IS a teacher, it's no wonder he's home more than
he's anywhere near a classroom".
146- William Poaster: "Good grief. If anyone's having a mental breakdown
it's the Prescott Computer Guy, Michael Snit Glasser. What a f#cked up
mess he is." 29 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/914d1e74855fb461
147- William R. Walsh: "Now, if you'll excuse me, and accept my sincere
apologies for this, PLONK! Feel proud about that. You're the first person
to be plonked from my new computer! :-) " 10 Feb 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/313c7368f6369c49
148- Woofbert: "*Plonk*" 14 Jun 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/436e6b5333d747e0
149- zara: "Look - I'm not into combing through thousands of posts, to
prove what was said or not said - I leave stuff like that to people
without lives, like Snit. But it is assuredly, in the record. Ping Snit
to do a search - you will flatter him, and give meaning to his tawdry
little life." 25 Oct 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a1d4fc7120a6a538
150- Zaren Ankleweed: "And with that, Snit goes in the global killfile.
No subject, no author, no nothing. Buh-bye". 11 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/12f7c34f24d43624
151- Znu: "The Snit Circus has gotten particularly bad as of late. When I
set up my filters to kill all of Snit's posts, plus direct replies to
them (which is how I'm keeping things from now on), nearly 40% of the
most recent 1000 articles in CSMA go out the window. .... In all,
something like 50% of the traffic in this group is now related to Snit
insanity. .... I killfile Edwin because I don't have a patience to have
discussions with someone who deliberately tries to waste my time. But
watching *other people* tie him knots can be entertaining. The Snit-
related posts are not like this. They are endless repetitions of the
exact same material and/or arguments dating back *years* about who said
what." 20 Apr 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9244dd79c682b2d6
152- amicus_curious (COLA): "Where on earth do you get the idea that I am
arguing with you, little man? Is your name "Hadron"? Shoo! Go back to
your mail order business!" 29 May 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/00ee203fe6183b1b
153- nessuno (COLA):
Chris Ahlstrom: "Have you ever noticed that threads involving Snit, [...]
are a basically a waste of time?
nessuno: "Yep. I don't read them." 29 May 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2f997598f0e25f9d
154- Marti Van Lin (COLA): "I paid enough attention to Snit IMHO. I
killfiled him the very first month I started lurking COLA. I find his
nitpicking and immature behavior extremely annoying. I am not going to
torture myself reading his bullshit. Snit is also a proven liar. Remember
his retarded exif debacle." 08 Jul 2011
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d12622df3671359b
--
HPT
Gary Stewart
His posts are up to 1.2k in length.
He must be hitting the firewater again.
Hahaha!
--
7/31/2011 10:41:21 PM
Snit
7/31/11 7:42 PM:
I expect, now that I have called him out again, for his attacks and posting
of largely forged "quotes" to escalate again.
He *hates* when I point out his failure to support his accusation of
forgery... absolutely hates it.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Peter Köhlmann
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 16:31:39 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> High Plains Thumper stated in post j14j08$gn4$1...@dont-email.me on 7/31/11
>> 2:55 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>>>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls apart.
>>>>>> His freak-out against me started when he accused me for forging
>>>>>> videos and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had *no* evidence
>>>>>> for this and how others had even replicated what he claimed was
>>>>>> "forged", he completely freaked out.
>>>
>>> No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe with
>>> your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair; but alas,
>>> it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged "evidence".
>>> Again.
>>
>> You accused me of forging evidence... though when challenged on that
>> accusation your folded and cried like a baby...
Another bald faced lie. Naturally from the dishonest cretin Snit Michael
Glasser
He *did* produce the proof of Glasser forging evidence. And he naturally
ignored it, completely.
And therefore, HPT did not "fold and cry like a baby". That is just anopther
open lie from that Glasser twit
Snit
Show the proof you lying swine.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> TomB stated in post 201107312...@usenet.drumscum.be on 7/31/11
> 2:16 PM:
>> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>>
>> 8<
>>
>>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I
>>> think anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit
>>> that its standard GUI is great
>>
>> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI
>> consistency in MS Windows is a mess:
>>
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>>
>> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>>
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
>
> Not found.
Only that last one you mean? That's correct, because it's a pdf file
instead of a png file ;-) So the correct link is:
http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.pdf
> But, in any case, don't those pics show Windows in a non-default
> view where there is more inconsistencies?
No, this is all with default settings. It's a *lot* worse even when
you play with theming.
8<
--
Hippies.They're everywhere. They wanna save the earth, but all they do
is smoke pot and smell bad.
~ Eric Cartman
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>
>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
>> anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
>> standard GUI is great
>
> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI consistency
> in MS Windows is a mess:
>
> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>
> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>
> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
Forget about consistency. What speed and customizability? And you have to
pay through the nose for Windows Ultimate to get half the eye-candy you can
get from a Linux desktop.
Take a look at the new Control Panel in "detail" view. The entries are
alphabetized, but not per column. Per row. Still throws me off to have to
read left-to-right to find an entry. And, of course, the names of the
entries have changed (for what reason) since XP.
The senseless obfuscation of the shiny "new" Windows desktop.
>> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who are
>> totally blind to the downsides of choice,
>
> I'm sure that pretty much every GNU/Linux user in this group realizes
> that the immense amount of choice does have a number of downsides, and
> that not all computer users need those choices.
In fact, for a certain type, choices are completely ignored. They find one
path, and stick with it.
> A while back I had a talk with Snit about the possibility to have
> categories in the package manager that split up programs in three
> categories: the 'good', the 'bad' and the 'ugly'. The 'good' group
> would list only those package that have a very high degree of
> consistency with the default desktop environment of the distro in
> question. The 'bad' category would contain package with a certain
> degree of consistency, but with some clear issues. The 'ugly' group
> would list packages that are completely out of place (eg. pure X-based
> programs, or KDE programs on a Gnome-based distro).
>
> For me personally a system like that would not be useless, but the
> less tech-savvy user would get a clear indication about which programs
> are made for 'the system' and which are not, guiding them in making an
> informed decision about what to install, or at least make them aware
> of the consequences. It could even be a trigger for Free software
> developers to make their program integrate better with one of the two
> major desktop environments (which already is done to a large extent).
I think most noobs would stop, satisfied, at the Gnome, KDE, and Unity
desktops.
--
I accept chaos. I am not sure whether it accepts me. I know some people
are terrified of the bomb. But then some people are terrified to be seen
carrying a modern screen magazine. Experience teaches us that silence
terrifies people the most.
-- Bob Dylan
TomB
> TomB wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>>
>>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I
>>> think anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit
>>> that its standard GUI is great
>>
>> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI
>> consistency in MS Windows is a mess:
>>
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>>
>> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>>
>> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
>
> Forget about consistency. What speed and customizability?
GNU/Linux beats Windows hands-doen of course ;-)
> And you have to pay through the nose for Windows Ultimate to get
> half the eye-candy you can get from a Linux desktop.
Or to get not even a tenth of the environment options and features.
> Take a look at the new Control Panel in "detail" view. The entries
> are alphabetized, but not per column. Per row. Still throws me
> off to have to read left-to-right to find an entry.
They did that to the file manager too. Throws me off big time,
especially in file dialogs. Such madness to change this, and provide
no apparent option to change it back.
8<
--
Human beings are the only creatures that allow their
children to come back home.
~ Bill Cosby
RonB
> Forget about consistency.
This is Snit, the ultimate obsessive, you're talking about. He will never,
ever, EVER forget about it. It's the circular rut he lives in, and he's
worn it too deep to climb out. You can either ignore him, or circle in the
rut with him, there's no middle ground. No matter how many Logical ladders
you offer him, he won't use one to climb out on to the surface. His
"world" *is* the rut and he will walk in that same circle forever.
--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.6 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0
or Linux Mint 10
Snit
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201107312...@usenet.drumscum.be on 7/31/11
>> 2:16 PM:
>>> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>>>
>>> 8<
>>>
>>>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I
>>>> think anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit
>>>> that its standard GUI is great
>>>
>>> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI
>>> consistency in MS Windows is a mess:
>>>
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>>>
>>> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>>>
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
>>
>> Not found.
>
> Only that last one you mean? That's correct, because it's a pdf file
> instead of a png file ;-) So the correct link is:
>
> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.pdf
That one works.
>> But, in any case, don't those pics show Windows in a non-default
>> view where there is more inconsistencies?
>
> No, this is all with default settings. It's a *lot* worse even when
> you play with theming.
>
> 8<
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
What does "find the path" even mean... esp. in the context of having a
*system*?
>> A while back I had a talk with Snit about the possibility to have
>> categories in the package manager that split up programs in three
>> categories: the 'good', the 'bad' and the 'ugly'. The 'good' group
>> would list only those package that have a very high degree of
>> consistency with the default desktop environment of the distro in
>> question. The 'bad' category would contain package with a certain
>> degree of consistency, but with some clear issues. The 'ugly' group
>> would list packages that are completely out of place (eg. pure X-based
>> programs, or KDE programs on a Gnome-based distro).
>>
>> For me personally a system like that would not be useless, but the
>> less tech-savvy user would get a clear indication about which programs
>> are made for 'the system' and which are not, guiding them in making an
>> informed decision about what to install, or at least make them aware
>> of the consequences. It could even be a trigger for Free software
>> developers to make their program integrate better with one of the two
>> major desktop environments (which already is done to a large extent).
>
> I think most noobs would stop, satisfied, at the Gnome, KDE, and Unity
> desktops.
Irrelevant to the discussion... given that *none* of the things you just
listed are distros.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
> On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 06:04:31 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Forget about consistency.
>
> This is Snit, the ultimate obsessive, you're talking about. He will never,
> ever, EVER forget about it. It's the circular rut he lives in, and he's
> worn it too deep to climb out. You can either ignore him, or circle in the
> rut with him, there's no middle ground. No matter how many Logical ladders
> you offer him, he won't use one to climb out on to the surface. His
> "world" *is* the rut and he will walk in that same circle forever.
We all know you lost a debate, RonB... let it go.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
> On 2011-08-01, the following emerged from the brain of Chris Ahlstrom:
>> TomB wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of tactical:
>>>
>>>> Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I
>>>> think anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit
>>>> that its standard GUI is great
>>>
>>> Absolutely not. Here are just /some/ examples of how GUI
>>> consistency in MS Windows is a mess:
>>>
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/menus.png
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/deco.png
>>>
>>> This PDF file provides a more thorough comparison:
>>>
>>> http://cola.drumscum.be/win-vs-ubu.png
>>
>> Forget about consistency. What speed and customizability?
>
> GNU/Linux beats Windows hands-doen of course ;-)
There are areas where it does - but where are the System Preferences of a
distro? As the KDE and Gnome spat made very clear recently - they each
think of themselves as the "system". And neither is - hence the conflict.
>> And you have to pay through the nose for Windows Ultimate to get
>> half the eye-candy you can get from a Linux desktop.
>
> Or to get not even a tenth of the environment options and features.
>
>> Take a look at the new Control Panel in "detail" view. The entries
>> are alphabetized, but not per column. Per row. Still throws me
>> off to have to read left-to-right to find an entry.
>
> They did that to the file manager too. Throws me off big time,
> especially in file dialogs. Such madness to change this, and provide
> no apparent option to change it back.
>
> 8<
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
> (snip lies and idiocy)
Another stupid asshole claiming that there's some better way to
determine the optimal amount of choice than simply letting the free
market work
chrisv
>"Chris Ahlstrom" wrote:
>>
>> <sniff sniff> I smell fish.
>
>Genius!
Plonk!
chrisv
>Yes, desktop Linux could learn from OS X and Windows here.
>
>Although alternative OSes are not really liked here in c.o.l.a, I think
>anyone who's used something like Windows just has to admit that its
>standard GUI is great -- for users and developers.
And there's nothing stopping you from using it or developing for it.
Those who are "easily confused" or just want to be "safely in the
herd" have those options available to them, today.
So quit trying to limit the options of those who believe otherwise.
chrisv
> trolling fsckwit tactical:
>
>> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who are
>> totally blind to the downsides of choice,
>
>I'm sure that pretty much every GNU/Linux user in this group realizes
>that the immense amount of choice does have a number of downsides, and
>that not all computer users need those choices.
The troll is lying.
It's the routine ridiculous idiocy of taking things like "choice is
good" and dishonestly twisting them into "there are no drawbacks to
choice", when, in reality, *no one* is so stupid to think so.
Snit
5:41 AM:
A well designed UI is not there just for those who get "easily confused".
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
5:44 AM:
So what are some of the drawbacks in your view?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Gabriel Piccirilli
useless asshole "chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:so7d37lnkj3b3rbpu...@4ax.com...
shut the fsck up you useless stupid asshole.
Gary Stewart
> Forget about consistency. What speed and customizability? And you have to
> pay through the nose for Windows Ultimate to get half the eye-candy you can
> get from a Linux desktop.
And how many people really care?
Take a walk through the average office and you will see default
Windows desktops everywhere.
Watch on TV with shows like History Channel, Discovery, Science
Channel and so forth. The Windows default scheme is just about all
you see.
It's only in the Linux world where people obsess over eye candy.
Seeing the lack of quality applications the Linux world has I can
understand that.
> Take a look at the new Control Panel in "detail" view. The entries are
> alphabetized, but not per column. Per row. Still throws me off to have to
> read left-to-right to find an entry. And, of course, the names of the
> entries have changed (for what reason) since XP.
Take a person running kde and toss gnome at her and see what
happens.
At least with Windows just about everything is right in Control
Panel and it's pretty intuitive.
How long has it taken Linux to almost reach that point?
It's still not there BTW.
You admit to not being able to figure out iTunes so I wonder about
your abilities.
> The senseless obfuscation of the shiny "new" Windows desktop.
The multitudes of commercial quality applications that people
actually are interested in.
The hardware support for modern hardware.
The seamless interfacing with other Windows users and your day job
at the office.
etc....
>>> I've had countless arguments with fellow computer people who are
>>> totally blind to the downsides of choice,
>>
>> I'm sure that pretty much every GNU/Linux user in this group realizes
>> that the immense amount of choice does have a number of downsides, and
>> that not all computer users need those choices.
>
> In fact, for a certain type, choices are completely ignored. They find one
> path, and stick with it.
With Windows yes.
With Linux no.
Take a look at the typical Linux group and you will find:
"So what distribution are you running this week Jayne?"
"Oh I'm running Mandriva"
"That's cool, I was running Mandriva last week but now I'm running
Sabyon"
And so forth......
What a waste of time....
Why is Mandriva better than Saybon?
It goes on and on like that.
> I think most noobs would stop, satisfied, at the Gnome, KDE, and Unity
> desktops.
They stop alright.
Stop using Linux and toss the CD in the trash can as they go back to
Windows or OSX.
--
8/1/2011 10:50:29 AM
tactical
> TomB wrote:
>
>> trolling fsckwit tactical:
Real mature.
"Choice is good" is chanted like a mantra throughout the FOSS community.
People rarely talk about the exceptions to this generalisation, but if
somebody ever does (such as the people doing so in this thread), they tend
to get attacked by FOSS advocates.
Anyway, since you have resorted to childish insults, this is the last reply
you'll get from me.
chrisv
>Anyway, since you have resorted to childish insults, this is the last reply
>you'll get from me.
Oh, dear.
TomB
> AM:
8<
> As you have said:
>
> -----
> Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
> Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it is
> perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem hangs
> together. That perception is wrong.
> -----
>
> And, assuming you meant a coherent system, you were right.
I do not recall the exact context of that comment, but I likely was
referring to the availability of different desktop environments, and
applications specifically written for said environments.
> There is no coherent desktop Linux system - hence, no *system level
> choice* (or much less than there would be if there was a more
> coherent system.) I have offered examples of things where there
> choices and features are limited on desktop Linux because of this.
> Here is the list, again:
Oh, you're basically talking about having /features/ that are
available in most (if not all) desktop applications. Now, that's a
completely different discussion.
> * Services (as in adding ROT13 and All Caps to almost all programs)
> * PDF Services, proxy icons
> * Universal color selector
> * Media browser
> * Proxy icons
> * Path on task bar
All features of the Aqua graphical environment. I don't see what this
has to do with 'having choice', except for the notion that if you want
those specific features you'll have to use Aqua (and thus OSX) as your
desktop environment.
> * True System Preferences (Not KDE or Gnome preferences
> calling themselves that)
When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences' available
in Aqua are not that different from the 'system preferences' on Gnome
or KDE. They offer a subset of settings for the entire system. Just
like with Gnome or KDE, the Aqua 'system preferences' program doesn't
offer the option to configure every single bit of the entire system.
Instead it offers those system configuration options that the creators
of the graphical layer deemed relevant to the user.
> * Integrated backup like TimeMachine - at both file browser
> and application levels (restore things "in", say, your image
> organizer)
Again a feature. This has nothing to do with choice.
> * Consistent hotkeys for preferences, etc.
> * Consistent menu placement for preferences, etc.
As are offered by KDE and Gnome.
> * QuickLook throughout system
No idea what that is, but I suspect it's also merely a feature of the
graphical environment.
> * AppleScript / Automator
Also merely a feature.
> And maybe even having screencast and image tools which can isolate
> individual elements on the screen. Not sure that is possible with
> desktop Linux. Is it?
Of course.
8<
--
My luck is so bad that if I bought a cemetery, people would stop dying.
~ Ed Furgol
Peter Köhlmann
No. Except the proxy icons, all are available in KDE
>> * True System Preferences (Not KDE or Gnome preferences
>> calling themselves that)
Naturally Snot Glasser has to exclude those, even though he knows nothing
about them
> When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences' available
> in Aqua are not that different from the 'system preferences' on Gnome
> or KDE.
Actually, they aren't
> They offer a subset of settings for the entire system.
They offer the settings for the DEs plus a whole lot more.
KDE offers also a lot of networking settings, bluetooth settings, proxy
services etc etc
> Just
> like with Gnome or KDE, the Aqua 'system preferences' program doesn't
> offer the option to configure every single bit of the entire system.
No, it doesn't. Not by a loooong shot
> Instead it offers those system configuration options that the creators
> of the graphical layer deemed relevant to the user.
Few enough of them
>> * Integrated backup like TimeMachine - at both file browser
>> and application levels (restore things "in", say, your image
>> organizer)
As if that were exclusive to OSX. What a dimwit
> Again a feature. This has nothing to do with choice.
>
>> * Consistent hotkeys for preferences, etc.
>> * Consistent menu placement for preferences, etc.
Snot Glasser naturally has never looked at the hotkey screen for KDE
> As are offered by KDE and Gnome.
Right. More extensive than on OSX
>> * QuickLook throughout system
>
> No idea what that is, but I suspect it's also merely a feature of the
> graphical environment.
>
>> * AppleScript / Automator
>
> Also merely a feature.
And not a really useful one
>> And maybe even having screencast and image tools which can isolate
>> individual elements on the screen. Not sure that is possible with
>> desktop Linux. Is it?
>
> Of course.
>
> 8<
>
Well, Snot Glasser will dismiss it. It does not work in *exactly* the same
way as on OSX. So by definition, it has to be sub-standard
Snit
PM:
> On 2011-07-31, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201107311...@usenet.drumscum.be on 7/31/11 4:59
>> AM:
>
> 8<
>
>> As you have said:
>>
>> -----
>> Your concept of 'desktop Linux' or a distro being a 'system'.
>> Which it isn't. It's many systems. And I don't care how it is
>> perceived by users who don't know about how the ecosystem hangs
>> together. That perception is wrong.
>> -----
>>
>> And, assuming you meant a coherent system, you were right.
>
> I do not recall the exact context of that comment, but I likely was
> referring to the availability of different desktop environments, and
> applications specifically written for said environments.
Right: and there is no real "system". Of course, Peter insists that KDE and
Gnome apps are native on each other's environments - but so be it.
>> There is no coherent desktop Linux system - hence, no *system level
>> choice* (or much less than there would be if there was a more
>> coherent system.) I have offered examples of things where there
>> choices and features are limited on desktop Linux because of this.
>> Here is the list, again:
>
> Oh, you're basically talking about having /features/ that are
> available in most (if not all) desktop applications. Now, that's a
> completely different discussion.
Well, on OS X there is little choice to have or not have these system wide
features, though you can add all sorts of things to most of those (Services,
PDF Services, the color selector, etc.)
>> * Services (as in adding ROT13 and All Caps to almost all programs)
>> * PDF Services, proxy icons
>> * Universal color selector
>> * Media browser
>> * Proxy icons
>> * Path on task bar
>
> All features of the Aqua graphical environment. I don't see what this
> has to do with 'having choice', except for the notion that if you want
> those specific features you'll have to use Aqua (and thus OSX) as your
> desktop environment.
And the fact that these system choices are not really possible on desktop
Linux because, as you note, there is no real "system" to have these services
on. Again, think in terms of the KDE and Gnome teams each referring
(incorrectly) to their own settings as if they were system settings. They
*want* there to be system settings, but desktop Linux has not matured enough
for that to exist.
>> * True System Preferences (Not KDE or Gnome preferences
>> calling themselves that)
>
> When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences' available
> in Aqua are not that different from the 'system preferences' on Gnome
> or KDE.
Sure they are: the system preferences for OS X are, well, system
preferences.
The "system" preferences for KDE and Gnome are not for the system, but for
KDE and Gnome. This is pretty darn obvious.
> They offer a subset of settings for the entire system. Just like with Gnome or
> KDE, the Aqua 'system preferences' program doesn't offer the option to
> configure every single bit of the entire system. Instead it offers those
> system configuration options that the creators of the graphical layer deemed
> relevant to the user.
OS X system preferences apply to the system (well, also you use the same
area for account settings)... the KDE and Gnome "system" settings are not
for the system - hence the recent disagreement between the two over the use
of the term "system".
>> * Integrated backup like TimeMachine - at both file browser
>> and application levels (restore things "in", say, your image
>> organizer)
>
> Again a feature. This has nothing to do with choice.
Sure it does: this choice cannot exist as a system-wide choice on Linux,
because - as you note - there is no real system (no coordinated system, to
use my term).
>> * Consistent hotkeys for preferences, etc.
>> * Consistent menu placement for preferences, etc.
>
> As are offered by KDE and Gnome.
How many times do you have to be told those are not desktop systems (that
would be Ubuntu or PCLOS or the like). This is a copout you repeatedly run
to... looking at some subset of the system and acting like it represents the
whole system.
>> * QuickLook throughout system
>
> No idea what that is, but I suspect it's also merely a feature of the
> graphical environment.
It is a quick way of looking at content. It is something available to
pretty much any program on the system.
Anyway, here is some info on the system wide feature:
<http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/os_x_lion_new_quick_look_features/>
>> * AppleScript / Automator
>
> Also merely a feature.
No kidding! But it is a *system wide* feature - it works throughout the
system.
You are ignoring that point. Repeatedly.
>> And maybe even having screencast and image tools which can isolate
>> individual elements on the screen. Not sure that is possible with
>> desktop Linux. Is it?
>
> Of course.
What tools? For example, if I take a screenshot of Ubuntu and later want to
have each window as a separate layer in GIMP (even those windows that were
partially covered), what tool would I use? Would love to see this - and had
no idea it was possible on desktop Linux.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
One: KDE is not the *system*.
Two: I would love to see evidence of this.
* Looking up "KDE Media Browser" I find nothing like the OS X media browser
- but maybe it has a different name? More likely: Peter K. simply has no
idea what he is talking about.
Same thing for System Services and others.
>>> * True System Preferences (Not KDE or Gnome preferences
>>> calling themselves that)
>
> Naturally Snot Glasser has to exclude those, even though he knows nothing
> about them
Note: Peter is, again, showing his ignorance - showing no sign of even
knowing KDE and Gnome just had a spat over use of the term "System
Settings".
>> When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences' available
>> in Aqua are not that different from the 'system preferences' on Gnome
>> or KDE.
>
> Actually, they aren't
Of course they are - hence the spat between KDE and Gnome.
>> They offer a subset of settings for the entire system.
>
> They offer the settings for the DEs plus a whole lot more.
> KDE offers also a lot of networking settings, bluetooth settings, proxy
> services etc etc
Lovely... and not in dispute.
>> Just
>> like with Gnome or KDE, the Aqua 'system preferences' program doesn't
>> offer the option to configure every single bit of the entire system.
>
> No, it doesn't. Not by a loooong shot
Irrelevant.
>> Instead it offers those system configuration options that the creators
>> of the graphical layer deemed relevant to the user.
>
> Few enough of them
>
>>> * Integrated backup like TimeMachine - at both file browser
>>> and application levels (restore things "in", say, your image
>>> organizer)
>
> As if that were exclusive to OSX. What a dimwit
Can you point to that feature in, say, Ubuntu or PCLOS?
Of course not... Peter K. has no idea what he is talking about.
>> Again a feature. This has nothing to do with choice.
>>
>>> * Consistent hotkeys for preferences, etc.
>>> * Consistent menu placement for preferences, etc.
>
> Snot Glasser naturally has never looked at the hotkey screen for KDE
Once again, Peter confuses the idea of a distro (the system) with that of
KDE. Is he *ever* right? Ever?
>> As are offered by KDE and Gnome.
>
> Right. More extensive than on OSX
Nope, but nice try!
>>> * QuickLook throughout system
>>
>> No idea what that is, but I suspect it's also merely a feature of the
>> graphical environment.
>>
>>> * AppleScript / Automator
>>
>> Also merely a feature.
>
> And not a really useful one
LOL! Peter K., wrong on every point he makes. Amazing.
>>> And maybe even having screencast and image tools which can isolate
>>> individual elements on the screen. Not sure that is possible with
>>> desktop Linux. Is it?
>>
>> Of course.
>>
>> 8<
>>
>
> Well, Snot Glasser will dismiss it. It does not work in *exactly* the same
> way as on OSX. So by definition, it has to be sub-standard
So point to the tools. I would love to see them. Note: I never said they
do not exist... but since Peter now says they do, I bet they do not. After
all, he is *never* right.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> TomB stated in post 201107311...@usenet.drumscum.be on 8/1/11 12:37
> PM:
8<
>> When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences'
>> available in Aqua are not that different from the 'system
>> preferences' on Gnome or KDE.
>
> Sure they are: the system preferences for OS X are, well, system
> preferences.
>
> The "system" preferences for KDE and Gnome are not for the system,
> but for KDE and Gnome. This is pretty darn obvious.
Honestly, did you even looked at what's available in the system
settings of both environments? No, they don't offer a way to configure
every single bit of the underlying system, but neither does OSX.
There's an awful lot of UNIX goodness under the hood that is not
touched at all by the graphical shell on both GNU/Linux and OSX.
In any case, the system settings on KDE or Gnome are *not* just for
KDE or Gnome, but for the complete graphical shell *plus* the relevant
options (as seen by the developers) for configuring the underlying
system.
--
Mr. Torture brings pain
To the housewives in Spain
~ Helloween
Snit
> On 2011-08-01, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201107311...@usenet.drumscum.be on 8/1/11 12:37
>> PM:
>
> 8<
>
>>> When looking at the bigger picture, the 'system preferences'
>>> available in Aqua are not that different from the 'system
>>> preferences' on Gnome or KDE.
>>
>> Sure they are: the system preferences for OS X are, well, system
>> preferences.
>>
>> The "system" preferences for KDE and Gnome are not for the system,
>> but for KDE and Gnome. This is pretty darn obvious.
>
> Honestly, did you even looked at what's available in the system
> settings of both environments?
Of course.
> No, they don't offer a way to configure
> every single bit of the underlying system, but neither does OSX.
Irrelevant.
> There's an awful lot of UNIX goodness under the hood that is not
> touched at all by the graphical shell on both GNU/Linux and OSX.
Irrelevant.
> In any case, the system settings on KDE or Gnome are *not* just for
> KDE or Gnome, but for the complete graphical shell *plus* the relevant
> options (as seen by the developers) for configuring the underlying
> system.
Slightly relevant... but nobody said they would not overlap.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> Peter Köhlmann stated:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>>>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls
>>>>>>>> apart. His freak-out against me started when he accused me for
>>>>>>>> forging videos and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had
>>>>>>>> *no* evidence for this and how others had even replicated what he
>>>>>>>> claimed was "forged", he completely freaked out.
>>>>>
>>>>> No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe
>>>>> with your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair;
>>>>> but alas, it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged
>>>>> "evidence". Again.
>>>>
>>>> You accused me of forging evidence... though when challenged on that
>>>> accusation your folded and cried like a baby...
>>
>> Another bald faced lie. Naturally from the dishonest cretin Snit
>> evidence. And he naturally ignored it, completely. And therefore, HPT
>> that Glasser twit
>
> Show the proof you lying swine.
Oh, so now going from falsely calling people crybabies for revealing
Snit's trolling to racially charged language, eh, Michael Glasser?
127- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost
all self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses'
when referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have
fallen so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)." 27 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3edd9ab69425a6c5
--
HPT
Snit
PM:
> Snit wrote:
>> Peter K�hlmann stated:
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>>>>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ask him to support any of his claims and he completely falls
>>>>>>>>> apart. His freak-out against me started when he accused me for
>>>>>>>>> forging videos and screenshots - and when I pointed out he had
>>>>>>>>> *no* evidence for this and how others had even replicated what he
>>>>>>>>> claimed was "forged", he completely freaked out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one freaked out, Snit Michael Glasser. You would like to believe
>>>>>> with your wildest imagination that it caused me such deep despair;
>>>>>> but alas, it didn't. You made a fool of yourself with your forged
>>>>>> "evidence". Again.
>>>>>
>>>>> You accused me of forging evidence... though when challenged on that
>>>>> accusation your folded and cried like a baby...
>>>
>>> Another bald faced lie. Naturally from the dishonest cretin Snit
>>> Michael Glasser. He *did* produce the proof of Glasser forging
>>> evidence. And he naturally ignored it, completely. And therefore, HPT
>>> did not "fold and cry like a baby". That is just another open lie from
>>> that Glasser twit
>>
>> Show the proof you lying swine.
>
> Oh, so now going from falsely calling people crybabies for revealing
> Snit's trolling to racially charged language, eh, Michael Glasser?
If you *could* "reveal" your accusations to be true, you would... just as
Peter would.
And neither of you do. Ever.
But none of the herd will *ever* call you on this. Ever.
And then they whine when they are grouped as a "herd". Oh well.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> Show the proof you lying swine.
>> Oh, so now going from falsely calling people crybabies for revealing
>> Snit's trolling to racially charged language, eh, Michael Glasser?
>
> If you *could* "reveal" your accusations to be true, you would... just
> as Peter would.
You are more stupid than I thought.
65- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks. You
make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
liar and a hypocrite and you always have been." 14 Jul 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d1e3f9ac5c72c6ee
--
HPT