Why does Linux suck so much?

[Rusty Kans]

Why does linux suck so much?

I've been using Ubuntu 18.04 for less than a day and I've had so many
problems it's unbelievable how anyone could use it as their main
operative system.

After installing Ubuntu somehow it fucked up my windows installation
even though I selected to install it alongside windows and even though
they are on TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE hard drives so there was absolutely
no need to touch the hard drive that had windows in it now every time I
boot up windows it goes on BSOD with the error INACCESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE.

Apparently there's no way to select a default audio output device, I
can't seem to find a way to fix it and even then why the fuck do I have
to open the terminal to do something so simple? so every time I boot up
Ubuntu I have to go into the settings and select my speakers otherwise
the audio comes out of my headphones, sure I could just unplug them but
why in windows you can select a default device meanwhile on linux you
can't?

No way to change the CPU and GPU fan speed, I managed to change the
GPU fan speed with nvidia x server settings but there is no way to
manually set a fan speed curve like you could do in windows with many
programs such as Msi afterburner, and this is a problem for me since my
graphics card has a factory bug where the fan spins too fast even if the
temperature is at 30°C and it's noisy as fuck.

Every time I start Ubuntu it says that an application is asking for a
Keystring, what the fuck is a keystring and why can't it tell me exactly
which application is asking it so I can uninstall it?

Changing the DPI scaling or UI scale or whatever you want to call it
requires the use of the console and you can't even set it to something
like 150% because it only accepts integers so either 100% or 200% meaning
my 1440p screen makes everything look either too big or too small with no
middle ground, meanwhile on windows you can select any size you want.

For what retarded reason is there no option to disable the password?
WHY DO I HAVE TO WRITE MY PASSWORD TO INSTALL SOMETHING? the only way to
disable it is unnecessarily complicated and not recommended since it can
cause even more problems

Why is file browsing so complicated? on windows when you open for
example the disk C: you have the usual stuff, a folder called windows
with all the stuff the system needs and then you have Programs where all
your stuff goes, seems easy and intuitive, meanwhile linux gives you
fucking nothing it's full of folders that mean absolutely nothing to
someone using it for the first time, where do all my programs go? it's a
mystery, why does it have to be so counterintuitive? it's almost like
it's made to piss off anyone that tries to learn it

And now my right speaker doesn't work anymore, but it works perfectly
fine on windows and it's not my fault since in the settings the "balance"
is exactly in the middle with no way to change it since it's greyed out
for some reason, meanwhile on windows the option to change the speaker
Left Right balance is not greyed out and can be modified, can anyone
explain this bullshit?

I purposefully chose Ubuntu since it's the most popular one so in theory
the easiest to use and it still feels like a job to just get it working
with simple basic stuff.

--



Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks
and ignore the message time and time again.

[Ned Latham]

Rusty Kans wrote:
>
> Why does linux suck so much?

Because you blow so much.

[Soviet_Mario]

pls, don't feed the COGLIONES


--
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 22:52:59 -0000 (UTC), Rusty Kans wrote:

> I purposefully chose Ubuntu since it's the most popular one so in theory
> the easiest to use and it still feels like a job to just get it working
> with simple basic stuff.

Dunno. I dual boot between Windows & Ubuntu whenever I want.

And, since I set up Windows right (no hibernation for example), Ubuntu can
read and write the Windows file system even when Windows isn't booted.

How cool is that!

That's useful to, for example, copy iPad files over from the iPad to
Windows without ever having to deal with the iTunes abomination, since, on
Linux, turning the iPod into a USB stick "just works".

Maybe you need to ask alt.os.linux but you'll have to give them details, as
they're a helpful bunch, but not for mere tirades.

They're a wonderfully adult HELPDESK for Linux issues if you act like an
adult and provide the details for them to help you.

Good luck.

[Paul]

Rusty Kans wrote:
> Why does linux suck so much?
>

https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/9a8zcc/why_does_linux_suck_so_much/e4u1v7t/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=comment_timestamp

Since you didn't write the screed, but merely copied it,
feedback would be pointless.

*******

The person in that thread, is new to multibooting, and it
shows. Any person learning to do that, makes the same
mistakes everyone else does. And what you fuck up the first
time, you fix the second time. And so on. It's an
iterative learning experience. Nobody gets the details
right every time. Sometimes the results are a spectacular
failure (for example, *whole disk erased* was one of
my better results). This is why backups are recommended
if you're a noob, and there's nothing wrong with being a
noob. Just don't come out flailing like an idiot, if your
dumpster catches fire. Everyone has a dumpster fire in
this business, eventually.

One mistake the OP in that thread made, is a violation
of the First Rule of Multiboot.

"Never connect more disks during an OS install,
than are necessary to finish the install."

If Windows is on one disk and Ubuntu is going on the
second disk, you *unplug* the Windows disk.

If Windows and Ubuntu are going on the same disk,
the second (data-only) disk gets unplugged. This
ensures that there's no way for GRUB to end up on
the second disk.

If you're installing Windows for the first time,
only the empty disk is connected and all other
disks are disconnected. This ensures the boot and
system partitions end up on the same disk drive.
This helps avoid "Inaccessible boot volume" scenarios
later.

And the First Rule of Multiboot, is what you learn when
you make your first fuckup. Rather appropriate in a way.
Will the OP in that thread learn anything ? Who knows.
There's no point reading threads where there is
too much flailing going on.

I doubt anyone collected a picture of the disk partition
layout on the two disks, so they could reverse engineer
what the OP did wrong.

But as long as you insist on plugging in too many disk
drives, then threads like that will be the result.

Paul

[Yuri Baiul]

Rusty Kans <ruste...@email.com> wrote in
news:r1ne4b$o2k$2...@dont-email.me:

Why are you using snit's signature?
Isn't this the signature snit uses?

[гость]

Ah ha ha ha.

Dumb fuck screwed up.

--
Я гость в отеле

[гость]

Why did you hope to gain by using Linux over windows?

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 08 Feb 2020 22:49:22 -0500, Paul wrote:

> Since you didn't write the screed, but merely copied it,
> feedback would be pointless.

Thanks Paul for recognizing this thread was just a copypasted troll, where
you are 1 in 10,000 on Usenet who is purposefully helpful and detailed in
your responses, where you, even far more than I, speak facts that you've
found to be the case on the public record.

IMHO, most Usenet posters (i.e., 9,999 out of 10,000) spend seconds on each
post, instead of the minutes (and sometimes hours, and sometimes days) that
it takes to write a well-researched well-tested response.

Certainly your posts (and mine) are generally chock full of links and cross
references, which the idle trolls (you know who you are, and if you don't I
can provide a list, :) never seem to accomplish (even when they provide
links, the trolls, particularly the apologists, don't even _read_ their own
links for heavens' sake: they just look at the headlines).

While this isn't going to be one of those extremely well detailed well
researched posts, a point to be made for the edification of the audience
might be, given the cc list, what the singular main foible is of _each_ of
the five common consumer operating systems are.

What sucks about...
1. Windows
2. Linux
3. Android
4. iOS
5. Mac

I have years of experience (as do most of the listeners) in most of them,
where only my Mac experience is sporadic and not current.

I'll start, where my request, in tune with the subject line, would be for a
single most obvious most egregious foible & beauty of each of these five
common consumer operating systems (Chrome could be added, I guess), where I
use every day the first four, somewhat tongue in cheek due to brevity:

SUCKS:
1. Windows: *Doesn't have the power that Linux provides.*
2. Linux: *Doesn't have the popularity that Windows enjoys.*
3. Android: *Hasn't yet reached the plateau of maturity.*
4. iOS: *Too long ago reached its plateau of maturity.*
5. Mac: /I don't use this every day/
6. Chrome: /I don't use this every day/
*
BEST:
1. Windows: *Freeware for almost anything you want to do.*
2. Linux: *Freeware to script almost anything you want to script.*
3. Android: *Freeware for almost anything you want to do.*
4. iOS: *Its owners admittedly are as loyal as any human can be.*
5. Mac: /I don't use this every day/
6. Chrome: /I don't use this every day/

As an aside, Linux is so powerful nowadays and jammed chock full of
freeware equivalents to most Windows programs, I'm still one of the folks
surprised that Linux hasn't surpassed Windows long ago. I'm not sure why.

--
Normally I use Usenet as a public HELPDESK; this is a rare idle chitchat.

[F Russell]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 07:48:25 +0000, Arlen Holder wrote:

> 2. Linux: *Freeware to script almost anything you want to script.*
>

The term "freeware" is not correct.

On GNU/Linux the software is "open source" and this is much different
than something that is given away gratis.

Open source implies a community and a freedom from the constraints
of commercialism.

[chrisv]

Arlen Holder wrote:

> Paul wrote:
>>
>> Since you didn't write the screed, but merely copied it,
>> feedback would be pointless.
>
>Thanks Paul for recognizing this thread was just a copypasted troll,

But don't you know that if some loser can google the planet, and find
someone, somewhere, having a problem, it means that Linux "sucks"?

>Certainly your posts (and mine) are generally chock full of links and cross
>references, which the idle trolls (you know who you are, and if you don't I
>can provide a list, :) never seem to accomplish (even when they provide
>links, the trolls, particularly the apologists, don't even _read_ their own
>links for heavens' sake: they just look at the headlines).

Freedom-haters are, generally, stupid people.

>As an aside, Linux is so powerful nowadays and jammed chock full of
>freeware equivalents to most Windows programs, I'm still one of the folks
>surprised that Linux hasn't surpassed Windows long ago. I'm not sure why.

Windows is a little "slicker", it's more familiar, and it comes
pre-installed.

--
"The Linux users are squealing with delight that they can now run the
program they have been slamming for years. You know, the buggy IE...."
- "flatfish", lying shamelessly

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 08:22:52 -0600, chrisv wrote:

> Windows is a little "slicker", it's more familiar, and it comes
> pre-installed.

Long ago I predicted (wrongly, as it turns out) that Linux would kick
Windows' ass, but it just has not happened on the home desktop.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect two key factors are in play:
a. As you noted, in the USA anyway, Windows is already there, and,
b. Even today, MS Office has a hold on business like you can't believe.

[Carlos E.R.]

The term "freeware" applied the same to Android and Linux is not
correct. In Linux almost everything is Free, meaning both Gratis and
Free. You are free to take anything and modify it, not only to use it.
And then distribute your modification. With a myriad different license
types.

Except when you install some of the few proprietary things, of course.
But they are a minority.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 10/02/2020 08.48, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>> BEST:
>> 1. Windows: *Freeware for almost anything you want to do.*
>> 2. Linux: *Freeware to script almost anything you want to script.*
>> 3. Android: *Freeware for almost anything you want to do.*

>> [...]

>
> The term "freeware" applied the same to Android and Linux is not
> correct. In Linux almost everything is Free, meaning both Gratis and
> Free.

I think you meant "both gratis and libre" here, Carlos. But otherwise,
yep, completely agree.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl5CnU0ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooFPVgf/U33+mb0uPMAdvmyVV6tFUw/v3V4Sql0/7Br/gDdlIW+ktWo2KfiBvXQZ
tI7lmr8ts7pO55gJadTwUl080pHoDc9g38rmDYLj8t8ePN58+blWncn1yYS9L+jM
3BxH9NAaR0BQp+C/S4CiBgLWx/mDLVl/uJOgBfZjNI7KX89NpWhI7h2a3qh4vv3Z
SomvocpFXc3piwG/4P7npOE9bM+xMWYw5IH729JY1SjfKnMQ1i5dgHIMefPUuXOI
gIqj4HkFjpjAkf/GK3DMpR5IvNXyR7LS71bjVWJNwb0e1RKmoDocfe1AKvKxdSwR
z2vdg/Sr8rco9INrcDOC/oPgzYN+5Q==
=TeLj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[chrisv]

Oh, I can believe. The risk-averse mindset of business has been a
huge factor in facilitating the monopoly. No one ever got fired for
spec'ing Windows or MSO.

The workers using the same OS at home only makes sense. Especially
when you factor-in everything else - the networking effects, the
software situation, etc.

It's a *very* tough nut to crack, obviously.

But, on the Interwebs, we have a cadre of sneering pricks who blame it
all on the FOSS community. There's too much freedom, too much choice,
you know, and Windows' continued dominance "proves" it.

--
'Unfortunately idiots like chrisv and his "let's have a zillion
choices" is partially responsible for squashing any gains Linux has
had.' - "flatfish"

[Arlen Holder]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:02:54 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> The term "freeware" applied the same to Android and Linux is not
> correct. In Linux almost everything is Free,

Given I consider myself a freeware addict, there are two fundamental
perspectives, IMHO:
o User
o Developer &/or distributor

Someone else made the distinction between FOSS (and other licenses), where,
to me, those are distinctions that mainly apply to developers and
distributors - and not to the mere users.

Since I'm purely a user of the stuff, if it's distributed to me, for free
on purpose, and I get to use it for free on purpose, then, to me, as a mere
user, it's "freeware".

Yes, I know the definition can be argued ad infinitum where we can get down
to the details of the difference license types, but, as a mere user,
digging down into to those details has no value, IMHO.

Could I dig into those details? Sure. But why would I (as a user) care?

What I care about, as a user, is the distinction between, oh, say,
"freeware" and "payware", and, more often than not, devious "*trialware*",
where I shun payware & trialware except in the rare (so rare that it's
almost not existent) cases where I _need_ that payware or trialware to
perform a task I can't perform with bona-fide freeware. [This almost never
happens, in practice, if you're intelligent about software selection,
IMHO.]

Same thing with *adware*, which I shun just as strongly as trialware, since
I feel there's almost always freeware that does the job, at least on
Android there almost 100% certainly is (not quite, but almost 100% as shown
here):
o *Is there any fundamental app functionality for Android that's not already available for free?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/iVOgeioJ44Q>
Found from a search on:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/comp.mobile.android>

Then there is the "fremium" market, which I also shun, if possible, but
which is hard to avoid when, for example, you have programs like Mapfactor
Navigator which have traffic, but which don't provide traffic in the free
offline mode. An example is freeware non-login traffic apps on mobiles:
o *Is there a non Google freeware traffic app*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/Ve_2cgliiGk>

In summary, while legal distinctions certainly affect the user (e.g., how
many of us had to download FFMPEG separately in the past from the freeware
editors using LAME, as I recall?) ... in general, my position is currently
that the user is free from worrying about the specific licensing of re-use
and distribution details, and hence, if it's purposefully free, then, for
my purposes, it's freeware.

If someone wishes to write a post explaining all the types of possible
re-use licensing and modification licensing and distribution licensing,
then they're welcome to that effort - but - I posit - it has almost no
effect on the user.

So it's like the distinction of what metals went into the making of your
local newspaper. Sure, it matters to the guy making and distributing the
newspaper, but the distinction doesn't matter all that much to the user.

IMHO.

[F Russell]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:35:43 +0000, Arlen Holder wrote:

>
> Someone else made the distinction between FOSS (and other licenses), where,
> to me, those are distinctions that mainly apply to developers and
> distributors - and not to the mere users.
>
> Since I'm purely a user of the stuff, if it's distributed to me, for free
> on purpose, and I get to use it for free on purpose, then, to me, as a mere
> user, it's "freeware".
>

The idea of software "freedom," in the GNU sense, is clear although
subtle.

There is freedom as in "free beer" and freedom as in "free speech."

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/21932/what-does-the-term-and-free-as-in-free-beer-mean

GNU and FOSS see software as something of a basic right that is
intended to benefit the community through free exchange and open
development. The idea of software freedom thus extends well beyond
the idea of a free give away.

The distinction is critical. If I, for example, recognize systemd as
a toxic poison that is destroying the elegance and simplicity of Linux,
I can certainly take the entire Linux source, modify it, and distribute
a new systemd-free Linux.

Some have actually branded FOSS as a kind of socialism which is not
true, but the term "socialism" is perhaps the closest English word
to the spirit of FOSS.

The principle of GNU and FOSS extend back to the early years of academic
computing when software was exchanged by researchers in a similar fashion.
The Netlib math repository is an example that was actually formed in this
early period:

https://www.netlib.org/

In contrast, commercial software is developed by organized entities with
the sole purpose of making a profit.

>
> the distinction doesn't matter all that much to the user.
>

To a lot of users it may not matter. All they want is some "free
beer."

But for a lot of others it does matter. They recognize and strongly
appreciate the idea of GNU and FOSS. Hopefully they will contribute
in some way even if only though a donation to the FSF.

[Arlen Holder]

On 11 Feb 2020 16:49:23 GMT, F Russell wrote:

> To a lot of users it may not matter. All they want is some "free
> beer."
>
> But for a lot of others it does matter. They recognize and strongly
> appreciate the idea of GNU and FOSS. Hopefully they will contribute
> in some way even if only though a donation to the FSF.

Hi R. Rusell,
Thank you for that writeup, which I, for one, appreciate, since you
described the reason and social benefits of the various licensing models.

I should note that I embody my heart and soul into the "socialistic"
attitude you explained, both in my _use_ of freeware, and my dissemination
of "free beer".

By way of explanation, I too come out of a university atmosphere where
knowledge is not only shared, but improved, where, you may be aware, I've
written many tutorials (so many I can't count them) and posted them, as in
"free beer" on Usenet.

Here's just one of too many to count free beers, for example:
o This is intended to be a vim turd file reference (please improve!)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/OoRWRJHWsUI/Hclp1L0YAwAJ>

While simple, note that free beer has similar socialistic characteristics:
1. It starts with what is known;
2. It attempts to improve upon what is known;
3. It welcomes others to take it to the next step, from there.

For example, improvement results of the socialistic public "testing":
o Report of potential bug/enh in vpnstatus.sh & tbird.sh scripts
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/Uc3yqYZlL0Y/sTP29UsVDQAJ>

Lots of my "free beer" reviews and tutorials are on a score (or more) of
web sites, so it's hard to find them, but my style never changes so you'll
recognize this, for example, as mine, from my basic writing style:
o My test of freeware Android offline GPS navigation applications
<https://androidforums.com/threads/my-test-of-freeware-android-offline-gps-navigation-applications.806872/>

Most of my "free beer" tutorials are not actual software code, but working
with Marek I certainly greatly _helped_ the Linux group in testing of the
vpnstatus and other VPN-related scripts which have become famous.
o Free openvpn config using efficient scripts (please improve so all benefit)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/IXT9Eblx3iw/2D8Tta06FgAJ>

Some, but not many, of my "free beer" tutorials are actual software apps,
as in this tutorial below which took many (many) hours to write, overall:
o Report: My first "hello world" using Android Studio freeware on Windows worked just fine (in about an hour)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/aW64zYeBtF0/1b5h3r3PBAAJ>

Where, if I had the coding skills most of you have, I would be giving out
free beer products all the time on Android but likely not Windows or Linux
as that would take a much higher degree of effort than I want to expend.

I even said so in that tutorial above, where it would be nice to be able to
supply the public with free beer for Android apps that did one task well
and only one task - so well - people would be more efficient (sort of like
how RISC is often more efficient than RISC).

In short, I AGREE with the socialistic points you made!
o And I embody them myself!

While I make ample use of "freeware" software (where I feel almost
everything we need to do is available for free to intelligent people), I
also provide ample free beer on Usenet (& web forums).

Hence, we agree on the concept that everyone wins with both free beer and
free ware.

--
When people purposefully help each other on the Usenet potluck, we all win.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 11/02/2020 16.35, Arlen Holder wrote:
> Could I dig into those details? Sure. But why would I (as a user) care?

You should.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Arlen Holder]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:04:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> Could I dig into those details? Sure. But why would I (as a user) care?
>
> You should.

Hi Carlos,

Maybe. Maybe not.

While I enjoyed and benefited from your distinction between free (e.g.,
closed source) and freeware (e.g., open source), I don't generally care as
long as the app does what I need it to do (and they all generally do that).

Given I almost never update an app (on principle, and from experience),
there's even more reason to enjoy software that nobody is changing, so it
"still" works (most of the time, although the underlying OS is constantly
changing).

As for whether I "should" care about the myriad distinctions, I've been
there, done that, for many things (e.g., FFMPEG European and USA patent
expiry dates, for example), but I only delve to that level when I feel
there's some kind of advantage in the use model (e.g., distribution).

Despite the fact I make little to no distinction between types of "free
stuff", what I "might" do some day when I get a round tuit, is write my own
Android software, as per the previous discussion, which would be KISS apps
which do one thing and one thing only - and yet - they do them how I would
like them done - which is to say they would do that one thing well.

Most apps try to be a swiss army knife (e.g., ES File Explorer), where I'd
be more along the model of SimpleMobileTools and NewPipe than that.
o <https://www.simplemobiletools.com/>
o <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewPipe>

But for _that_ to happen, I'll have to learn more about Android (java) app
development, which, at this stage of my life, coding bores me (I learned
many of the languages many decades ago, where my attitude, nowadays, is
that they all essentially do the same thing (yes, some better than others)
only with different extremely picky syntax that is a PITA to learn).

I wouldn't even learn VI nowadays if it wasn't long ago embedded in my
finger memory.
--
Sometimes there's no value to digging deeply into the myriad details.

[Carlos E.R.]

Reposting, due to a wrong group listed.
If somebody answers only on the advocacy groups, I will not see it.

On 11/02/2020 17.49, F Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:35:43 +0000, Arlen Holder wrote:

...

>> the distinction doesn't matter all that much to the user.
>>
>
> To a lot of users it may not matter. All they want is some "free
> beer."
>
> But for a lot of others it does matter. They recognize and strongly
> appreciate the idea of GNU and FOSS. Hopefully they will contribute
> in some way even if only though a donation to the FSF.

For example, I use certain freeware software to watch tv programming
from my ISP. The person that did this software has disappeared, thus
that good software is dead in the water and nobody can continue the
work; the software has faults, needs corrections, nobody can do them. He
did not publish the sources, he did not even publish the investigation
that allowed him to create the software. He wanted them secret.

That would not happen in "Free" software, as we would have the source
and /maybe/ someone would want to continue the work.

That's a practical distinction between Free and Freeware.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 12/02/2020 03.51, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:04:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> Could I dig into those details? Sure. But why would I (as a user) care?
>>
>> You should.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Maybe. Maybe not.
>
> While I enjoyed and benefited from your distinction between free (e.g.,
> closed source) and freeware (e.g., open source), I don't generally care as
> long as the app does what I need it to do (and they all generally do that).

See my other post on a practical example (that happened to me) with a
freeware app.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Carlos E.R. wrote:

> On 12/02/2020 03.51, Arlen Holder wrote:

>> [...]

>> While I enjoyed and benefited from your distinction between free (e.g.,

>> closed source) and freeware (e.g., open source) [...]

>
> See my other post on a practical example (that happened to me) with a
> freeware app.

In two lines, Arlen successfully got all four terms twisted around (and,
in general wrong).

While I'm fairly certain the general population of this group already
knows ... maybe it'll help someone:

"Closed source" -> the source code is unavailable. The application MAY
be "freeware". The application is not "free".

"Open source" -> the source code is available in some manner. The
application MAY be "freeware". The application MAY be "free".

"freeware" -> the application is provided without charge. The
application MAY be "open source". The application MAY be "free".

"free" -> The application MAY
* be provided "free as in beer"
* be provided "free as in speech"

Due to the two meanings in English causing various levels of confusion
over the last 40(ish) years; the term "free" has in relatively recent
times been replaced with either "gratis" (i.e. "without charge") or
"libre" (i.e. "at liberty").


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl5D8r8ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooHZhAf/Qr0AnpnPP5V1Z8a9GaCSMRCVS/FoKJQnRY704OGYRGvXO5BzgU7FCwtb
9z0x0u3przwMToceRjS32+rooq44z4WpDZaLSsnzzeelPpi9ErYY7njrl2JFgf9/
d6VyXeO9Pf9Os5euL7DyNHbR8udlaWtZtqxqkGoHaslGwjDViASJ66h+8W0chTej
YbaL9FKmNGfARTUMmrN9EEYLivo/OBRwpN3C1nVN4Ev2VUasA5689ff1zAlTBxMA
hr1/Y6mO0ER/1FWP89LrXSZtz+TdOZ1IMNCGbnGIQBDoFEDtgyZv6w8fzmRj2ej7
eQlXb4ZQWhlQYtZ3sSn8lZAc3h7EAQ==
=y1O6

[William Poaster]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 12:42:40 +0000, Dan Purgert wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 12/02/2020 03.51, Arlen Holder wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> While I enjoyed and benefited from your distinction between free (e.g.,
>>> closed source) and freeware (e.g., open source) [...]
>>
>> See my other post on a practical example (that happened to me) with a
>> freeware app.
>
> In two lines, Arlen successfully got all four terms twisted around (and,
> in general wrong).

He did it deliberately because he's a fuckwitted troll.
Bin him & move on FFS.

<snip>

[Arlen Holder]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 11:48:18 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> If somebody answers only on the advocacy groups, I will not see it.

That's why I'm using the original ngs.

[Arlen Holder]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 11:50:24 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> See my other post on a practical example (that happened to me) with a
> freeware app.

Hi Carlos,

It's good when adults can converse on topics, such as these, which have
nuances in detail, such that nobody is fully right or fully wrong, simply
because there are various perspectives, e.g.,
o The perspective of developers/distributors is completely different...
o Than the perspective of a mere user
And, of course, their perspectives overlap, as they did in your apropos
example.

The logic is that the free software categories "can" change between those
two (developer vs user) perspectives (and do).

BTW, I saw your example, where rest assured, details don't generally elude
me (unless I'm uninterested or have no use for them).

Your example was apropos, and I used your example, only in different words.

So it's nice that we agree on your example of the app that went defunct but
whose code was proprietary.

Actually, what you speak of, as you know probably better than I do, has
happened many times.

I mean look at what happened with TrueCrypt for example, where, AFAIK,
without researching it anyway, I think VeraCrypt picked it up when
TrueCrypt developers dropped it.

I'm sure that's happened _many_ times, and it would be an interesting list
to see what programs were picked up AFTER a developer dropped it.

An example of code NOT picked up because it was proprietary could be, oh,
let's say, 40tudeDialog, which, if it wasn't for its scripting and
extremely loyal Germanic support, would have died long ago, where even its
original web site had to be picked up by someone else.

In summary, details don't easily slip by me, so yes, I did _use_ your
example when I made my example, where that's a compliment that your example
was apropos.

You made a good point as did others with "free beer" & "freeware":
o free software (proprietary)
o freeware (open source)

The problem, of course, is we each have our definitions for the same or
similar things, since I distinguish between:
o freeware (purposefully free)
o shareware (they hope you pay)
o trialware (sleazy stuff)
o adware (obnoxious stuff, but understandably so)
o subscription ware (pay forever)
o payware (pay once)

Any others?
--
(Ah, I see, belatedly, Dan Purgert created a few definitions, which didn't
cover the extent of the ones above, but covered _other_ aspects of the
disttribution)

Bearing in mind there are two perspectives:
o The perspective of the developer and/or distributor
o The perspect of the mere user

Dan's distinctions below mostly pertain to the "developer community", and
not, necessarily to the user community (e.g., he skips the types I
described above because they're looking at a _different_ aspect).

"Closed source" -> the source code is unavailable. The application MAY
be "freeware". The application is not "free".

"Open source" -> the source code is available in some manner. The
application MAY be "freeware". The application MAY be "free".

"freeware" -> the application is provided without charge. The
application MAY be "open source". The application MAY be "free".

"free" -> The application MAY
* be provided "free as in beer"
* be provided "free as in speech"

And, since I don't miss details, I noted the classic Dan Purgert childish
ad hominem attack and will not respond directly to any of Dan's posts in
this thread as a direct result, nor will I respond to the other classic
child-like trolls who infest this newsgroup (e.g., William Poaster).

[Carlos E. R.]

Libre software and Open Source. They can be for pay, but you get the
source and you can use it, modify it, publish your modifications,
distribute it yourself. Yes, it mostly apply to developers more than
users, but a user can pay someone to modify or continue a project, even
sell it. If the original project dies, you have some options.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Yeah, Arlen is (both).


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl5EaHUACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooGmeggAi5PZNHr7pTPdDhKSWV+n75aQ9apbSr1RVCu31xsFqjEYxwpDSGo5ojtt
aJOBw8K7Oygn17WP0AanPZ361dEZ2jJ0HX+2UJtFAmtpM5kMsmXb6TII9cNoc/VK
THPwqmuqzdvPFmPXGFygblmjnyf4YOkU6HSP5faltKG6E+C0FGm8S2AHoQNmO1Bq
1RvCzVjh0kDz8+ksr6BxX6K1qzz5tWCSxwrmg/NyvR8JnrKUP5vb8og0txaibiR5
mDAUtAzJkGJlOqcRM3AQBwVAHVKiaj0Sv2fLhHy6LUS7/je3LvDBX1s1Os8TM110
w/wdNW4d+J/IBsEdi03UDeTW5Gk2Uw==
=Aq0X

[Soviet_Mario]

On 12/02/20 03:51, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:04:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> Could I dig into those details? Sure. But why would I (as a user) care?
>>
>> You should.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Maybe. Maybe not.
>
> While I enjoyed and benefited from your distinction between free (e.g.,
> closed source) and freeware (e.g., open source), I don't generally care as
> long as the app does what I need it to do (and they all generally do that).
>
> Given I almost never update an app (on principle, and from experience),
> there's even more reason to enjoy software that nobody is changing, so it
> "still" works (most of the time, although the underlying OS is constantly
> changing).
>
> As for whether I "should" care about the myriad distinctions, I've been
> there, done that, for many things (e.g., FFMPEG European and USA patent
> expiry dates, for example), but I only delve to that level when I feel
> there's some kind of advantage in the use model (e.g., distribution).
>
> Despite the fact I make little to no distinction between types of "free
> stuff",

I think there are more and less intrinsically crucial SW
areas from this point of view.
For everything that has sth to do with security (also in the
sense of privacy in the broadest meaning) the closedness of
code makes a lot of difference.
The fact that numerous skilled eyes have had the chance to
sieve the code looking for weakness, backdoors and so, is
relevant.
Closed source implies stainless steel TRUST in the coder.
Otherwise you simply (and not even necessarily) move the
risk from one person/firm to another.
Also sw supporting activity that is legal per-se but
possibly used illegally (a torrent sharing SW) should be
open source at least.
For cloud storage the openedness of the syncing app might
not even be enough, as you have to also rely on the storage
in itself, a place where you have no control and no
knowledge at all. When you send data in clear out there,
imho you should be assuming everyone has some access to them.
Just by adding some "local" level of encryption, independent
of the storage, you are reasonably safe.

I know, I'm a bit paranoid about spyware :)

> what I "might" do some day when I get a round tuit, is write my own
> Android software, as per the previous discussion, which would be KISS apps
> which do one thing and one thing only - and yet - they do them how I would
> like them done - which is to say they would do that one thing well.
>
> Most apps try to be a swiss army knife (e.g., ES File Explorer), where I'd
> be more along the model of SimpleMobileTools and NewPipe than that.
> o <https://www.simplemobiletools.com/>
> o <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewPipe>
>
> But for _that_ to happen, I'll have to learn more about Android (java) app
> development, which, at this stage of my life, coding bores me (I learned
> many of the languages many decades ago, where my attitude, nowadays, is
> that they all essentially do the same thing (yes, some better than others)
> only with different extremely picky syntax that is a PITA to learn).
>
> I wouldn't even learn VI nowadays if it wasn't long ago embedded in my
> finger memory.
>


--

1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[Siri Cruise]

Don't suck! Bl---!

Wait.



Sorry, carry on.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed

[chrisv]

Dan Purgert wrote:

> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>> In Linux almost everything is Free, meaning both Gratis and Free.
>
>I think you meant "both gratis and libre" here, Carlos. But otherwise,
>yep, completely agree.

The dumb fscking liar "DFS" actually claimed that it's "flat-out
lying" to say that Ardour is 'free as in beer', even though it is.

What a POS!

If DumFSck responds, observe the shit-brained "logic" that he uses, to
argue that people are "forced" to pay for software that is easily and
legally available for free.

--
"the Ardour dev hypocrite liar claims he writes 'free as in beer'
software, then forces you to pay for it" - DumFSck, lying
shamelessly

[Soviet_Mario]

On 13/02/20 12:17, Siri Cruise wrote:
> Don't suck! Bl---!
>
> Wait.
>
>
>
> Sorry, carry on.
>

I'm sorry, I'm bestowed with a dramatic sense of humor, but
only in my motherlanguage (italian). I totally lack it in
English, so ... I did not understand your reply. My fault

[chrisv]

> DFS wrote:

>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> The dumb fscking liar "DFS" actually claimed that it's "flat-out lying"
>>> to say that Ardour is 'free as in beer', even though it is.
>>>
>>> What a POS!
>>>
>>> If DumFSck responds, observe the shit-brained "logic" that he uses, to
>>> argue that people are "forced" to pay for software that is easily and
>>> legally available for free.
>>

>> https://community.ardour.org/download_form
>>
>> FAQ #1: "I thought this was free software?"
>>
>> Author dissemble:
>>
>> <quote>
>> Ardour is free in the following ways:
>>
>> You are free to do anything with it that you want (including use it on
>> as many machines as you wish, make copies of it for friends).
>> You can get the source code without charge, and build (and modify) the
>> program yourself.
>> Some people like to explain this with the phrase "Ardour is free as in
>> free speech, not free as in free beer".
>>
>> If you want the convenience of using our ready-to-run version and/or for
>> support from Ardour developers and experienced users, we ask that you
>> pay something for this.
>>
>> If you don't want to pay for a ready-to-run version, then you'll need to
>> get the source code and build it yourself. We do not provide assistance
>> with this process and particularly on Windows and OS X this can be
>> challenging and take a long time.
>>
>> This is a big, complex software project, and without revenue to support
>> its development, it will almost certainly grind to a halt. Our download
>> system is one way that we try to raise revenue. Please consider being a
>> part of the wonderful group of people who help to make this continued
>> development of Ardour possible.
>> </quote>
>>
>> All these years later, and Ardour still isn't free as in beer.
>>
>> And quit crossposting your lies and stupidity outside of cola.

See what I mean, folks? The POS "DFS" pretends that the only way it's
freely available is from this one Web site.

"sudo apt-get install Ardour", anyone?

The shit-brained liar lives in an upside-down world, where he is
decent and honest, and decent, honest people are "liars" and
"hypocrites".

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <r32lfn$9ib$1...@dont-email.me>,
Johann Beretta <ber...@nun-ya-bizness.com> wrote:
...
>That's it, in a nutshell. Windows has inertia and Office is entrenched.
> Plus, on a purely technical view, Windows NT, XP, and Windows 7 were
>damn good operating systems. They were fairly stable and compatible with
>just about every piece of hardware you could think of.
>
>I ditched Windows a couple of years ago, when the Windows 7 EOL was
>drawing closer and, for the most part, Linux Mint just works. No driver
>issues (so far), but I don't have any exotic hardware, so that's not
>surprising.
>
>I do miss a few programs (Photoshop / Illustrator / InDesign) and have
>been considering building a dedicated "Adobe" machine using Windows 7
>again, but will have to keep it air-gapped. I won't use Windows 10 for
>any reason.

You are certainly right that MS has *completely* screwed the pooch with
"Windows 10". I don't even consider it Windows. It is just a random
collection of junk - ever changing.

As I've said before, "Windows 10" is all the bad things about Linux (the
general randomness - the "If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces"
aspect), with, of course, none of the good things about Linux.

--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansplaining

It describes comp.lang.c to a T!

[Jeff-Relf.Me]

Unlike Linux, Windows 10 -can- be configured properly.

It's difficult to do;
hence the popularity of (dainty) iPhones.

[chrisv]

Johann Beretta wrote:

>But, when you start spewing that kind of drivel,
>you only paint yourself as a moron.
>
>100% of Linux can be tweaked and customized to run PRECISELY the way you
>want it to. Hell, you can compile the kernel to contain exactly what you
>want it to contain and not 1 byte more.

Speaking of morons, the "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark argued that
Windows gives you more freedom than GNU/Linux does.

I couldn't make this stuff up. His "logic" is below.

--
'once more : nearly all the OSS application SW which runs on Linux
runs on Windows too. And a lot more exists for Windows only. Which is
more freedom? less or more "free" SW?' - "True Linux advocate"
Hadron Quark

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in
news:bvtj7f97a4trhpeeq...@4ax.com:

> Johann Beretta wrote:
>
>>But, when you start spewing that kind of drivel,
>>you only paint yourself as a moron.
>>
>>100% of Linux can be tweaked and customized to run PRECISELY the
>>way you want it to. Hell, you can compile the kernel to contain
>>exactly what you want it to contain and not 1 byte more.
>
> Speaking of morons, the "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark argued
> that Windows gives you more freedom than GNU/Linux does.
>
> I couldn't make this stuff up. His "logic" is below.
>

This guy wants to fashion himself like a subatomic particle.

What an insult to subatomic particles.

More like a macro atomic farticle.

It stinks where he posts.

[Jeff-Relf.Me]

Johann Beretta told me:
> Figuring out how to operate Windows 10 doesn't make you
> a Windows 10 expert and it certainly doesn't make you
> any type of expert on OSes.

That's your opinion, not mine.

My Win10 Registry Settings:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Win10.REG.TXT

My Mouse/Keyboard Layout:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/MouseKeyboardLayout.PNG

My Visual Studio 2019 macros, C#:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Macros.HTM

My modifications to Quantum Firefox 69 itself,
and the pages it displays:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMvYaNgWryc

My SearchBar:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/SearchBar.PNG

My playList when reading/writing/programming:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/MyPlayList.HTM

My diff routines:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Diff.PNG

My custom C++ console:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/X.HTM

My posts to Usenet ( since Feb 2012 ):
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Posts.TXT

My C++ Coding Rules:
http://Jeff-Relf.Me/C++CodingRules.HTM

> Why are $100+ million dollar
> supercomputers running Linux Oops?

What does that have to do with the PC you pulled
from the dumpster, because you couldn't afford an android ?

> But the fact that you want to engage in massive
> amounts of self-delusion and back-patting by declaring
> the least customizable OS Microsoft has ever produced
> to be "properly configurable" is laughable.

You have no idea.

I'm not going to teach you
because you don't want to learn.

[jrg]

On 3/24/20 6:17 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:

> Johann Beretta posted: >> But the fact that you want to engage in massive>> amounts of

self-delusion and back-patting by declaring>> the least customizable OS
Microsoft has ever produced>> to be "properly configurable" is laughable.
> You have no idea.

I have no idea why YOU think a playlist, playing with firefox prefs
files (you version is out of date BTW), or a searchbar layout, for
instance, means you know enough to make such a half-assed post. And
with all your newsposting, you have never bothered to learn not to cross
post.
Stay over in advocacy with the other nutters.

[chrisv]

Johann Beretta wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>
>> Johann Beretta told me:

>>>
>>> Why are $100+ million dollar
>>> supercomputers running Linux Oops?
>>
>> What does that have to do with the PC you pulled
>> from the dumpster, because you couldn't afford an android ?
>

>The point, genius, was that people don't run an inferior OS on the most
>expensive hardware on Earth. When you pay $250,000,000 for a computer,
>you load the most efficient and stable Operating System you possibly can
>on it.

The dumb fscking troll that calls itself "DFS" has claimed that Linux
is used on supercomputers primarily because it's free of cost, not
because it's the best tool for the job.

That's right. All that expensive hardware, and all the expensive
people using it, but not using the best OS. That's his claim.

Again, I couldn't make this stuff up. The filthy lying scum, like
"DFS" and "Hadron", have no shame in their idiocy and their lies.

--
"The middle 32 characters look very random - but it looks like you
stop at the letter 'f'. * why stop at letter f?" - DumFSck, putting
his ignorance on display

[Joel]

chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Johann Beretta wrote:
>> Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>> Johann Beretta told me:
>>>>
>>>> Why are $100+ million dollar
>>>> supercomputers running Linux Oops?
>>>
>>> What does that have to do with the PC you pulled
>>> from the dumpster, because you couldn't afford an android ?
>>
>>The point, genius, was that people don't run an inferior OS on the most
>>expensive hardware on Earth. When you pay $250,000,000 for a computer,
>>you load the most efficient and stable Operating System you possibly can
>>on it.
>
>The dumb fscking troll that calls itself "DFS" has claimed that Linux
>is used on supercomputers primarily because it's free of cost, not
>because it's the best tool for the job.
>
>That's right. All that expensive hardware, and all the expensive
>people using it, but not using the best OS. That's his claim.

ROFL, yeah, it amazes me that DFS would actually insinuate that the
Linux kernel and associated software are in any way inferior to
Windows. It's not that Windows isn't impressive software (apart from
these ridiculous bugs in Win10 updates), but there's a reason Linux
and GNU rapidly began dominating the Unix-like OS world, they've kept
pace, they've made it a real goal to be competitive. Microsoft is in
some ways better than it used to be, but they can't claim to be the
only game in town.

>Again, I couldn't make this stuff up. The filthy lying scum, like
>"DFS" and "Hadron", have no shame in their idiocy and their lies.

I do wonder why people have such a beef with the values of the FOSS
community. It's not like I run Mint merely because it's free, in fact
I have donated money to the project, I run it because it saves me from
the dread of a Win10 update borking my system.

--
Joel Crump

[Daniel60]

O.K., so it's good to know it's not just me that thinks Arlen's verbose
posts are of dubious value!!

--
Daniel

[Daniel60]

Soviet_Mario wrote on 14/02/2020 6:26 AM:

<Snip>

> I'm sorry, I'm bestowed with a dramatic sense of humor, but only in my
> motherlanguage (italian). I totally lack it in English, so ... I did not
> understand your reply. My fault
>

Hmm!! With a 'Nickname' like "Soviet_Mario", I would have expected your
"totally lack it in English" would have been because you were Russian!!

--
Daniel

[Daniel60]

Johann Beretta wrote on 24/03/2020 5:50 PM:
> On 2/11/20 6:51 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> <snip>

>> Given I almost never update an app (on principle, and from experience),

> <snip>
> If that's on a non-internet connected computer, more power to you. If
> you don't update apps / programs / software on internet connected
> computers, you're an asshole.
>
> Software is updated to fix bugs and vulnerabilities. Unpatched software
> is a target. Once you're compromised, you become the source of viruses
> and malware.
>
If Arlen doesn't 'update an app', I would hope that means he downloads a
completely new version of the apps/programs/software on internet
connected computers!!

--
Daniel