Hands-on: GNOME 3.4 arrives, introducing significant design changes

[Snit]

<http://arst.ch/t5b>
-----
Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in
the original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
introduces a new application style that promises to make the
desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
language of GNOME Shell.
-----

Ah, make the system more consistent. Hmmm, has anyone in COLA suggested
that as an important thing? Anyone? Ah, yes, me... only to have the herd
mock me for it. But the Gnome developers get it.

-----
The result is a more distinctive desktop with a more visually
coherent appearance, but there are still some rough edges and
pieces that don't fit well. The transformation of the
application stack will be gradual, following the incremental
model that is typical of GNOME's development culture. That
poses some challenges because it will mean less consistency
between applications over the next few cycles until the
effort is complete.
...
One problem with the way this feature has been implemented in
GNOME 3.4, however, is that applications that haven't been
updated with the new style still show their titlebar when
maximized. The inconsistency is jarring, but will
theoretically be less of an issue in future releases as more
applications are updated to the new style.
-----

Transitions sometimes lead to inconsistencies - and while these clearly come
with down sides, if they are done with a user-based reason and a goal behind
it then at least it makes sense. Again, the Gnome team gets the very things
the herd mocks me for.

-----
Having the application's functionality split across two
completely separate menus does not constitute a usability
improvement. The new model works fine in simple applications
where you can just assume that any feature not exposed
directly in the navigation bar is in the top panel menu, but
the model falls apart when the user has to start guessing
about which menu will contain the feature they are searching
for.
-----

Microsoft is moving away from menu bars... moving to the Ribbon UI. Without
really getting what MS is doing, too many OSS projects are also getting rid
of the menu - but without a good replacement (whatever your feelings are for
the Ribbon, it does replace the menu bar and toolbars by combining them).
Ubuntu's Unity is doing some of the same.

-----
Under the hood, GNOME's underlying Gtk+ development toolkit
also got several improvements. ... The toolkit's support for
CSS theming has also improved, which has in turn made it
possible to deliver more native-looking theming on Windows,
...
-----

Again: being consistent with the *system*... something I note the importance
of and the herd argues against me about. But the Gnome team gets the value.
Another sign of the lack of technical understanding of the herd.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[TomB]

On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:

><http://arst.ch/t5b>
> -----
> Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
> desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in the
> original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
> introduces a new application style that promises to make the
> desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
> language of GNOME Shell.
> -----
>
> Ah, make the system more consistent. Hmmm, has anyone in COLA
> suggested that as an important thing? Anyone? Ah, yes, me... only
> to have the herd mock me for it. But the Gnome developers get it.

Suggestion: work on your comprehensive reading skills.

Another suggestion: try to establish your personal definition of
"system" wrt. GNU/Linux and its distributions.

After that: whine on, but in a more coherent way.

Thanks.

[cc]

On Monday, April 2, 2012 12:48:51 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> <http://arst.ch/t5b>
> -----
> Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
> desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in
> the original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
> introduces a new application style that promises to make the
> desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
> language of GNOME Shell.
> -----
>
> Ah, make the system more consistent. Hmmm, has anyone in COLA suggested
> that as an important thing? Anyone? Ah, yes, me... only to have the herd
> mock me for it. But the Gnome developers get it.
>

All this very obvious usability improvement coinciding with a very obvious increase in Linux usage:

https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/51f96a03d287f401?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

Oh wait.

Your idiocy aside, "consistency" won't bring users to Linux.


--
"You both have the same IP address: 10.151.167.2" - Snit

[Snit]

TomB stated in post 201204022...@usenet.drumscum.be on 4/2/12 11:36
AM:

Ah, a non-specific insult... a great way to try to put me on the defensive
without having any real problem for you to find... and you keep the herd
happy!

TomB, you have become a great herd member... insisting I am wrong when you
cannot point out where or how or why. This is what you did with the whole
Stallman BS: insisted I was wrong based on - and nothing more - you could
not find anyone who agreed with me (the fact you also could not find anyone
who had found a flaw in my quoting of Stallman nor my noting how repulsive
his comments are completely escaped you - or so you claimed). I will say,
however, that once you read what Stallman said you finally admitted you do
not agree with him either - though you refused to offer any specifics. As I
noted, you are beholden to the herd... to even note you disagree is a risk,
to be specific would mean you would have to be honest and complete... and
that is something he herd would not allow!

And now, with this... just more non-specific BS. Before you try to come up
with something, yes, I am very well aware that for the Gnome people to try
to make their own "house" better does not make the systems the Gnome tools
are used on suddenly become Gnome-only. The distros still are going to
struggle with the weaknesses I have talked about many times... but since I
did not mention it in the post you responded to, let me guess, *that* is the
area where you shall pretend I am showing some level of ignorance. Right?

Uh oh. I just called TomB on his game. Now he will slink off and pretend
there is some other horrible thing I have missed... but never say what. Ah,
what a good cult-like herd member he has grown to be. There was a time,
TomB, when you showed some independent thought and some ability to step
outside what the herd demanded of you. Sadly it appears those days are
over.

I would love to have you prove me wrong. But the chances of that are slim,
and we both know it.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
4996427.585.1333399476769.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yno21 on 4/2/12
1:44 PM:

See: you lash out at others to try to feel better about yourself.

But usability and better productivity are needed if the goal is to bring
more users to desktop Linux. The idea that this is even in debate is silly.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

Neither will the $0 cost, the source code, the Live CD/DVD, the backing
of IBM, a free office suite, or a nude supermodel begging you to find
the Linux-installed USB drive hidden on/in her naked body...

[TomB]

On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
> TomB stated in post 201204022...@usenet.drumscum.be on 4/2/12 11:36
> AM:
>
>> On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> <http://arst.ch/t5b>
>>> -----
>>> Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
>>> desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in
>>> the original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
>>> introduces a new application style that promises to make the
>>> desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
>>> language of GNOME Shell.
>>> -----
>>>
>>> Ah, make the system more consistent. Hmmm, has anyone in COLA
>>> suggested that as an important thing? Anyone? Ah, yes, me...
>>> only to have the herd mock me for it. But the Gnome developers
>>> get it.
>>
>> Suggestion: work on your comprehensive reading skills.
>>
>> Another suggestion: try to establish your personal definition of
>> "system" wrt. GNU/Linux and its distributions.
>>
>> After that: whine on, but in a more coherent way.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Ah, a non-specific insult...

No, a very specific accusation. You're whining and lying. Again. About
the same old bullshit.

8<

> And now, with this... just more non-specific BS. Before you try to

> come up with something (...)

I don't have to "try" to come up with something. You, dear sir, are
simply lying when you claim that COLA regulars mock you for noting
that desktop environments such as Gnome strive to offer a consistent
and unified "system". COLA folks generally have not, and never will,
argue against that. COLA folks *know* that the goal of desktop
environments such as Gnome and KDE is to offer a consistent and
unified environment, despite your claim that they don't (another lie
indeed).

And you, dear sir, are double talking by one time arguing against
Gnome being a system ("the distro is the system"), and other times
(when it fits your silly agenda) call it a system yourself.

[Hadron]

Certainly a well developed consistent UI would bring new users : most
people I know who use Linux for the first time are aghast at the general
mess that is keyboard driven UI.

[Foster]

It's in Stallman's beard!!!!!!!!

Now, whether it's worth diving in there for a $10.00 USB drive
depends upon the "winner".

[DFS]

Just don't call it 'Linux'! It's 'Guhnoo-slash-Linux' goddammit!

[Snit]

TomB stated in post 201204030...@usenet.drumscum.be on 4/3/12 12:06

AM:

> On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201204022...@usenet.drumscum.be on 4/2/12 11:36
>> AM:
>>
>>> On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>> <http://arst.ch/t5b>
>>>> -----
>>>> Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
>>>> desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in
>>>> the original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
>>>> introduces a new application style that promises to make the
>>>> desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
>>>> language of GNOME Shell.
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> Ah, make the system more consistent. Hmmm, has anyone in COLA
>>>> suggested that as an important thing? Anyone? Ah, yes, me...
>>>> only to have the herd mock me for it. But the Gnome developers
>>>> get it.
>>>
>>> Suggestion: work on your comprehensive reading skills.
>>>
>>> Another suggestion: try to establish your personal definition of
>>> "system" wrt. GNU/Linux and its distributions.
>>>
>>> After that: whine on, but in a more coherent way.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>

>> Ah, a non-specific insult... a great way to try to put me on the defensive
>> without having any real problem for you to find... and you keep the herd
>> happy!
>

> No, a very specific accusation. You're whining and lying. Again. About
> the same old bullshit.
>
> 8<

TomB: Herd stroking. Boring.

>> TomB, you have become a great herd member... insisting I am wrong when you
>> cannot point out where or how or why. This is what you did with the whole
>> Stallman BS: insisted I was wrong based on - and nothing more - you could not
>> find anyone who agreed with me (the fact you also could not find anyone who
>> had found a flaw in my quoting of Stallman nor my noting how repulsive his
>> comments are completely escaped you - or so you claimed). I will say,
>> however, that once you read what Stallman said you finally admitted you do
>> not agree with him either - though you refused to offer any specifics. As I
>> noted, you are beholden to the herd... to even note you disagree is a risk,
>> to be specific would mean you would have to be honest and complete... and
>> that is something he herd would not allow!
>>

>> And now, with this... just more non-specific BS. Before you try to come up

>> with something, yes, I am very well aware that for the Gnome people to try to
>> make their own "house" better does not make the systems the Gnome tools are
>> used on suddenly become Gnome-only. The distros still are going to struggle
>> with the weaknesses I have talked about many times... but since I did not
>> mention it in the post you responded to, let me guess, *that* is the area
>> where you shall pretend I am showing some level of ignorance. Right?
>>
>> Uh oh. I just called TomB on his game. Now he will slink off and pretend
>> there is some other horrible thing I have missed... but never say what. Ah,
>> what a good cult-like herd member he has grown to be. There was a time,
>> TomB, when you showed some independent thought and some ability to step
>> outside what the herd demanded of you. Sadly it appears those days are over.
>>
>> I would love to have you prove me wrong. But the chances of that are slim,
>> and we both know it.
>

> I don't have to "try" to come up with something. You, dear sir, are
> simply lying when you claim that COLA regulars mock you for noting
> that desktop environments such as Gnome strive to offer a consistent
> and unified "system". COLA folks generally have not, and never will,
> argue against that.

They mock the importance of consistency... and deny the harm it causes to
productivity.

> COLA folks *know* that the goal of desktop environments such as Gnome and KDE
> is to offer a consistent and unified environment, despite your claim that they
> don't (another lie indeed).

And yet they argue against the value of consistency and the harm done to
productivity when it is lacking.

> And you, dear sir, are double talking by one time arguing against
> Gnome being a system ("the distro is the system"), and other times
> (when it fits your silly agenda) call it a system yourself.

Nope. But, hey, I did guess where your non-specific trolling was heading.
Shows I understand your herd-stroking well.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Foster]

I have to give Stallman credit.
He's been able to earn a very tidy living spewing the nonsense he
does.

He saw an opportunity, the down trodden, social outcast Linux/FOSS
community, and he is milking it for all it's worth.

In one sense, Stallman is the ultimate capitalist.
See an opportunity to make money and go for it.

[Snit]

Hadron stated in post vud37py...@news.eternal-september.org on 4/3/12
2:06 AM:

Absolutely.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

He would probably be wealthy as a commercial developer.

> He saw an opportunity, the down trodden, social outcast Linux/FOSS
> community, and he is milking it for all it's worth.

"I can't make this printer work the way I want it to, and they won't
give me the code?!?! Where's my freedom and my rights?!!?!
waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!


I think the whole concept of "software freedom" is absurd.

> In one sense, Stallman is the ultimate capitalist.
> See an opportunity to make money and go for it.

Yep. But from what I can tell, he lives a fairly spartan lifestyle.

[Foster]

No question about it.
He's a very smart man.

>
>> He saw an opportunity, the down trodden, social outcast Linux/FOSS
>> community, and he is milking it for all it's worth.
>
>
> "I can't make this printer work the way I want it to, and they won't
> give me the code?!?! Where's my freedom and my rights?!!?!
> waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!
>
>
> I think the whole concept of "software freedom" is absurd.

Me too :)

>
>
>> In one sense, Stallman is the ultimate capitalist.
>> See an opportunity to make money and go for it.
>
> Yep. But from what I can tell, he lives a fairly spartan lifestyle.

That's his persona.

[Snit]

Foster stated in post 1tff5byh5crke.1t2gnbsjnukzh$.d...@40tude.net on 4/3/12
9:27 AM:

...

>>> I have to give Stallman credit.
>>> He's been able to earn a very tidy living spewing the nonsense he
>>> does.
>>
>> He would probably be wealthy as a commercial developer.
>
> No question about it.
> He's a very smart man.

Yes: to be a cult leader you cannot be stupid... and while he may or may not
technically have a "cult" under him, there are clearly many cult-like
qualities of many of his followers.

>>> He saw an opportunity, the down trodden, social outcast Linux/FOSS
>>> community, and he is milking it for all it's worth.
>>
>>
>> "I can't make this printer work the way I want it to, and they won't
>> give me the code?!?! Where's my freedom and my rights?!!?!
>> waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!
>>
>>
>> I think the whole concept of "software freedom" is absurd.
>
> Me too :)

*People* should be free. Code is simply a tool. It makes no more sense to
talk about freedom for software than it does to talk about freedom for
hammers or bicycles. Now in some communities they do have bicycles where
you can use them for free... and that is great. The idea that code can be
used and share for free is great... and if Stallman and crew wish to protect
this code with an IP protection system such as the GPL that is great, too.
If they wanted to *really* make it "free" they would just make it public
domain... but they want to maintain some control over the code. That is
completely within their rights and a fine thing for them to want to do. I
have no problem with it - nor do I know of anyone who does. The herd's
paranoia over someone, somewhere, and even in groups trying to fight against
their rights to release their code under the GPL is just loony. Nobody (or
very, very few) are telling them not to! They have as much right to protect
their code as they wish as do others who want more restrictive IP licenses.

>>> In one sense, Stallman is the ultimate capitalist.
>>> See an opportunity to make money and go for it.
>>
>> Yep. But from what I can tell, he lives a fairly spartan lifestyle.
>
> That's his persona.

Would be interesting to see what really happens in his day to day life...
nto that I am suggesting anyone hire a PI to watch him or anything, just
saying it would be interesting.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

Then either the claims that GNOME developers have been improving the UI are false, or the claims the an improved UI would bring new users is false. Linux has held steady for years and years and years. So either there has been no improvement in the UI or users could care less about the UI and there are other more important issues.

I would certainly say that there have been some improvements in the UI, so why hasn't that lead to more people using Linux?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
9773164.1882.1333543114774.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbq18 on 4/4/12
5:38 AM:

Please show any support for this.

> Linux has held steady for years and years and years.

Gnome =/= Linux or even desktop Linux.

> So either there has been no improvement in the UI or users could care less
> about the UI and there are other more important issues.

The UI affects productivity, error reduction, enjoyment of a system, etc.
And *this*, you claim, are things people do not care about! How absurd.

Now I will say most people are not knowledgeable enough to judge UIs (and,
really, just looking at one is not sufficient, there is testing and the like
to be done). To your credit, you have made it clear you have no ability to
judge if UI elements are done well or poorly even when it is painfully
obvious to those of us with some knowledge in the area (and, yes, I am happy
to pull up the examples of inconsistency which *clearly* are problematic but
of which you repeatedly claimed to be unable able to judge).

> I would certainly say that there have been some improvements in the UI, so why
> hasn't that lead to more people using Linux?

If the percentage of users has remained roughly steady the number of people
using desktop Linux has grown... *more people are using desktop Linux*.

Amazing how even something that obvious escapes you.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

If an improved UI would bring in new users, then more people as a percentage would be using Linux. But they're not. So either the improved UI has no effect, or there is no improved UI.

Amazing how something even that obvious escapes you.

> > Linux has held steady for years and years and years.
>
> Gnome =/= Linux or even desktop Linux.

Irrelevant.

> > So either there has been no improvement in the UI or users could care less
> > about the UI and there are other more important issues.
>
> The UI affects productivity, error reduction, enjoyment of a system, etc.
> And *this*, you claim, are things people do not care about! How absurd.

I did not claim people don't care about it. I'm claiming there are other more important problems that are plaguing Linux. An improved UI will help Windows get more users. An improved UI will help Mac OS get more users. An improved UI will not do jack shit for getting Linux more users.

> Now I will say most people are not knowledgeable enough to judge UIs (and,
> really, just looking at one is not sufficient, there is testing and the like
> to be done). To your credit, you have made it clear you have no ability to
> judge if UI elements are done well or poorly even when it is painfully
> obvious to those of us with some knowledge in the area (and, yes, I am happy
> to pull up the examples of inconsistency which *clearly* are problematic but
> of which you repeatedly claimed to be unable able to judge).

Well that's a paragraph full of bullshit.

> > I would certainly say that there have been some improvements in the UI, so why
> > hasn't that lead to more people using Linux?
>
> If the percentage of users has remained roughly steady the number of people
> using desktop Linux has grown... *more people are using desktop Linux*.
>
> Amazing how even something that obvious escapes you.
>

More people are using every OS. So if it's held steady, improvements in the UI have done nothing to bring people to Linux. In your "very obvious correlation thread" you used a temporary rise in PERCENTAGE OF LINUX USERS and a supposed INCREASE IN FOCUS ON USABILITY to claim there was a "very obvious correlation" between more Linux users and an increased focus in usability. I'm speaking in the exact same terms now.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
3803667.1347.1333628890894.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynlq17 on 4/5/12
5:28 AM:

...
>>>> Certainly a well developed consistent UI would bring new users : most
>>>> people I know who use Linux for the first time are aghast at the general
>>>> mess that is keyboard driven UI.
>>>
>>> Then either the claims that GNOME developers have been improving the UI are
>>> false, or the claims the an improved UI would bring new users is false.
>>
>> Please show any support for this.
>
>
> If an improved UI would bring in new users, then more people as a percentage
> would be using Linux. But they're not. So either the improved UI has no
> effect, or there is no improved UI.

Again, as you were already told:

Gnome =/= desktop Linux.

But also notice how you moved your goal post from "bring new users" to "more
people as a percentage".

>
> Amazing how something even that obvious escapes you.

I get how you feel the need to belittle others to try to feel good about
yourself - but if you had read my message you would have seen how I very
much understood and discussed what you are claiming I did not understand.

You are, at the least, presenting yourself as being functionally illiterate.
You do this often. I note it. Then DFS claims I am "lying" but never shows
any counter evidence.

The two of you are funny.

>>> Linux has held steady for years and years and years.
>>
>> Gnome =/= Linux or even desktop Linux.
>
> Irrelevant.

Sure it is relevant! It is not as if people are using Gnome in a vacuum!
They are using *systems*, desktop Linux *systems*! No matter how consistent
or well designed Gnome and Gnome made programs are, if the *system* is a
mess it will not have that large of an affect.

And, of course, there are other factors, such as having software that people
need... and that is another area where desktop Linux is far behind the
competition. It is not as if Gnome improving its UI is sufficient to allow
desktop Linux as a whole to suddenly made major leaps in productivity,
error-reduction, etc. for users. For distros which are pure Gnome (or
nearly so) it will almost certainly benefit this (if you have the Gnome
tools improve in those areas then Gnome-based systems will improve in those
areas - not a hard concept... but will you get it?)

>>> So either there has been no improvement in the UI or users could care less
>>> about the UI and there are other more important issues.
>>
>> The UI affects productivity, error reduction, enjoyment of a system, etc.
>> And *this*, you claim, are things people do not care about! How absurd.
>
> I did not claim people don't care about it.

Above you say "So either there has been no improvement in the UI or users
could care less about the UI ..." But there *have* been improvements...
thus you are claiming "users could care less about the UI"

And you are wrong. They do care... even if they do not understand much
about the direct connections, they care about productivity, error-reduction,
and other such issues. They *do* care.

This is not to deny that there are other huge issues with desktop Linux and
its adoption (such as the applications available).

You live in such an amazing black and white world where either the UI is
important *or* the application set (or something... you are not saying) is
important. As noted: you and many in COLA have a poor understanding of
technical issues - in this case what you are missing is that there is a
combination of factors. The UI is *one* important factor. Clearly. Heck,
you claim to design UIs and now are showing you think users do not care
about them and dismissing any value of a good UI.

What a complete fool you are. Really: you are not only ignorant you pretend
to have knowledge in areas where you clearly do not. And you are boring...
keep your trolling on this interesting or be ignored... I am not interested
in your never-ending BS where you finally figure out you are wrong so you
start forging "quotes" and then making up stories about how you were merely
dishonestly "paraphrasing" (dishonest on two counts - one, to place a
"paraphrase" in quotes and, two, your "paraphrases" do not in any way
represent my views).

And you do this over and over - you get in over your head and then just
freak out and forge IDs (as described above... I am not saying you post as
"Snit", no matter how many times DFS lies about that).

> I'm claiming there are other more
> important problems that are plaguing Linux. An improved UI will help Windows
> get more users. An improved UI will help Mac OS get more users. An improved UI
> will not do jack shit for getting Linux more users.

Baseless comments noted.

>> Now I will say most people are not knowledgeable enough to judge UIs (and,
>> really, just looking at one is not sufficient, there is testing and the like
>> to be done). To your credit, you have made it clear you have no ability to
>> judge if UI elements are done well or poorly even when it is painfully
>> obvious to those of us with some knowledge in the area (and, yes, I am happy
>> to pull up the examples of inconsistency which *clearly* are problematic but
>> of which you repeatedly claimed to be unable able to judge).
>
> Well that's a paragraph full of bullshit.

Dodge noted.

>>> I would certainly say that there have been some improvements in the UI, so
>>> why
>>> hasn't that lead to more people using Linux?
>>
>> If the percentage of users has remained roughly steady the number of people
>> using desktop Linux has grown... *more people are using desktop Linux*.
>>
>> Amazing how even something that obvious escapes you.
>>
>
> More people are using every OS.

I am glad you understood my point there. Good!

> So if it's held steady, improvements in the UI have done nothing to bring
> people to Linux.

So you say. But your lack of evidence is telling... you are now admitting
more people are using desktop Linux... something you denied before. Then
you say that the UI has nothing to do with it... because... um... well...
um... it would matter for Windows or OS X but with Linux... um...

You get yourself stuck. And, before you freak out, nobody is denying the
importance of application selection and quality. Nobody.

> In your "very obvious correlation thread" you used a temporary rise in
> PERCENTAGE OF LINUX USERS and a supposed INCREASE IN FOCUS ON USABILITY to
> claim there was a "very obvious correlation" between more Linux users and an
> increased focus in usability. I'm speaking in the exact same terms now.

I already noted your move of goal posts. See: you are very repetitive.

Now if you are looking to see if the percentage is growing and seeing it is
not and thus saying the correlation I was speaking of is not, at least yet,
something that is as easy to see as it appeared based on the data at the
time, I can accept that. I accept the newer data without a problem.

In any case, as you respond you will snip most of the above and pretend it
does not exist. Your dishonesty is very predictable and boring. Be more
interesting or be ignored.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Thursday, April 5, 2012 10:21:24 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 3803667.1347.1333628890894.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynlq17 on 4/5/12
> 5:28 AM:
>
> ...
> >>>> Certainly a well developed consistent UI would bring new users : most
> >>>> people I know who use Linux for the first time are aghast at the general
> >>>> mess that is keyboard driven UI.
> >>>
> >>> Then either the claims that GNOME developers have been improving the UI are
> >>> false, or the claims the an improved UI would bring new users is false.
> >>
> >> Please show any support for this.
> >
> >
> > If an improved UI would bring in new users, then more people as a percentage
> > would be using Linux. But they're not. So either the improved UI has no
> > effect, or there is no improved UI.
>
> Again, as you were already told:
>
> Gnome =/= desktop Linux.

Irrelevant.

> But also notice how you moved your goal post from "bring new users" to "more
> people as a percentage".
> >

That is the only valid measurement. Another way of thinking is Linux has been adding new users at the same rate for the past decade plus, regardless of improvements. So how much impact have these UI improvements had? None! How much impact have ANY improvements had? None! The rate of people using Linux is pretty much a constant.

> > Amazing how something even that obvious escapes you.
>
> I get how you feel the need to belittle others to try to feel good about
> yourself -

Funny, I just copied your words...

>
> >>> Linux has held steady for years and years and years.
> >>
> >> Gnome =/= Linux or even desktop Linux.
> >
> > Irrelevant.
>

> No matter how consistent
> or well designed Gnome and Gnome made programs are, if the *system* is a
> mess it will not have that large of an affect.

No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that will change, but there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
22948454.257.1333644801643.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynuu4 on 4/5/12
9:53 AM:

As noted, you dodge points, ignore facts (such as the importance that Gnome
=/= desktop Linux), ignore your moving of goal posts, pretend my points are
yours (though, hey, at least you show some understanding - a step up for
you!), snip material you know is true but makes you embarrassed, and
otherwise show off your dishonesty and inability to hold a reasoned
conversation. If you can rise to the level of holding an adult
conversation, great... but I am not interested in your immature and ignorant
drivel. Respond to my past post again but do so *honesty* and you can keep
my attention. Other than that, you just bored me out of your trolling.

> In the future maybe that will change,
> but there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.

I have noted your black and white thinking before. You just demonstrated it
again. I bet you cannot even figure out how... you are just not mentally
capable of rising to show the depth of thought of a pre-teen.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Hadron]

cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:

>
> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements won't and
> haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that will change, but
> there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.

What total nonense.

New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God
you're dense at times. A more consisten UI will result in better
feedback, reviews etc and THAT will attract new users. Its really not
rocket science and is WHY the Gnome/KDE developers have been striving to
do just this.

[cc]

So where are these new users? Or have the "improvements" not resulted in a more consistent UI thus far? Once again, you're touting improvements and how they will bring in new users, BUT THERE ARE NO NEW USERS. It's the same as it ever was. Perhaps I'm dense at times, but I can see that Linux usage has remained steady while improvements have been made to the UI. So your idea that it will attract new users is fucking bullshit, and I have the facts to back it up. This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as this year and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI.

If all other things remain the same, what percentage of users would use Linux if GNOME/KDE (or both) developed the "best" UI ever? Some hypothetical perfect UI. Let's hear your guess.

My guess: 1%.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
20675102.616.1333652434313.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14 on 4/5/12
12:00 PM:

> On Thursday, April 5, 2012 2:09:41 PM UTC-4, Hadron wrote:
>> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements won't
>>> and
>>> haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that will change,
>>> but
>>> there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.
>>
>> What total nonense.
>>
>> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
>> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
>> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God
>> you're dense at times. A more consisten UI will result in better
>> feedback, reviews etc and THAT will attract new users. Its really not
>> rocket science and is WHY the Gnome/KDE developers have been striving to
>> do just this.
>
> So where are these new users?

You mean other than the ones you already acknowledged were moving to desktop
Linux... you know, when you noted that even with the growth of computer
users desktop Linux has managed to keep a fairly consistent percentage?

Or do those users no longer count?

In any case, there are at least some stats that point to desktop Linux
growing not just in terms of users but percent of users.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Web_clients>
OR <http://goo.gl/JRChK>

Averages from those they quote is 1.35%

<http://goo.gl/hgfDv>
From a year ago, the average was: 1.08%

So based on year-over-year stats from the stats Wikipedia collects, there
*has* been an uptick. And while the numbers themselves are still small, the
increase *in a year* is 25%. Yes, based on that data, which is likely the
best data we have, in the last year there has been a 25% increase in the
*percentage* of desktop Linux users.

Some have been focusing just on NetMarketShare. So here is there site:
<http://goo.gl/KM4Mc>
-----
Feb 2011: 0.96%
Feb 2012: 1.16%
-----

Again, about a 20% increase, though, to be fair, if you look at the most
recent data there seems to be a drop: <http://goo.gl/vxrvS>. Still, looking
at the *trend* from the last year shows an increase:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12.png>.

So, yes, desktop Linux usage share *seems*, based on our best data, to be
moving upward.

Now, of course, nobody is saying that the improvements in the UI is the only
cause of the upward trend, nor is anyone claiming that is the only
improvement needed (a common and important other example is the need for
improvements in applications, even outside of UI problems)

> Or have the "improvements" not resulted in a more consistent UI thus far? Once
> again, you're touting improvements and how they will bring in new users, BUT
> THERE ARE NO NEW USERS.

You claim is contrary to the data and even your own admission that the
percentage has stayed stable (though, as you have been shown, the data shows
the percentage is trending upward).

> It's the same as it ever was.

And you base this on...???

> Perhaps I'm dense at times, but I can see that Linux usage has remained steady
> while improvements have been made to the UI.

Well, good for you to note the improvements to the UI... but where dud you
get the idea that Linux usage has remained steady, when your *own* claims
indicate it is growing at least as fast as the market (and *better* data
than just your yapping shows it is growing even more)?

> So your idea that it will attract new users is fucking bullshit, and I have
> the facts to back it up.

Correction: you *claim* to have such facts but, as is your norm, you show a
poor understanding of the topic and are trying to pretend to be more
knowledgeable than you can show yourself to be.

> This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as this year
> and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI.

See above where the best data we have is discussed and where you are shown
there is, at least, a reported upward trend. But you will not admit to this
- once again, I have shown you that you are wrong... so you will go into
super defense and denial mode. This is very predictable.

> If all other things remain the same, what percentage of users would use Linux
> if GNOME/KDE (or both) developed the "best" UI ever? Some hypothetical perfect
> UI. Let's hear your guess.
>
> My guess: 1%.

Good to see you can make WAGs with such joy.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Thursday, April 5, 2012 5:15:30 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 20675102.616.1333652434313.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14 on 4/5/12
> 12:00 PM:
>
> >

> > It's the same as it ever was.
>
> And you base this on...???
>

Linux
April, 2010 1.08%
May, 2010 1.15%
June, 2010 1.10%
July, 2010 0.96%
August, 2010 0.87%
September, 2010 0.87%
October, 2010 0.89%
November, 2010 0.96%
December, 2010 1.00%
January, 2011 1.00%
February, 2011 0.96%
March, 2011 1.00%
April, 2011 0.99%
May, 2011 0.95%
June, 2011 1.00%
July, 2011 0.97%
August, 2011 1.07%
September, 2011 1.11%
October, 2011 1.19%
November, 2011 1.31%
December, 2011 1.41%
January, 2012 1.56%
February, 2012 1.16%
March, 2012 0.98%

It's waxed and waned, but always hovered around 1%. You're claiming a 25% increase in a year by taking two cherry picked points. Graph those percentages and then tell me there's been a steady increase in Linux usage.

That's why it's the same as it ever was. Sure, if you're a fucking moron and look at two months a year apart, maybe you WOULD think Linux usage has grown 25% in a year. But if you take a look at the numbers, you would see they've held steady, right down to the return to the norm last month.

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-04-05, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>
>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements won't and
>> haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that will change, but
>> there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.
>
> What total nonense.
>
> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God

What app does that? Hadron the liar.

--
It's a great paradox. |||
/ | \
Mac users aren't supposed to be capable of organizing their
own files with the Finder or browse the storage on a digital
camera yet they can be expected to track down their own QT
extensions with no real help from Apple.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
24931855.30.1333661227560.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbd16 on 4/5/12
2:27 PM:

1) As predicted, you snipped and ran from my comments.

2) Year-over-year data is not, as you claim, "two months apart". As you
make such a claim you present yourself as functionally illiterate.

3) Here is the year-over-year data, including trend line, that you snipped
and ran from (it clearly was contrary to your claims - hence, you run):
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12.png>.

4) Here is the trend line from your data, the very data you imply should
show, at best, a steady state:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12B.png>. Yeah, it
shows an upward trend line, too. Your own data. Again, it is contrary to
your claims so you will, predictable, snip and run.

Bottom line: you just shot yourself in the foot, again. You proved you are
clueless on the very topics you try to portray yourself to be knowledgeable
in. You cannot figure out trend lines nor even figure out what
year-over-year data means (you claimed it was data that was "two months
apart". Just amazing how functionally illiterate and, now, mathematically
incompetent you are.



--
🙈🙉🙊

[Chris Ahlstrom]

JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2012-04-05, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements won't and
>>> haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that will change, but
>>> there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.
>>
>> What total nonense.
>>
>> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
>> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
>> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God
>
> What app does that? Hadron the liar.

Liar? He's an idiot.

--
So you're too much of a fucking idiot to follow that link and see that
YOUR experiences are almost certainly unique or of no value to the
thousands who HAVE encountered errors and have gone about constructively
fixing them as the Envy guy did. Oh no. Wankers like you sit here
calling people liars and claiming it "works for you". Well most of us
know different.
-- "Hadron" <ie9223$d3m$2...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Peter Köhlmann]

And once again Hadron Snit Larry is making up shit.
Come on, you snittish dimwit, tell us what application is using C-w to
"format my drive". Or other such idiotic shortcuts.
Making up those lies is just showing that you are a clueless lying Snit

[Snit]

Peter Köhlmann stated in post jlm80s$6u3$1...@dont-email.me on 4/6/12 1:01 AM:

He never claimed anyone was using that specific example. The point is that
a well done, consistent UI that is handled at a system level with minimal
exceptions is a huge benefit to the user.

And while direct confusion is not the main concern (efficiency and error
reduction are), remember, Peter, you are one of the ones who showed you got
confused by the inconsistencies of different programs using "Quit" and
"Exit" to mean the same thing. The inconsistencies lead to you not
understanding what was happening on desktop Linux systems.

Peter Köhlmann:
-----
The apps with "Quit" do *not* exit, they continue to run
in the background
-----

You also showed you could not understand what was happening when things
acted inconsistently in terms of copy and paste, as I showed here:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/UbuntuCP.mov>. You, Peter, incorrectly
believed that such inconsistent and poorly done behavior was how things are
supposed to be on desktop Linux and even blamed me for not understanding,
when it is clear I am the one who understood *and documented* the problem:

Peter Köhlmann:
-----
You both show just *again* your incredible cluelessness. That is
*standard* X behaviour, you cretins. That Snot Michael Glasser
knows *nothing* about that is normal, he is the worst "IT teacher"
of all time. He knows nothing usefull about computing.
-----

Still, at other times you have also acknowledged it is poor practice to
install apps from different DEs:

Peter Köhlmann:
-----
Why would a user install apps from different DEs if he does
not need to?
-----

Yes, based on that comment of your it is clear you understand it *is* a
problem when things are inconsistent. Still, you generally present yourself
as someone who is too technically incompetent to understand such a simple
thing.

Then DFS comes to your "rescue" and insists that COLA folks tend to show
themselves as being technically competent. You, Peter, do anything but
that...



--
🙈🙉🙊

[William Poaster]

Heh, this should be good!

> Making up those lies is just showing that you are a clueless lying Snit

+1

--
Klingon Prime Directive: Shoot it!

Most people are sheep.  
Microsoft is very effective
at fleecing the flockers.

[Peter Köhlmann]

William Poaster wrote:

> Here is a facsimile from Peter Köhlmann who, on 6/4/2012 09:01, wrote:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements
>>>> won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that
>>>> will change, but there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.
>>>
>>> What total nonense.
>>>
>>> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
>>> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
>>> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God
>>> you're dense at times. A more consisten UI will result in better
>>> feedback, reviews etc and THAT will attract new users. Its really not
>>> rocket science and is WHY the Gnome/KDE developers have been striving to
>>> do just this.
>>
>> And once again Hadron Snit Larry is making up shit.
>> Come on, you snittish dimwit, tell us what application is using C-w to
>> "format my drive". Or other such idiotic shortcuts.
>
> Heh, this should be good!

/Should/ is the word. It will not be, because Hadron Snit Larry will not
bring a single example of idiotic shortcuts in linux applications.

Instead he will act as he always does: He will simply slink away when
confronted with his idiocy
He is, after Snit Michael Glasser, the worst liar ever to post in cola. He
never was able to back up a single claim that was declared as bullshit by
the linux users. Not *one* single claim of this type was *ever* backed up by
that snittish lying rat

[chrisv]

Peter Köhlmann wrote:

> Hadron quacked:

>>
>> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
>> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
>> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive".

Oh, is that *really* something that Linux users need to worry about,
Larry?

>And once again Hadron Snit Larry is making up shit.
>Come on, you snittish dimwit, tell us what application is using C-w to
>"format my drive". Or other such idiotic shortcuts.
>Making up those lies is just showing that you are a clueless lying Snit

That is some *ridiculous* anti-Linux FUD, even for the "true Linux
advocate" Hadron Quark.

[cc]

I did not claim that it was two months apart, dipshit. I said it was two months a year apart. You took Feb 2011 and Feb 2012 and claimed a 25% increase in usage.

> 3) Here is the year-over-year data, including trend line, that you snipped
> and ran from (it clearly was contrary to your claims - hence, you run):
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12.png>.
>
> 4) Here is the trend line from your data, the very data you imply should
> show, at best, a steady state:
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12B.png>. Yeah, it
> shows an upward trend line, too. Your own data. Again, it is contrary to
> your claims so you will, predictable, snip and run.
>

Already the trend is flattening out. Now that we added an extra year to your data, add another. Add eight more. See what happens when you add in enough data to cover those blips that happened the past few months? Or wait a few more months/years of 1% figures and watch the trend flatten out again.

So your stance is that Linux usage has been trending upward over the last 10+ years? Is that a new stance or something you've believed all along?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
19880181.231.1333715743486.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynku11 on 4/6/12
5:35 AM:

...

>>> It's waxed and waned, but always hovered around 1%. You're claiming a 25%
>>> increase in a year by taking two cherry picked points. Graph those
>>> percentages
>>> and then tell me there's been a steady increase in Linux usage.
>>>
>>> That's why it's the same as it ever was. Sure, if you're a fucking moron and
>>> look at two months a year apart, maybe you WOULD think Linux usage has grown
>>> 25% in a year. But if you take a look at the numbers, you would see they've
>>> held steady, right down to the return to the norm last month.
>>
>> 1) As predicted, you snipped and ran from my comments.
>>
>> 2) Year-over-year data is not, as you claim, "two months apart". As you
>> make such a claim you present yourself as functionally illiterate.
>
> I did not claim that it was two months apart, dipshit. I said it was two
> months a year apart. You took Feb 2011 and Feb 2012 and claimed a 25% increase
> in usage.

Not that I made that mistake on purpose, but I am glad I did... not because
I like making mistakes, but because it gives me a chance to demonstrate to
you what one does when one is wrong: admit it. Yup, I was wrong. My
mistake. You are right and you never said "two months apart". Instead you
just claimed one would have to be a "moron" to think there was growth based
on the year-over-year data... and so you provided your own data (a
non-standard timeframe) and suggested I look at *that* data so I can see how
wrong I was in saying there seems to be an upward trend in usage.

So I looked at your data. And showed it to you... including the upward
trend line. And still you cannot find it in yourself to admit the trend
line is moving upward, even based on your data:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

A nice summary of the "debate"... which is really just another example of
you showing off how you want to disagree just to disagree and no amount of
data and no level of facts will get you to change your mind.

You made up your mind. I proved you wrong. You will not do as I do and
admit when you are wrong.

>> 3) Here is the year-over-year data, including trend line, that you snipped
>> and ran from (it clearly was contrary to your claims - hence, you run):
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12.png>.

Yeah, no comment from you... the trend line is certainly in agreement with
my claims and not with yours.

>> 4) Here is the trend line from your data, the very data you imply should
>> show, at best, a steady state:
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxUsageTrendMar12B.png>. Yeah, it
>> shows an upward trend line, too. Your own data. Again, it is contrary to
>> your claims so you will, predictable, snip and run.
>
> Already the trend is flattening out. Now that we added an extra year to your
> data, add another. Add eight more. See what happens when you add in enough
> data to cover those blips that happened the past few months? Or wait a few
> more months/years of 1% figures and watch the trend flatten out again.

In other words, the data you provided did not show I was wrong... so maybe,
just maybe, you can find some time period where you can show this... like
the idiots who play games with stocks and try to find the magic perfect time
period where they can show a stock is going up or going down, whatever
floats their boats and fits their desires.

Face it: I showed you year-over-year data that fit what I would expect. You
tried to prove me wrong by showing a different time period... only to find
your data supported my views as well.

But unlike me, you do not admit to your mistakes... even when your mistake
is not a minor one that is not really tied to the main point but is, well,
key to the whole discussion.

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

"Let the reader decide if cc's data shows a good refutation of an upward
trend line".

Well, cc, let you be the reader - do you think your data show a good
refutation of an upward trend line? Just so you do not think I am being
tricky, I will tell you my view - no: the fact your data *also* showed an
upward trend line does not somehow indicate that there is not an upward
trend line for the data.

Now your answer... assuming you can do more than just turn tail and run from
the question. Come on, cc, it is an easy one... but I still predict you
will run. Hey, this gives you a chance to prove me wrong again (your
greatest joy in life it seems)... just answer the question: do you think
your data (from the above link) show a good refutation of an upward trend
line?

A simple yes or no will do - but no false dichotomies here... answer in the
most honest way you know how. Should be fun to see!


...

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

chrisv stated in post 38ntn7tmmvgate6ud...@4ax.com on 4/6/12
5:13 AM:

Peter took an abstract example and pretended it was something other than it
was.

Maybe, though, he really is that illiterate.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

Peter Köhlmann stated in post jlmifo$q2q$1...@dont-email.me on 4/6/12 4:00 AM:

And not a single herd member will call Peter out on his BS.

Not one.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Megabyte]

On 03/04/2012 3:06 AM, Hadron wrote:
> Certainly a well developed consistent UI would bring new users : most
> people I know who use Linux for the first time are aghast at the general
> mess that is keyboard driven UI.

You mean like the well developed consistent UI in Windows 8 for use on a
Desktop or Laptop? I'm sure people are going to just love flipping back
and forth between Metro and the standard Windows desktop minus a Start Orb.

[cc]

On Friday, April 6, 2012 10:30:46 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 19880181.231.1333715743486.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynku11 on 4/6/12
> 5:35 AM:
>
>>
> >

> > Already the trend is flattening out. Now that we added an extra year to your
> > data, add another. Add eight more. See what happens when you add in enough
> > data to cover those blips that happened the past few months? Or wait a few
> > more months/years of 1% figures and watch the trend flatten out again.
>
> In other words, the data you provided did not show I was wrong... so maybe,
> just maybe, you can find some time period where you can show this...

Like I said, it's been flat for 10 years. So the time period is 10 years. Not the past year or two. Even adding one additional year flattened your line, like I said it would. You're weighted too heavily for small blips in time. Even so, your upward trend is so incredibly small as to be insignificant.

> like
> the idiots who play games with stocks and try to find the magic perfect time
> period where they can show a stock is going up or going down, whatever
> floats their boats and fits their desires.

You mean like taking some stats over one single year when the original statement was that Linux has flatlined for the past 10 years? Adding one single year already flattened your trend. Add another, and another, and another.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
11888312.926.1333724431936.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynmc17 on 4/6/12
8:00 AM:

> On Friday, April 6, 2012 10:30:46 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 19880181.231.1333715743486.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynku11 on 4/6/12
>> 5:35 AM:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Already the trend is flattening out. Now that we added an extra year to your
>>> data, add another. Add eight more. See what happens when you add in enough
>>> data to cover those blips that happened the past few months? Or wait a few
>>> more months/years of 1% figures and watch the trend flatten out again.
>>
>> In other words, the data you provided did not show I was wrong... so maybe,
>> just maybe, you can find some time period where you can show this...
>
> Like I said, it's been flat for 10 years. So the time period is 10 years. Not
> the past year or two. Even adding one additional year flattened your line,
> like I said it would. You're weighted too heavily for small blips in time.
> Even so, your upward trend is so incredibly small as to be insignificant.

I used a year-over-year analysis. You did not like it... give how it did
not fit your desires.

You provided your own data and asked me to graph it for you. I did. You
did not like it because it did not fit your desires.

All documented here:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Face it: your claims do not match any of the data that you or I have
provided. But you will not admit to this... it goes against what you *want*
to be true...

>> like the idiots who play games with stocks and try to find the magic perfect
>> time period where they can show a stock is going up or going down, whatever
>> floats their boats and fits their desires.
>
> You mean like taking some stats over one single year when the original
> statement was that Linux has flatlined for the past 10 years? Adding one
> single year already flattened your trend. Add another, and another, and
> another.

Year over year data did not support your claim.
Your hand-picked data did not support your claim.

Keep fishing for data that just might. Good luck!

> So your stance is that Linux usage has been trending upward over the last 10+
> years?

Please show where you think I mentioned anything about a 10 year trend line.

Oh.

You made that up. The reality is I have made no comments about that... at
least not related to this topic.

> Is that a new stance or something you've believed all along?

What makes you think your made up and irrelevant question be a "stance" of
mine at all? Again, you have been shown the data is contrary to your claims
so you are just making things up. What is next? Forging my ID by
fabricating quotes about "my" stance, that you made up, of data over the
last 10 years? I mean, really, why can't you just be honest and admit that
neither my data nor yours show what you wanted to - a stagnant level of use
in terms of percentages (which, let us recall, was your second stance before
you moved goal posts - initially you claimed a lack of growth... only when
that was shown to be completely stupid did you alter it to a lack of usage
share).

As noted: you like to pretend you have knowledge when you generally have
little or none. You and I play a game where I make a comment, you try to
"prove" me wrong, I show the data supports my claims (in this case even
using your figures), and then you start making up claims about my "stance" -
going so far as to even forge quotes when you feel completely over your
head. We are dancing the same dance again.

Oh, and you snipped and dodged my question (as predicted). Given this:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Do you think your data (from the above link) show a good

refutation of an upward trend line?

A simple yes or no will do - but no false dichotomies here...
answer in the most honest way you know how. Should be fun to
see!

But, of course, cc will run. Yeah, you know the data is contrary to your
denials of what I have noted... but you are too immature and cowardly to
admit to it. Compare that to me - you caught me in an error... yup, I
goofed... and admitted to it with no problem and no shame. We all make
mistakes. How we react to them says a lot about our character.... I present
myself as honest and honorable and willing to admit to my errors... you
present yourself as cowardly and dishonest and unwilling to admit to your
errors.

This tread is just another example. How many times do you need to prove me
right about you?


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Foster]

It's a bad idea IMHO.
Not sure what the reasoning behind it is though.
But on the surface, it's not a good thing from my perspective.

[Hadron]

No. Why do you morons insist on bringing things back to Windows. This
isnt't about WIndows. Its about the importance of standards and
consistency. On Linux/Windows/Mac/whatever. The links to the KDE/Gnome
UI guidelines have been posted enough that even a total dick like Jed
should understand it. If MS break consistency then thats *BAD* yes : to
answer your question.

[cc]

On Friday, April 6, 2012 11:38:52 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 11888312.926.1333724431936.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynmc17 on 4/6/12
> 8:00 AM:
>
>

> > So your stance is that Linux usage has been trending upward over the last 10+
> > years?
>
> Please show where you think I mentioned anything about a 10 year trend line.
>
> Oh.
>
> You made that up. The reality is I have made no comments about that... at
> least not related to this topic.
>

I said it's the same as it ever was, and mentioned how Linux usage has been 1% for a decade. You said "And you base this on..." And I base this on the 10 year trend of Linux usage. Then you decided to disagree based on a one year trend:

cc: "This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as this year and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI."
Snit: "See above where the best data we have is discussed and where you are shown there is, at least, a reported upward trend."

I was obviously referring to the past 10 years, and you disagree saying there is an upward trend. If you don't think Linux has been trending upwards over the past 10 years, then you have a weird way of agreeing with me.

To get back on topic, I think we both agree that Linux has been stagnant in terms of percentage of users over the past decade. We can start there.

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 2, 12:36 pm, TomB <tommy.bongae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2012-04-02, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>
> ><http://arst.ch/t5b>
> >     -----
> >     Although the new shell dramatically changed the feel of the
> >     desktop, GNOME application design didn't change very much in the
> >     original 3.0 release. But that's changing in 3.4, which
> >     introduces a new application style that promises to make the
> >     desktop's application stack more consistent with the visual
> >     language of GNOME Shell.
> >     -----
>
> > Ah, make the system more consistent.  Hmmm, has anyone in COLA
> > suggested that as an important thing?  Anyone?  Ah, yes, me... only
> > to have the herd mock me for it.  But the Gnome developers get it.
>
> Suggestion: work on your comprehensive reading skills.
>
> Another suggestion: try to establish your personal definition of
> "system" wrt. GNU/Linux and its distributions.
>
> After that: whine on, but in a more coherent way.
>
> Thanks.

Snit is often found patting himself on the back for his "water is wet"
arguments (that no one is ever arguing against).

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 6, 8:30 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 19880181.231.1333715743486.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynku11 on 4/6/12
> 5:35 AM:
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> It's waxed and waned, but always hovered around 1%. You're claiming a 25%
> >>> increase in a year by taking two cherry picked points. Graph those
> >>> percentages
> >>> and then tell me there's been a steady increase in Linux usage.
>
> >>> That's why it's the same as it ever was. Sure, if you're a fucking moron and
> >>> look at two months a year apart, maybe you WOULD think Linux usage has grown
> >>> 25% in a year. But if you take a look at the numbers, you would see they've
> >>> held steady, right down to the return to the norm last month.
>
> >> 1) As predicted, you snipped and ran from my comments.
>
> >> 2) Year-over-year data is not, as you claim, "two months apart".  As you
> >> make such a claim you present yourself as functionally illiterate.
>
> > I did not claim that it was two months apart, dipshit. I said it was two
> > months a year apart. You took Feb 2011 and Feb 2012 and claimed a 25% increase
> > in usage.
>
> Not that I made that mistake on purpose,

Not to worry, Snit, virtually everyone has seen your reading
comprehension problem.

> but I am glad I did...

Being that you can't really help it... you might as well embrace it,
right? <eyeroll>.

(snip crap)

[Snit]

cc stated in post
18709416.1109.1333734979690.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynpp8 on 4/6/12
10:56 AM:

> On Friday, April 6, 2012 11:38:52 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 11888312.926.1333724431936.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynmc17 on 4/6/12
>> 8:00 AM:
>>
>>
>>> So your stance is that Linux usage has been trending upward over the last
>>> 10+
>>> years?
>>
>> Please show where you think I mentioned anything about a 10 year trend line.
>>
>> Oh.
>>
>> You made that up. The reality is I have made no comments about that... at
>> least not related to this topic.
>>
>
> I said it's the same as it ever was, and mentioned how Linux usage has been 1%
> for a decade. You said "And you base this on..." And I base this on the 10
> year trend of Linux usage. Then you decided to disagree based on a one year
> trend:

But now you have been shown what over the last year, and when you freaked
out about that, since Oct. 2010 it has *not* been doing a you said but been,
on average, increasing (having an upward trend line) you are not going to
admit you are wrong.

And let us keep the context clear, you got your panties in a bunch when I
noted that the greater focus on UI consistency and overall quality is likely
to lead to an increase in users. When it was noted that reports were coming
out that Linux desktop usage share were increasing, I noted that this made
sense to me - fit with my predictions: make a more usable / consistent
system (one where users can be more productive, are less prone to errors,
find more enjoyment in using it, etc.) and you are likely to get more users.
I also spoke of their being some lag time.

Repeatedly we keep seeing stories of how Gnome or KDE or - more importantly
- different distros are focusing on the UI issues. This is a good thing.
And while it is not the only weakness of desktop Linux (nor even the only
significant one), the idea that this has gained focus is a very good thing.
And while it is not sufficient to bring desktop Linux on par with the
competition, it makes sense that such an improvement in such a way can be
logically predicted to bring in more users. This is pretty much a given...
I mean, really, how much thought does it take to figure out that if you make
a free and easily accessible tool more productive, less error prone, and
more enjoyable to use that more people are likely to use it.

Now, of course, the above is not happening in a vacuum: there are
improvements in other OSs / environments, there *may* be a small "halo"
affect from Android (though that is questionable), etc. And, of course, all
of this ignore another key component of desktop Linux usage: what
applications are available and what quality are they. But with that I see
nothing indicating the quality has gone done - though one can argue if it
has improved as quickly as the competition (the quality is a comparative
analysis, at least to some extent).

What I think happened, and you can correct me if I am wrong, is you got so
caught up in all these other variables (and I am sure I left some out) and
you then decided you would disagree with me because, well - face it, that is
a major past time of yours. You love to disagree.

When the increase in Linux usage was reported, you just were not going to
accept that my long-standing predictions are being supported. So you
decided to disagree. And, joy-of-joy to you, for the last couple of months
there has been a significant *downward* trend, at least based on the best
stats we have.

Aha!, you thought - now I have Snit. You figured you could finally prove me
wrong. You can show there is no upward movement. Heck, over the last
couple of months you can show how the trend line of usage share has been
dropping significantly.

But then came a better look at the data. First the year-over-year data which
was very supportive of my claims, even with the recent down trend. But
you decided to call a year-over-year look arbitrary (which was really rather
absurd of you), and you said we should use all of the data provided by the
same source. You even asked me to show the trend line (you show no ability
to figure out how to get one yourself).

Lo and behold, I did as you asked (as you have seen, I am a very kind person
who often goes out of my way to help even people such as yourself who, face
it, do all you can to spit on me out of jealousy or whatever). When I
looked at your data I found, of course, that there is still an upward trend
line.

Just as I predicted there should be.

Now a pickle for you. My data supported my view - the one you pretend to
have enough knowledge to have an intelligent disagreement with. And then
your own data did the same thing.

Slam dunk. You were wrong. The data - yours and mine - both fit with my
predictions, even with the last couple months of significant dropping.

This is where you - if you were a mature and intelligent adult - would
acknowledge this trend line and admit that, yes, my prediction is holding
true. Maybe, since your goal is simply to disagree with me, you would
attribute to the trend to something else, say the halo effect or
astrological movements or whatever meaningless drivel popped into your head
(because, face it, you do not have the industry experience or knowledge to
make any reasoned explanations to counter mine).

But you did not do this. You just went on insisting, contrary to my data
*and your own*, that you were right.

You just gave up. You made it so your trolling, which it is clear is all
you are doing, just is not as much fun. So, cc, at least try: come up with
some other explanation where you can pretend to have a reasoned disagreement
with me (we both know you can only pretend this, given how you are not
capable of making reasoned arguments). That would be fun.

I will give you another chance... as I have noted, I am a kind and generous
man, but if you just keep running from the data you show you are not even
trying to sound reasonable. And that is no fun... I want a third party to
be able to come into this thread and at least have to think a little to
figure out who is making sense. But any reasonable person who sees this:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png> and then
sees you are still in denial - well, they will immediately see how absurd
you are being.

And look below where you try to pretend my comments and predictions were
about the last 10 years. No, that is just silly. You are doing nothing but
focusing on a change of goal posts I did not call you on.

My original prediction is still being shown to be upheld, though the next
few months might flatten that trend line or even push it down. Certainly
the last two months have gone against the trend... and in a *big way*.

Now I have theories and reasons for this - and, frankly - it would not
really be contrary to my overall claims that focus on the UI, if successful,
will bring new users. It may very well be that the focus on the UI is one
of the key reasons why the upswing was so high for about six months. As far
as I know, nobody else has offered a better explanation (which is not to say
it is the full reason). Once they use it, though, it clearly is still not
on par with the competition... and there are now a lot of people leaving it
or, at best, a lack of growth (we would have to compare the percentages with
the overall growth of the market).

> cc: "This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as this
> year and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI."
> Snit: "See above where the best data we have is discussed and where you are
> shown there is, at least, a reported upward trend."
>
> I was obviously referring to the past 10 years, and you disagree saying there
> is an upward trend. If you don't think Linux has been trending upwards over
> the past 10 years, then you have a weird way of agreeing with me.
>
> To get back on topic, I think we both agree that Linux has been stagnant in
> terms of percentage of users over the past decade. We can start there.

There have been ups and downs, but, as I noted and as you were disagreeing
with me, there has been an upward trend at about the same time (with a lag)
as there has been an increased focus on the UI. I have not been following
desktop Linux percentage use for the last 10 years and, unlike you, will not
pretend to have knowledge of information I do not. I simply shall not sink
to your level (a common theme in our "discussions")

Oh, and again, the question you keep running from (the one that makes it so
obvious you are not even trying to be reasonable). Given this:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Do you think your data (from the above link) show a good
refutation of an upward trend line?

A simple yes or no will do - but no false dichotomies here...
answer in the most honest way you know how. Should be fun to
see!

I predicted you would run. And you proved that, again, my predictions tend
to be correct. See: even when you troll me with the goal to make me look
wrong you end up supporting me. I love how you put yourself into no-win
situations with your trolling. It is one of the things that makes you so
amusing.





--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Friday, April 6, 2012 3:52:20 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 18709416.1109.1333734979690.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynpp8 on 4/6/12
> 10:56 AM:
>
> >
>

> > cc: "This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as this
> > year and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI."
> > Snit: "See above where the best data we have is discussed and where you are
> > shown there is, at least, a reported upward trend."
> >
> > I was obviously referring to the past 10 years, and you disagree saying there
> > is an upward trend. If you don't think Linux has been trending upwards over
> > the past 10 years, then you have a weird way of agreeing with me.
> >
> > To get back on topic, I think we both agree that Linux has been stagnant in
> > terms of percentage of users over the past decade. We can start there.
>
> There have been ups and downs, but, as I noted and as you were disagreeing
> with me, there has been an upward trend at about the same time (with a lag)
> as there has been an increased focus on the UI.

So only in the past year or two have there been improvements to the UI? Interesting.

We've already seen a return to the norm for Linux users. Keep me updated on your unsupported time periods of UI improvements so we can compare against the trend. It won't take too many more months of 1% numbers to bring the "upward trend" back to reality, but I'm sure you'll find some reason for the UI improvements to have stoppped, just like you've discounted all previous work on the UI until a year ago.

We've had 10 years of improvements to the UI, and we've had 10 years of 1% Linux usage. What an impact!

[Snit]

cc stated in post
1631879.536.1333745696190.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynhh34 on 4/6/12
1:54 PM:

> On Friday, April 6, 2012 3:52:20 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 18709416.1109.1333734979690.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynpp8 on 4/6/12
>> 10:56 AM:
>>
>>>
>>
>>> cc: "This month last year Linux was attracting users at the same rate as
>>> this
>>> year and at the same rate 10 years ago, all the while improving the UI."
>>> Snit: "See above where the best data we have is discussed and where you are
>>> shown there is, at least, a reported upward trend."
>>>
>>> I was obviously referring to the past 10 years, and you disagree saying
>>> there
>>> is an upward trend. If you don't think Linux has been trending upwards over
>>> the past 10 years, then you have a weird way of agreeing with me.
>>>
>>> To get back on topic, I think we both agree that Linux has been stagnant in
>>> terms of percentage of users over the past decade. We can start there.
>>
>> There have been ups and downs, but, as I noted and as you were disagreeing
>> with me, there has been an upward trend at about the same time (with a lag)
>> as there has been an increased focus on the UI.
>
> So

So you snip and run.

As noted and predicted.

And, yes, over the last couple of years there has been an increased focus on
UI issues... look at the press releases for KDE, Gnome, Unity, etc. Not
that this was not a focus before, but Shuttleworth is pushing it *hard* and
it is making a difference.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[William Poaster]

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 21:19:16 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2012-04-05, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI improvements
>>>> won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the future maybe that
>>>> will change, but there's a mess of other problems to deal with first.
>>>
>>> What total nonense.
>>>
>>> New users will be more likely to remain when they get a consistent and
>>> useable UI where they dont hose work because someone who doesnt give a
>>> fig about standards binds something like C-w to "format my drive". God
>>
>> What app does that? Hadron the liar.
>
> Liar? He's an idiot.

Ok, a compromise - an idiotic liar. HTH. :-)

--
Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over & over again,
expecting different results.
By that definition, the Mac & wintrolls repeating the same ol' FUD
over & over, means that their sanity is being brought into question.

[TomB]

On 2012-04-05, the following emerged from the brain of cc:

> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI
> improvements won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the
> future maybe that will change, but there's a mess of other problems
> to deal with first.

Just out of curiosity (which may or may not kill -9 cat), what do you
figure those other problems are?

[DFS]

Snit screwed up that graph in #4 (another honest mistake I'm sure, along
with the 'two months' fiasco earlier in the thread). There are 24 data
points, but he only shows 23. And his first point is labeled Apr 10
(should be 1.08%) but it's the data from May 10 (1.15%).

Vertical gridlines would help.

And he didn't explain where that 'Trend' line comes from; I assume it's
least-squares.

And he didn't say which tool he used to produce the graph.

He's very technical.

[Snit]

DFS stated in post jlq2h9$o2g$1...@dont-email.me on 4/7/12 11:54 AM:

...

> Snit screwed up that graph in #4 (another honest mistake I'm sure, along
> with the 'two months' fiasco earlier in the thread). There are 24 data
> points, but he only shows 23. And his first point is labeled Apr 10
> (should be 1.08%) but it's the data from May 10 (1.15%).
>
> Vertical gridlines would help.
>
> And he didn't explain where that 'Trend' line comes from; I assume it's
> least-squares.
>
> And he didn't say which tool he used to produce the graph.
>
> He's very technical.

Here is the updated and corrected data. With the data being corrected,
trend line is actually more steep - so it actually defeats cc's claims even
better (the missing data point was the first one, and it is lower than the
next two, thus lowering the starting point of the trend line).

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

The trend line is linier, in case you could not figure that out on your own!
If you want to double check the data, try a Polynomial trend line with an
order of 2. :)

Oh, and yes, I fully understand that you will use the fact I admit to my
errors and mistakes against me - all the while just out and out lying about,
for example, your claims about me misrepresenting Stallman. Yeah, you
refuse to admit to your incorrect claims and I openly admit to mine - and
you will try to twist this to show how you are better than me. Many, many
trolls have used the same techniques as you - they are juvenile and absurd.

A better action on your part would be to acknowledge I have done the right
thing and that I am correct about the data showing an upward trend...
because it does. As I have noted in the past, the last couple months have
shown a strong reversal in that - so we shall have to see how things go.
But this has been discussed elsewhere.

Hey, cc keeps running from a question. Maybe you can answer it. Given
this:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Do you think cc's data (shown in the above link) show a good

refutation of an upward trend line?

A simple yes or no will do - but no false dichotomies here...
answer in the most honest way you know how. Should be fun to
see!

I suspect you, like cc, will run. You both know the data backs my
predictions and my claims. But, hey, you enjoy proving me wrong and perhaps
will do so again, here. I would prefer it.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[chrisv]

TomB wrote:

> ccretin wrote:
>
>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI
>> improvements won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the
>> future maybe that will change, but there's a mess of other problems
>> to deal with first.
>
>Just out of curiosity (which may or may not kill -9 cat), what do you
>figure those other problems are?

Evil monopolists?

[cc]

No "killer" app(s): Why switch to Linux when Windows has everything? Why develop top notch apps for Linux when not that many people use it? Chicken or the egg problem.

Too many distros: been through this too many times to count. Not a "problem" that can be fixed while still remaining Linux, but still something I think that keeps people from using Linnux.

No momentum and no way to get it: Again, not a "problem" but just something that just is. Linux has had some opportunities and the problem is no one can capitalize on it. Who is going to speak up for Linux? Unfortunately everyone. So for any reasonable argument there is a nutjob talking about 9/11 being an inside job or cavemen and hive computers. Advertising works.

So there you have it. My big three. Just my opinion of course (possibly based on incorrect data since I've now been told that there has been a significant trend upward of Linux users over the past 10 years). Feel free to discuss or just call me an anti-choice wintroll and leave it at that.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
17186756.64.1333975353941.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynhh34 on 4/9/12
5:42 AM:

> On Saturday, April 7, 2012 2:07:18 AM UTC-4, TomB wrote:
>> On 2012-04-05, the following emerged from the brain of cc:
>>
>>> No shit. That's EXACTLY what I've said, and my point. UI
>>> improvements won't and haven't brought new users to Linux. In the
>>> future maybe that will change, but there's a mess of other problems
>>> to deal with first.
>>
>> Just out of curiosity (which may or may not kill -9 cat), what do you
>> figure those other problems are?
>
> No "killer" app(s): Why switch to Linux when Windows has everything? Why
> develop top notch apps for Linux when not that many people use it? Chicken or
> the egg problem.

I would agree... and many of the "equivalents" are not really equals.

> Too many distros: been through this too many times to count. Not a "problem"
> that can be fixed while still remaining Linux, but still something I think
> that keeps people from using Linnux.

Yes: while I am completely against the herd's "culling committee" idea, one
downside of the large number of distros is it deters users. Over time,
though, maybe there will rise one or two distros which will be the main
distros "general" people use. For a while it looked like this would be
Ubuntu. Maybe it will be... maybe not.

> No momentum and no way to get it: Again, not a "problem" but just something
> that just is. Linux has had some opportunities and the problem is no one can
> capitalize on it. Who is going to speak up for Linux? Unfortunately everyone.
> So for any reasonable argument there is a nutjob talking about 9/11 being an
> inside job or cavemen and hive computers. Advertising works.

True. So does word of mouth - and desktop Linux has not earned a good word
of mouth.

In other words: I largely agree with you that the things you speak about are
important. See: when you are not just disagreeing to disagree you *can*
have reasoned ideas. Your problem is you like to disagree just to debate,
esp. against those whom have proved you wrong. Below you babble about your
10 year trend stuff... pretending someone was talking to you about that.
Not that I have seen. You are just looking to get my attention. Again.
Trying to get in some little dig against me because I noted that even based
on your data, you were wrong to deny my view that the focus on UIs in KDE4,
Gnome3, Unity, and the like is a benefit to Linux adoption.

You disagreed to disagree... or maybe you live in such a black and white
world you could not figure out that nobody was claiming that was the only
issue with adoption. Whatever your error was, the more you tried to prove
me wrong the more you helped to make my case.

So you moved to a 10 year claim of there not being an upward trend (which,
at least based on w3schools is not true, but they are hardly a good wide
indicator. In any case, here is the data:
<http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>

🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 10:41:42 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
>
> So you moved to a 10 year claim of there not being an upward trend (which,

I did not move at all. I've been speaking about the history of the last 10 years in this thread from the beginning.

> at least based on w3schools is not true, but they are hardly a good wide
> indicator. In any case, here is the data:
> <http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
>
>

So you don't think it's a good indicator, but you decided to post the link anyway?

How would you characterize the last ten years of Linux usage? Upward trend? Downward trend? No significant change?


--
"For example, if someone wanted to push to make it legal for 80 year old siblings to have sex I would not really care." - Snit

[Snit]

cc stated in post
21171434.256.1333987834867.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbi17 on 4/9/12
9:10 AM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 10:41:42 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>>
>> So you moved to a 10 year claim of there not being an upward trend (which,
>
> I did not move at all. I've been speaking about the history of the last 10
> years in this thread from the beginning.

Are you no longer are disagreeing with me that KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, and
other fairly recent projects that have all focused pretty heavily on UI /
usability are correlated to an increase in desktop Linux usage share?
Remember, that is what I was talking about and you were disagreeing with.

I have, since, shown that there is, at least, an upward trend in both the
year-over-year data I first graphed and the longer term data you asked me to
graph. This, of course, shows I am right about there being a correlation
between recent projects and an upward trend line (it does not, however, show
a cause and effect relationship, even though I believe there is one - as has
been discussed in the past).

You say that for most of the last 10 years there has been an upward trend in
desktop Linux usage share. I have noted I have not followed such data for
long enough to have an opinion on that, but if you are correct then this
supports my idea that these newer projects with their greater focus on UI /
usability issues are causative.

In other words, it sounds like we have reached a basic level of agreement
and that you are offering your view of the longer term trend which, at least
to some extent, supports my view.

I would also say that likely when KDE first came out that lead to a jump in
the user base... but that was in the late 1990s so it is outside of your 10
year window.

>> at least based on w3schools is not true, but they are hardly a good wide
>> indicator. In any case, here is the data:
>> <http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
>
> So you don't think it's a good indicator, but you decided to post the link
> anyway?

It was the best data I could find... but as noted above, I am not saying you
are wrong about your claims of the ten year trend. In fact, if you are
right it supports my views better than just the year-over-year data I used
and the somewhat longer term data you specifically asked me to graph for
you... your comments are quoted here and the graphs are shown:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

> How would you characterize the last ten years of Linux usage? Upward trend?
> Downward trend? No significant change?

I have repeatedly told you I have not followed Linux usage that long and
have no comment on the trend over that length of time. But, as noted, if
you are correct you have helped to support my view about the more recent
project. Can you back your view? Looking at the w3school data your view is
*not* supported, but I completely grant that looking at one site is a very
poor indicator and am not claiming it proves you wrong. I would, however,
love to see you show a similar graph for the data you are focusing on... it
would allow you to back your views, which would be great, and - as discussed
- it would help support my views about the current projects.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 12:44:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> I have, since, shown that there is, at least, an upward trend in both the
> year-over-year data I first graphed and the longer term data you asked me to
> graph. This, of course, shows I am right about there being a correlation
> between recent projects and an upward trend line (it does not, however, show
> a cause and effect relationship, even though I believe there is one - as has
> been discussed in the past).

This does not show you are right about there being a correlation. Show your work.

>
> You say that for most of the last 10 years there has been an upward trend in
> desktop Linux usage share.

No I don't.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
32032508.323.1333990349403.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yncd8 on 4/9/12
9:52 AM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 12:44:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:

>>>> So you moved to a 10 year claim of there not being an upward trend (which,
>>>>
>>> I did not move at all. I've been speaking about the history of the last 10
>>> years in this thread from the beginning.
>>>
>> Are you no longer are disagreeing with me that KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, and other
>> fairly recent projects that have all focused pretty heavily on UI / usability
>> are correlated to an increase in desktop Linux usage share?

You snipped this question. How odd! Well, not really... it is your norm to
snip and run when you know you have backed yourself into a corner.

But, as shown, the trend line for desktop Linux usage share has been going
up over, roughly, the same time the listed projects, with their focus on UI
/ usability issues. This is the correlation I have been talking about.
Those UI / usability projects are correlated with an upward trend in usage
share.

>> Remember, that is what I was talking about and you were disagreeing with.
>>

>> I have, since, shown that there is, at least, an upward trend in both the
>> year-over-year data I first graphed and the longer term data you asked me to
>> graph. This, of course, shows I am right about there being a correlation
>> between recent projects and an upward trend line (it does not, however, show
>> a cause and effect relationship, even though I believe there is one - as has
>> been discussed in the past).
>
> This does not show you are right about there being a correlation. Show your
> work.

Oh, we have already discussed it. In any case, I am happy to see your
denial! DFS and I were having a discussion about your ability or lack of
ability to understand the concept of a correlation. He was saying you did
and I was noting you did not. And here you are, proving me right. Thanks!

>> You say that for most of the last 10 years there has been an upward trend in
>> desktop Linux usage share.
>
> No I don't.

Correct - you do not... *absolutely* my mistake: I left out a *very*
important "not" in that sentence. Sorry 'bout that. So that makes it (with
the "not" emphasized:

>> You say that for most of the last 10 years there has *NOT* been an upward

>> trend in desktop Linux usage share. I have noted I have not followed such
>> data for long enough to have an opinion on that, but if you are correct then
>> this supports my idea that these newer projects with their greater focus on
>> UI / usability issues are causative.

See what I mean: if the usage share has been mostly flat for the last 10
years, which is what you believe, then the fact that the upward trend is
only more recent is supportive of my view of causation. On the other hand,
if you are wrong and the w3school data is correct - in other words, if there
has been a pretty steady upward trend - then the current projects are only,
if anything, adding to an ongoing trend but not making the change I have
stipulated.

Granted, it is not as though usability issues were ignored before these
projects, nor is anyone suggesting that such issues are the only that affect
usage percentage... so even in the most extreme "take" on my view, I am not
claiming these current focuses on UI / usability issues are the only things
to affect the trend lines!

>> In other words, it sounds like we have reached a basic level of agreement and
>> that you are offering your view of the longer term trend which, at least to
>> some extent, supports my view.

You snipped this... but the evidence supports this is correct. If I am
wrong please explain how.

>> I would also say that likely when KDE first came out that lead to a jump in
>> the user base... but that was in the late 1990s so it is outside of your 10
>> year window.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 1:55:51 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 32032508.323.1333990349403.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yncd8 on 4/9/12
> 9:52 AM:
>
> >
> >

> > This does not show you are right about there being a correlation. Show your
> > work.
>
> Oh, we have already discussed it.

Correct. And you could not show your work, just as you cannot now. If you wish to show your work and give some actual numbers to peruse and verify, then that would be great. Anything less is just a bullshit statement from you with no support, and will be ignored.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
6546606.473.1333995000734.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yngr3 on 4/9/12
11:10 AM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 1:55:51 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 32032508.323.1333990349403.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yncd8 on 4/9/12
>> 9:52 AM:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This does not show you are right about there being a correlation. Show your
>>> work.
>>
>> Oh, we have already discussed it.
>
> Correct. And you could not show your work, just as you cannot now. If you wish
> to show your work and give some actual numbers to peruse and verify, then that
> would be great. Anything less is just a bullshit statement from you with no
> support, and will be ignored.

Your snipping and running shows you know you are in over your head. To
summarize what you are running from:

1) You will not give a direct answer to this question:

Are you no longer are disagreeing with me that KDE4, Gnome3,
Unity, and other fairly recent projects that have all focused
pretty heavily on UI / usability are correlated to an
increase in desktop Linux usage share?

2) You claim that there has been a lack of increase in the last ten years,
but, as shown by year-over-year data and your longer term data, the trend
line has been going up during the approximate time period I have noted (as
KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, etc. take off... with some lag). If you are right
about the lack of upward trend line over the last ten years, this shows the
upward trend line is a more recent phenomena (though we have not found good
data to show how long it has been going on for). Still, the upward trend
line has been happening at least during the time I predicted it would... and
the time I predicted was based on the UI / usability projects discussed
above. This shows a correlation (though it does not prove the causation
which I have said I believe and have shown why it makes sense to be so).

3) Your denial of the correlation shows, as I have noted, your lack of
understanding of what a correlation is. This shows DFS was wrong to claim
you were showing a lack of understanding. While I am happy to be right, I
would prefer to be wrong and have you show a basic understanding of such a
simple concept. Oh well... you do not seem bothered by your ignorance, so I
shall not lose sleep over it either.




--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 2:23:54 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
>
> Your denial of the correlation shows, as I have noted, your lack of
> understanding of what a correlation is.

So because I want to see the actual number and work you did to get there, I don't understand what a correlation is? I'm asking for the correlation coefficient and the work and method you used to achieve it.

I'm assuming you have not done any actual work on this, and you're just guessing that there's a correlation. I'm going to guess you won't respond with any of the info I requested. But feel free to prove me wrong.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
29300793.131.1333997149199.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynmf4 on 4/9/12
11:45 AM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 2:23:54 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>>
>> Your denial of the correlation shows, as I have noted, your lack of
>> understanding of what a correlation is.
>
> So because I want to see the actual number and work you did to get there, I
> don't understand what a correlation is?

Incorrect: that is not what gave away your ignorance. Keep guessing
though... if you get it I will tell you (and your having to think it through
will help you to gain understanding!)

> I'm asking for the correlation
> coefficient and the work and method you used to achieve it.
>
> I'm assuming you have not done any actual work on this, and you're just
> guessing that there's a correlation. I'm going to guess you won't respond with
> any of the info I requested. But feel free to prove me wrong.
>

Your snipping and running shows you know you are in over your head. To
summarize what you are running from:

1) You will not give a direct answer to this question:

Are you no longer are disagreeing with me that KDE4, Gnome3,
Unity, and other fairly recent projects that have all focused
pretty heavily on UI / usability are correlated to an
increase in desktop Linux usage share?

2) You claim that there has been a lack of increase in the last ten years,
but, as shown by year-over-year data and your longer term data, the trend
line has been going up during the approximate time period I have noted (as
KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, etc. take off... with some lag). If you are right
about the lack of upward trend line over the last ten years, this shows the
upward trend line is a more recent phenomena (though we have not found good
data to show how long it has been going on for). Still, the upward trend
line has been happening at least during the time I predicted it would... and
the time I predicted was based on the UI / usability projects discussed
above. This shows a correlation (though it does not prove the causation
which I have said I believe and have shown why it makes sense to be so).

3) Your denial of the correlation shows, as I have noted, your lack of
understanding of what a correlation is (please note I have stated I had a
specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
topic). This shows DFS was wrong to claim you were showing a lack of

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
>
> (please note I have stated I had a
> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
> topic).

Then let's see it.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
12:10 PM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>>
>> (please note I have stated I had a
>> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
>> topic).
>
> Then let's see it.

You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient. You also
snipped a lot more. #1 is a question you refuse to answer because you know
you backed yourself into a corner, #2 is an explanation of why their is a
known correlation (though other information has been given in the past, that
is sufficient to show the point... though it is based on the idea that your
claims about the last 10 years, as a whole, are correct), and #3 is just a
side comment, largely for the benefit of DFS, to show I am happy to support
my claims. That is something you and he do not do.

1) You will not give a direct answer to this question:

Are you no longer are disagreeing with me that KDE4, Gnome3,
Unity, and other fairly recent projects that have all focused
pretty heavily on UI / usability are correlated to an
increase in desktop Linux usage share?

You backed yourself into a corner with this one.

2) You claim that there has been a lack of increase in the last ten years,
but, as shown by year-over-year data and your longer term data, the trend
line has been going up during the approximate time period I have noted (as
KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, etc. take off... with some lag). If you are right
about the lack of upward trend line over the last ten years, this shows the
upward trend line is a more recent phenomena (though we have not found good
data to show how long it has been going on for). Still, the upward trend
line has been happening at least during the time I predicted it would... and
the time I predicted was based on the UI / usability projects discussed
above. This shows a correlation (though it does not prove the causation
which I have said I believe and have shown why it makes sense to be so).

3) Your denial of the correlation shows, as I have noted, your lack of

understanding of what a correlation is (please note I have stated I had a

specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the

topic). This shows DFS was wrong to claim you were showing a lack of
understanding. While I am happy to be right, I would prefer to be wrong and
have you show a basic understanding of such a simple concept. Oh well...
you do not seem bothered by your ignorance, so I shall not lose sleep over
it either.

4) You have made specific claims about desktop Linux usage over the last 10
years. Please show some support for your claims, as I did with the graphing
and use of trend lines to back my claims of an increase in usage over the
time period correlated with what I said would be associated with such a
trend line).


In any case, your snipping is a clear sign of you waving a white flag. I
post evidence and data you do not like... you run... I post it again... you
run from it again. You have given up and are showing not even you believe
your own claims... it is not as if you are just saying we should agree to
disagree, you are demonstrating your lack of belief in your own claims.

As such, respond with a more meaningful response or we should let the thread
end - you have made it clear you have nothing to counter my well supported
claims... just denials and whines and lies. Those bore me. I tend to give
ignorant / dishonest folks such as yourself way too many chances. Let us
make this your last one unless you can show at least some sign of trying to
back your claims (heck, I do not even list your claims of Linux usage over
the last 10 years... you never even tried to back that... I added that as a
#4 on the above list)


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:31:18 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
> 12:10 PM:
>
> > On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> (please note I have stated I had a
> >> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
> >> topic).
> >
> > Then let's see it.
>
> You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient.

I'm sorry you consider it an obsession to want a specific coefficient from someone who claims there is a correlation. You do realize that you can't have a correlation without a coefficient, right? Even with the coefficient there is not necessarily a correlation. It could be close to zero. That's why it would be nice to see the coefficient and the work you did in obtaining it. People make mistakes. If you're going to continue to refuse to show your work, then that's telling, and we're done here.

What was Linux usage at for March 2012?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
18929822.451.1334000248699.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynma1 on 4/9/12
12:37 PM:

> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:31:18 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
>> 12:10 PM:
>>
>>> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (please note I have stated I had a
>>>> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change
>>>> the
>>>> topic).
>>>
>>> Then let's see it.
>>
>> You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient.
>
> I'm sorry you consider it an obsession to want a specific coefficient from
> someone who claims there is a correlation. You do realize that you can't have
> a correlation without a coefficient, right? Even with the coefficient there is
> not necessarily a correlation. It could be close to zero. That's why it would
> be nice to see the coefficient and the work you did in obtaining it. People
> make mistakes. If you're going to continue to refuse to show your work, then
> that's telling, and we're done here.
>
> What was Linux usage at for March 2012?

As I noted, you are ignorant of what it means for there to be a correlation.

<http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/correlation>
-----
A causal, complementary, parallel, or reciprocal
relationship, especially a structural, functional, or
qualitative correspondence between two comparable entities: a
correlation between drug abuse and crime.
-----

<http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/correlation>
-----
a mutual or reciprocal relationship between two or more things
-----

<http://www.yourdictionary.com/correlation>
-----
A correlation is a connection or interdependence between two
or more things.
-----

<http://www.wordsmyth.net/?ent=correlation>
-----
a relationship or correspondence between two or more things.
-----

My point being there is a relationship between the increased focus on UI /
usability issues and an upswing in desktop Linux user base. I have shown
how, over roughly the expected time, the trend line fits my predicted
correlative (and even causative) beliefs.

You have taken than and demanded to see a statistical analysis which is not
required for one to determine a correlation... such is needed to determine
the *degree* of the correlation, but I never claimed to be speaking in such
specific terms. You are simply showing your ignorance of the concept when
you demand things which are not required to show my argument as being
supported.

Further, you claim to believe in data which would offer an even higher level
of support for my view: if it is true that the overall trend of the last ten
years does *not* match the year-over-year data (or the larger set of data
you asked me to graph for you) then this would mean that the current upward
trend line is an anomaly... presumably caused by some change. The idea that
the change would be the changes I have talked about is quite reasonable,
though, also as discussed, there are some other possibilities.

But, frankly, this has been discussed to death. No offense, but you have
shown you do not have the background or knowledge to follow this line of
reasoning and certainly do not have the knowledge to counter it. You
disagree for the sake of disagreeing - you do not like it when I am right,
so you argue just to argue. You have no valid points to make and you run
from the most simple of questions, without even giving an acknowledgement
that you do not know.

As is your habit, you pretend to be knowledgeable in areas you clearly are
not. You do this often and when you start snipping, as you have been, it is
one of your major tells that even you know you have gotten in over your
head.

The bottom line: The evidence shows that KDE4, Gnome3, Unity, and other

fairly recent projects that have all focused pretty heavily on UI /

usability are correlated to an increase in desktop Linux usage share...
though the exact extent of this correlation is not known and there may very
well be other factors leading to the upward moving trend line in the desktop
Linux usage share. This has been supported well and while you want to
disagree based on your emotional challenges, you have neither the data nor
the understanding of the concepts and terms being used to offer a reasonable
counter anyone with any knowledge on the topic would take seriously.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

On 4/9/2012 3:37 PM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:31:18 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
>> 12:10 PM:
>>
>>> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (please note I have stated I had a
>>>> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
>>>> topic).
>>>
>>> Then let's see it.
>>
>> You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient.
>
> I'm sorry you consider it an obsession to want a specific coefficient from someone who claims there is a correlation. You do realize that you can't have a correlation without a coefficient, right? Even with the coefficient there is not necessarily a correlation. It could be close to zero. That's why it would be nice to see the coefficient and the work you did in obtaining it. People make mistakes. If you're going to continue to refuse to show your work, then that's telling, and we're done here.
>
> What was Linux usage at for March 2012?

0.98%, which is trending way up (see Snit's graph) from Apr 2010 when it
was 1.08%... whoops!


http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpcustomb=0&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=135&qpnp=25

[Foster]

Queue the Linturds bringing up the W3schools website which is
probably being "gamed" by the Linturds at large.

A little script pounding the site all day with a browser ID string
showing Linux would do it.

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 9, 10:52 am, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, April 9, 2012 12:44:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> > I have, since, shown that there is, at least, an upward trend in both the
> > year-over-year data I first graphed and the longer term data you asked me to
> > graph.  This, of course, shows I am right about there being a correlation
> > between recent projects and an upward trend line (it does not, however, show
> > a cause and effect relationship, even though I believe there is one - as has
> > been discussed in the past).
>
> This does not show you are right about there being a correlation. Show your work.
>
>
>
> > You say that for most of the last 10 years there has been an upward trend in
> > desktop Linux usage share.
>
> No I don't.

You didn't really expect him to get that, did you? Notably, he also
missed the fact that you were taking about a decade time span from
early on. Just more of Snit's 'rare mistakes' (to hear him tell it).
If he's not dishonestly stuffing words in your mouth his meds have
gotten the better of him again.

[DFS]

Sounds like the kind of thing an insane Linux moron (like Bilk or 7)
would do.

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 9, 1:37 pm, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:31:18 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> > cc stated in post
> > 15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
> > 12:10 PM:
>
> > > On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> > >> (please note I have stated I had a
> > >> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change the
> > >> topic).
>
> > > Then let's see it.
>
> > You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient.
>
> I'm sorry you consider it an obsession to want a specific coefficient from someone who claims there is a correlation. You do realize that you can't have a correlation without a coefficient, right? Even with the coefficient there is not necessarily a correlation. It could be close to zero. That's why it would be nice to see the coefficient and the work you did in obtaining it. People make mistakes. If you're going to continue to refuse to show your work, then that's telling, and we're done here.

I'm sure you're well aware you were done long ago with this. Snit is
now trying to use his "psych degree" on you... always a sure sign that
he knows he is in "over his head".

[Snit]

DFS stated in post jlvqrn$917$1...@dont-email.me on 4/9/12 4:20 PM:

I suggest you look up the concept of a trend line. Nobody is denying the
downward trend of the last couple of months - I have written about them
quite a bit. But here is what the data shows for the last year over year
(my chosen range) and the last 2 years (cc's chosen range). Both show a
*trend* upward, which does not mean that you can take any two arbitrary
months and see that trend!

I sincerely wish you both would take even a basic statistics class... you
are clearly not understanding what are very simple concepts. To be very
succinct, if the trend line is moving up, the usage share for that range is,
on average, moving up. If it is moving down then the usage share is, on
average, moving down. This is not complex. Knowing this simple data, see
this:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Clearly the trend lines are moving up... and if cc is right that this has
*not* been the case over the last 10 years (a claim he makes with no
support, but let's just go with it) then the more current trend line is a
sign that something has changed. I have noted that some of the major
changes in desktop Linux, which largely deal with UI and usability issues,
*correlate* with these changes - in other words, they are happening roughly
concurrently (I have speculated that the increase in usage share would have
a lag, but that has not been shown). Others and myself have speculated that
there might be other reasons - either adding to the change or perhaps even
instead of the reasons I list.

While I have predicted a cause and effect relationship and the data at least
roughly fits with my predictions (we have not looked back far enough nor
were my predictions specific enough to speak in terms of how closely they
fit), this is not proof that the cause and effect I have spoken about is
accurate. Still, it makes sense: a focus on UI and usability issues is
likely to bring users... the more usable something is, the more people who
will use it. Given the free nature of OSS, this is almost a given, though
some argue that the projects I have noted as bettering the UI / usability
are not doing so. If that can be shown then it weakens my argument of
causation - but at the very least there certainly has been a large effort by
many to improve usability on desktop Linux and it certainly seems to be
working, even though the last couple of months have shown and contrary
trend.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next, say, 6 to 12
months. Are the last couple of data points indicative of a new trend? I do
not think so, though perhaps the "bounce back" will not take us back up to
the highs of a couple months ago.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Foster]

Yep.
Or Shitzferwitz.
Or maybe even Ahlstrom, although he would have to get some
assistance from Shitzferwitz.

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 9, 5:54 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> DFS stated in post jlvqrn$91...@dont-email.me on 4/9/12 4:20 PM:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4/9/2012 3:37 PM, cc wrote:
> >> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:31:18 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> >>> cc stated in post
> >>> 15380153.600.1333998656331.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynvv7 on 4/9/12
> >>> 12:10 PM:
>
> >>>> On Monday, April 9, 2012 3:06:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> >>>>> (please note I have stated I had a
> >>>>> specific coefficient, something you keep obsessing over to try to change
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> topic).
>
> >>>> Then let's see it.
>
> >>> You snipped your obsession over wanting a specific coefficient.
>
> >> I'm sorry you consider it an obsession to want a specific coefficient from
> >> someone who claims there is a correlation. You do realize that you can't have
> >> a correlation without a coefficient, right? Even with the coefficient there
> >> is not necessarily a correlation. It could be close to zero. That's why it
> >> would be nice to see the coefficient and the work you did in obtaining it.
> >> People make mistakes. If you're going to continue to refuse to show your
> >> work, then that's telling, and we're done here.
>
> >> What was Linux usage at for March 2012?
>
> > 0.98%, which is trending way up (see Snit's graph) from Apr 2010 when it
> > was 1.08%... whoops!
>

> >http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qp...

> > ustomb=0&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=135&qpnp=25
>
> I suggest you look up the concept of a trend line.  Nobody is denying the
> downward trend of the last couple of months - I have written about them
> quite a bit.  But here is what the data shows for the last year over year
> (my chosen range) and the last 2 years (cc's chosen range).  Both show a
> *trend* upward, which does not mean that you can take any two arbitrary
> months and see that trend!
>
> I sincerely wish you both would take even a basic statistics class...

This thread is getting hilarious;)

(Snit, do yourself a favor and do some research on the term
"correlation coefficient")

[cc]

"please note I have stated I had a specific coefficient" - Snit

Nice try though.

[DFS]

Ask Snit to explain how "[the HCI papers] correlate well with the
scenario based framework."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d473b65784a7708e?hl=en

[cc]

And get another 15 paragraphs of bullshit? No thanks. If he's going to state he has a correlation coefficient, then when asked for it, supply line after line about why he doesn't need it, then fuck it.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
21396378.129.1334068511584.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynei5 on 4/10/12
7:35 AM:

> "please note I have stated I had a specific coefficient" - Snit
>
> Nice try though.

LOL! I left out another very important "not". Yeah, I can see where that
would confuse you - but keep in mind that sentence was written *long* after
your obsession started. But to be clear (and to correct that very incorrect
sentence):

please note I have *NOT* stated I had a specific coefficient

And I do not. If you look up you can see where I discussed that and you
just ignored it. Still, to missing "not"s in two days. Bad form on my
part... no doubt. But now that you see this, of course, you will accept
that your obsession of my stating a specific coefficient is just based on
your ignorance. And, hey, while I have left out two very important words in
sentences, at least I have not sunk to your level and started snipping,
lying, and all but bragging (as you do) about knowledge I do not have.

> --
> "For example, if someone wanted to push to make it legal for 80 year old
> siblings to have sex I would not really care." - Snit

Another tell of yours: you know you have lost this debate - made a complete
fool of yourself... so you obsess over past debates. Well, I am happy to
remind you of your past statements... ones where you actually do say stupid
things, not just ones where you incorrectly *think* I have.

--

cc proves he is an ID forging pathological liar
<http://goo.gl/eC1qa>

[Snit]

DFS stated in post jm1gl8$cra$2...@dont-email.me on 4/10/12 7:38 AM:

What is your question about that? What is it you need explained?



--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

And reposted by you multiple times, each time with me asking about it.

> please note I have *NOT* stated I had a specific coefficient
>
> And I do not.

Right. So you're claiming there's a correlation without any evidence. You say that there's been an increase in usabilility but the only evidence is some press releases claiming it, when in reality most people don't like the latest changes. You're claiming some arbitrary time period over which these improvements took place (with a made up "lag time" you've shown no evidence for), because it fits a trend line showing a marginal increase over your cherry-picked time period due to some heavily weighted anomolies in the stats. You have no real evidence to support this correlation, and are unable to show a coefficient, yet you say this lends credence to your claims of causality. So you've made dubious claims, with no evidence, no work to show except a trend line based on outliers, and paragraphs of bullshit claiming you don't need to show any work anyway. And I'm the one who needs to take a stats class?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
17317765.881.1334081488568.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynkf14 on 4/10/12
11:11 AM:

...

From what I can see, posted *twice*, and the second time being a clear copy
/ paste of the first (after you snipped and ran from it... a tell that you
know you are not right).

But it is true, it was a silly mistake... but it is also true it was posted
*in response* to your obsession with my posting a specific coefficient...
something I have made clear is something I do not have and do not think it
is a reasonable think to even try to measure given the variables being
discussed (would have to quantify things better and do more work than I care
to do). What I did do was not that with the projects I have listed (and
those like them) there is likely to be an upward tend line in Linux usage
share. And using both the one-year data I first used and the two-year data
you asked me to graph for you, this has been shown. Your claim is that this
upward trend line is *not* something that has been seen in the past - not
over the last ten years. This, if you are right (though you have shown no
evidence to support your claim), the upward trend line is a new thing... and
matches well with the time line I have talked about (in other words, it
correlates well... though how well has not been specific by any given
coefficient, nor do I think it will be).

But you cannot accept the idea of there being evidence of an upward trend
line matching the rough time line I talked about without someone producing a
correlation coefficient for you. This, as I have noted, shows how you have
gotten yourself confused by the term correlation and how it has been used.
You have a poor understanding of the concept.

I have admitted to my errors - even the absurd ones such as leaving the
"not" out of two sentences (completely messing up the meaning of the
sentence). I not only admit to my errors, I correct them and explain what I
mean.

I would love to see you rise to my level and admit to your errors - they are
*obvious* and repeated. You are pretending to have a good understanding
about topics you are clearly ignorant about (and we all have topics we are
ignorant about).

>> please note I have *NOT* stated I had a specific coefficient
>>
>> And I do not.
>
> Right. So you're claiming there's a correlation without any evidence.

Incorrect. See: when you make claims such as this you prove I am right that
you do not understand the concept of a correlation.

> You say that there's been an increase in usabilility but the only evidence is
> some press releases claiming it, when in reality most people don't like the
> latest changes.

I have noted the increased focus on this area, and supported it by pointing
to the many projects which have had this as a focus. You want to deny this
as evidence, even though it is solid. So be it. I can lead a horse to
water but I cannot make it drink. Oh, and nobody has said that all of these
projects have been without flaw... in fact, I have noted where they are
flawed. Heck, Shuttleworth, being honest and doing as I do, has spoken
about some of the missteps his organization has made. Unlike you he admits
to his mistakes and works to make things better.

> You're claiming some arbitrary time period over which these improvements took
> place (with a made up "lag time" you've shown no evidence for)

It makes sense that there is a lag time between a change being introduced
and it leading to a measurable change in use. In fact, how could it not?

> , because it fits a trend line showing a marginal increase over your
> cherry-picked time period due to some heavily weighted anomolies in the stats.

You made that up.

> You have no real evidence to support this correlation,

You made that up.

> and are unable to show a coefficient

Other than with a silly typo I never suggested I could or would or should.
That is your hang-up, not mine.

> , yet you say this lends credence to your claims of causality.

You made that up - I never said your ignorance of what I have shown lends
credence to any claim of mine. Now your claims about the past 10 years does
lend credence as did your request for me to extend the trend line back two
years. Yeah, kinda funny how your extreme lack of understanding of the
topic has lead your attempts to show I am wrong to actually support my view.

By the way, here is the evidence for the upward trend line - matching the
times I have spoken about:

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendMar2012Snit-vs-cc.png>

Yeah, I did as you asked and looked at the data you clearly hoped would
prove me wrong.

And it only served to back my view.

And you then said you did not think this trend line would extend beyond that
time (at least not for the past 10 years). And this *also*, if true, backs
my view (though, again, unlike me you offer no evidence of your claims...
you rarely offer evidence... which makes sense given your focus on emotions
and not rationality).

> So you've made dubious claims, with no evidence, no work to show except a
> trend line based on outliers, and paragraphs of bullshit claiming you don't
> need to show any work anyway. And I'm the one who needs to take a stats class?

Your lack of understanding is what indicates you should take a stats class.
You are trying to twist that and say I am claiming your lies about me are
what indicate this. This is directly dishonest of you. But do not worry,
DFS will back you... at least I would no be surprised. He has shown he is
against reason and logic, much like you are.



--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:35:30 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
>
>
> but it is also true it was posted
> *in response* to your obsession with my posting a specific coefficient...
> something I have made clear is something I do not have and do not think it
> is a reasonable think to even try to measure given the variables being
> discussed (would have to quantify things better and do more work than I care
> to do).
>
>

> I have noted the increased focus on this area, and supported it by pointing
> to the many projects which have had this as a focus.
>
>

> It makes sense that there is a lag time between a change being introduced
> and it leading to a measurable change in use.
>
>

> Your lack of understanding is what indicates you should take a stats class.

Your "statistical analysis" says it all, doesn't it?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
9983991.249.1334152627205.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynje10 on 4/11/12
6:57 AM:

> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:35:30 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> but it is also true it was posted
>> *in response* to your obsession with my posting a specific coefficient...
>> something I have made clear is something I do not have and do not think it
>> is a reasonable think to even try to measure given the variables being
>> discussed (would have to quantify things better and do more work than I care
>> to do).
>>
>>
>> I have noted the increased focus on this area, and supported it by pointing
>> to the many projects which have had this as a focus.
>>
>>
>> It makes sense that there is a lag time between a change being introduced
>> and it leading to a measurable change in use.
>>
>>
>> Your lack of understanding is what indicates you should take a stats class.
>
>
> Your "statistical analysis" says it all, doesn't it?

I made no formal statistical analysis nor claimed or even hinted I did...
other, if you wish to count it, the trend lines (with the one year data I
selected and then your hand-picked two-year data you would hope would prove
me wrong but, in the end, supported my claims even better - esp. tied with
your claims about the last 10 years.).

Here, in simple terms for you (though it will still go over your head)

1) You claim the tend line has been mostly flat over the last 10 years.
2) We know over the last 2 years (and last year) it has been going up.
3) We know that this is roughly the same time period where the
projected I have noted should lead to an upward trend line have
been becoming popular on common distros
4) Hence we know that my predictions are correct - at least in a
correlative way.

What we do not have direct evidence for is the *reasoning* behind why my
predictions have turned out to be true, or at least seem so based on the
given data. But we know they have. I have offered reasoning for my
predictions and the reasoning is sound (though I and others have offered
other possible factors that also might play a part).

You have no counter to this and show no understanding of what you are even
reading. As is your norm, though, you pretend to be knowledgeable on topics
you clearly are completely clueless about. This is your habit... and you
seem surprised every time this happens... as if people are so stupid they
will not see through your silly games. Well, let me be clear: I do. I am
not fooled by your attempts to sound knowledgeable on topics you are
clueless about. Do you know of anyone who is?


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Steve Carroll]

On Apr 10, 12:35 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
(snip)

> > Right. So you're claiming there's a correlation without any evidence.
>
> Incorrect.

Then it should be easy for you to answer the question that follows the
quoting of your paragraph where you sought to "keep the context
clear":

"And let us keep the context clear, you got your panties in a bunch
when I noted that the greater focus on UI consistency and overall
quality is likely to lead to an increase in users. When it was noted
that reports were coming out that Linux desktop usage share were
increasing, I noted that this made sense to me - fit with my
predictions: make a more usable / consistent system (one where users
can be more productive, are less prone to errors, find more enjoyment
in using it, etc.) and you are likely to get more users." - Snit

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/9f888a7a06d0a234

Given what you have written above, it's evident that the "context", as
far as you are concerned, is that there is a correlation between "UI
consistency" and (your allegation of) the increase of "Linux desktop
usage share" (that means "percentage", Snit).

What that context in mind, where is your evidence of this correlation
you keep claiming exists?

My prediction: Now that your BS is totally exposed (with this one
simple paragraph that tells the entire story as far as you are
concerned) you will keep doing what you've been doing... running.