July: Another month of UI improvements...

[cc]

July brought another round of UI improvements [1] by HCI experts [2]. Of course these experts apparently have no idea what they're doing [3]. Cognitive dissonance much? So with all these improvements, there should have been a correlated rise in Linux usage [4].

Drum roll please...

http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpaf=&qpcustom=Linux&qpcustomb=0

Still 1%!

Feel free to respond with predictions for next month. If you would please note the method you used (videos aren't necessary, but if you're going to be hilariously wrong then they are recommended) that would be great. And no math necessary, random guesses are welcome.

My prediction (same method as before, and I can give updated numbers if necessary):
1.05%

My prediction based on history:
1%

Good luck!


[1] "Do you deny the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu, and Mint?"
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d12b5b97dc6b1696?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

[2] "UI / HCI Experts [2]
[2] Including, but not limited to:
KDE / Gnome developers: <http://osnews.com/story/2997>"
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/66d4dec8e2fddfc2?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

[3] "I keep hoping Unity will get its act together. Right now, though, it is -in my view - a complete and utter mess. Horrible."
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5ceaa0572dd5ed0c?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

[4] "Hmmmm, renewed interest in usability and experimentation on the desktop... and the usage numbers increase. Exactly what *I* have been saying would happen and the herd has been disagreeing with. For years."
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/164db8575b99ff67?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

[5] https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ffd84d55f236211a?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect


--
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinearTrendLineCreation.mov> - Snit's ignorance of Excel and his hilarious attempt at statistical analysis

[Snit]

On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> July brought another round of UI improvements

Such as? I have not been following any such improvements the last couple of
months... I would love to hear what you are in reference to... other than
taking my quotes out of context and playing silly trolling games.


--
* cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.

[Nobody]

On 8/1/2012 7:18 AM, cc wrote:

> July brought another round of UI improvements

[...]

July brought another round of anti-Linux FUD too.

But Linux is still here and only getting stronger.

The life of a M$ troll is a hard one indeed.

[cc]

On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > July brought another round of UI improvements
>

Actual quote: July brought another round of UI improvements [1]

[1] "Do you deny the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu, and Mint?"
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d12b5b97dc6b1696?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

"Citation has several important purposes:... to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation

> Such as? I have not been following any such improvements the
> last couple of months... I would love to hear what you are in
> reference to... other than taking my quotes out of context and
> playing silly trolling games.

If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> July brought another round of UI improvements

.
>
> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.

Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux market share
by the first of August.

[cc]

You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any effect at all. I'm not an idiot. There are other, more serious, problems. My post just highlights the idiocy of that kind of thinking, especially when the supposed "proof" is an incredibly small sample set of anomalies.

[Hadron]

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

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>> .
>>>
>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>>
>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
>> market share by the first of August.
>
> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
> effect at all. I'm not an idiot.

Yes you are.

The better the UI then the more chances people will be impressed by it
and adopt/stick with it.

If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped adoption
then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated from other poorer
desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in distrowatch) but not to
understand the benefits of a better, cleaner more consistent UI is a
sure sign you're clueless.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 7:30 AM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>> .
>>>
>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE,
>>> Gnome, Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>>
>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux market
>> share by the first of August.
>
> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to
> have any effect at all.

So are you recanting your OP that started this thread, or did you just
forget what you wrote?

> I'm not an idiot.

You only play the part of one on Usenet? :-)

> There are other, more
> serious, problems. My post just highlights the idiocy of that kind of
> thinking, especially when the supposed "proof" is an incredibly small
> sample set of anomalies.

IOW, you posted a straw man argument.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:38:20 AM UTC-4, Hadron wrote:
> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>>>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>>> .
>>>>
>>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
>>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>>>
>>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
>>> market share by the first of August.
>>
>> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
>> effect at all. I'm not an idiot.
>
> Yes you are. The better the UI then the more chances people

Changing your tune so quickly?

https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d543e0b25ade2821?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

> will be impressed by it and adopt/stick with it.

An impressive UI is the least of Linux's problems.

> If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped
> adoption then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated

Then show where this adoption has occured. Back your statements up, for the first time ever.

> from other poorer desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in
> distrowatch) but not to understand the benefits of a better,

You mean, see how many have been dead in distrowatch for YEARS and then retroactively attribute this to new improvments made to the desktop UIs recently? Jesus Christ. Maybe I need to write it out in a way you'll understand? That logic is : literally the dumbest shit I've ever seen.

> cleaner more consistent UI is a sure sign you're clueless.

You're a fucking moron. I've responded to you too many times to count that it's not that a better UI isn't beneficial. It's that a better UI isn't beneficial to Linux, due to all the other issues. You seemingly agreed with that before, but I guess Snit stopped giving you kisses so you have to change your tune again.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:52:40 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>
> So are you recanting your OP that started this thread,
> or did you just forget what you wrote?

Wow. Read the OP carefully, then get back to me. Actually since you're fucking stupid, I'll give you a hint. Look at my predictions, which have remained steady, then determine if I ever thought improvements would make a difference month to month or at all. Does a 1% prediction every month seem like I'm expecting an increase?

Apology accepted.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 8:28 AM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:52:40 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>
>> So are you recanting your OP that started this thread, or did you
>> just forget what you wrote?
>
> Wow. Read the OP carefully, then get back to me.

Do that yourself.

> Actually since
> you're fucking stupid, I'll give you a hint. Look at my predictions,
> which have remained steady, then determine if I ever thought
> improvements would make a difference month to month or at all. Does a
> 1% prediction every month seem like I'm expecting an increase?

Your OP says you were expecting an increase.

> Apology accepted.

You accepted Mother Nature's apology to you?

[cc]

If you don't understand obvious sarcasm...
Or if you don't understand that the citation labels next to each segment of the first paragraph correspond to quotes and links at the bottom to statements made by someone else...

I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of these posts seem like I'm expecting an increase?

What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled as coming from Snit, or the part where I predict that it will stay the same?

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 9:05:56 AM UTC-4, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:38:20 AM UTC-4, Hadron wrote:
>
>> If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped
>> adoption then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated
>
> Then show where this adoption has occured.
> Back your statements up, for the first time ever.

Well here's some evidence it hasn't helped adoption:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/archive/squid_reports/

Ubuntu
04/2009 - .67%
05/2009 - .70%
06/2009 - .72%
07/2009 - .73%
08/2009 - .69%
09/2009 - .67%
10/2009 - .68%
11/2009 - .71%
12/2009 - .70%
01/2010 - .70%
02/2010 - .71%
03/2010 - .70%
04/2010 - .71%
05/2010 - .74%
06/2010 - .73%
07/2010 - .68%
08/2010 - .69%
09/2010 - .72%
10/2010 - .75%
11/2010 - .77%
12/2010 - .74%
01/2011 - .74%
02/2011 - .73%
03/2011 - .72%
04/2011 - .67%
05/2011 - .57%
06/2011 - .52%
07/2011 - .50%
08/2011 - .44%
09/2011 - .43%
10/2011 - .41%
11/2011 - .47%
12/2011 - .65%
01/2012 - .66%
02/2012 - .66%
03/2012 - .69%
04/2012 - .72%
05/2012 - .68%
06/2012 - .66%

So you see, besides an unusual dip DOWNWARD for a couple of months, Ubuntu has held pretty steady at .70%. Have Snit make a trendline for you if you can't visualize it (note using Snit's hilarious 'method' outlined in his video, Ubuntu is on a downward trend).

So not only have UI improvements not brought any new users to Linux (still 1%), UI improvements have not brought any new users to Ubuntu from other distros like your latest claim. Would you care to move the UI on Linux goalposts again to something else I can shoot down?

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 5:01 AM, in article
70a7dd22-b1e1-4eec...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>>
>
> Actual quote: July brought another round of UI improvements [1]
>
> [1] "Do you deny the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu, and Mint?"
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d12b5b97dc6b1696?dm
> ode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>
> "Citation has several important purposes:... to attribute prior or unoriginal
> work and ideas to the correct sources..."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation
>
>> Such as? I have not been following any such improvements the
>> last couple of months... I would love to hear what you are in
>> reference to... other than taking my quotes out of context and
>> playing silly trolling games.
>
> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu, and
> Mint then I would be happy to update my post.

I am asking you about *your* claim that there were huge improvements in
*July*. You are trying to point to words *I* said to support your claim,
but my words said nothing about *any* improvements in July 2012... in fact,
my comments were made prior to that month and were not forward looking (not
that it cannot be reasonably stipulated that there would be improvements
past my comments!). But you know of *no* improvements. You made a claim
and, as is your norm, you not only lack backing, you are so ignorant of the
topic you cannot even understand what is ignorant about your claims. You
are truly just lost. But, hey, I am a nice guy... look at what KDE has been
doing... that *might* help you support your claims. That is if you were
knowledgeable enough on the topic to be able to speak intelligently about
it. As has been proved, you are not.

Bottom line: you made a claim about July 2012 in terms of UI improvements on
desktop Linux... and you made such comments *without* being able to support
or back your claims. You *again* are proving your ignorance on the topic.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 5:30 AM, in article
2ccfca84-b410-4fc6...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>> .
>>>
>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>>
>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
>> market share by the first of August.
>
> You misunderstand.

His question is a valid one... though he leaves out the question of what
improvements you even are in reference to! But why would you expect these
un-named improvements to have an immediate effect on usage?

And the bottom line is you have no answer. You are completely ignorant of
what you are talking about. You are making posts to try to get a "dig" at
me, but in the end you are merely showing off our own *extreme* ignorance of
both the open source ecosystem *and* my view.

You cannot help but prove your own ignorance over and over and over. It is
one of the reasons why I would love to have a recorded "radio" style
discussion with you. On Usenet you pretend to be knowledgeable... but you
dodge questions and make absurd claims. On a radio show your dodging would
be *much* harder... you would be stumbling over your words and would be
backing yourself into corners faster than you do in a text-based forum where
you just pretend the facts you are shown do not exist. The conversation
would be great! You would ask me a question and I would give a reasoned and
supported reply (or, just as likely, note that your question includes
incorrect assumptions on your part) and then I would ask you questions and
you would try to dodge. I would then ask the same question and note your
dodging and you would get very uncomfortable.

Frankly I would enjoy such a discussion. Maybe you would surprise me and do
better... maybe you are just unable to express your thoughts well in the
written word. Either way, I would very much like such an experience.

Are you game? We can Skype or whatever and both record it - no chance of
either of us twisting the other's words.

> I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
> effect at all.

That is funny! You claim to be some sort of UI expert but here you are
admitting you do not think UI improvements do a darn thing in terms of
drawing users into a system! Why the heck would you work to become the
expert you claim to be in UI issues if you have such little faith in their
value?

> I'm not an idiot.

You are not a good judge of that. :)

> There are other, more serious, problems.

Oh, there are certainly other problems with adoption of Linux: application
selection being a *huge* one. There are others. No doubt. But that is not
relevant to the discussion you started here on *UI* improvements and their
affect on usage rates.

> My post just highlights the idiocy of that kind of thinking, especially when
> the supposed "proof" is an incredibly small sample set of anomalies.

You did not provide any set of data in this thread.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 6:05 AM, in article
ba6e444e-86a5-4521...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

...

>>> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have
>>> any effect at all. I'm not an idiot.
>>
>> Yes you are. The better the UI then the more chances people
>
> Changing your tune so quickly?
>
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d543e0b25ade2821?dm
> ode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>
>> will be impressed by it and adopt/stick with it.
>
> An impressive UI is the least of Linux's problems.

You claim he "changed his tune"... but you do not say where.

As far as there being issues *other* than UI issues, has *anyone* said or
suggested otherwise... in this thread or any other?

Your purpose of this thread, it has become clear, is to argue against your
own straw man. In doing so, though, you made claims you cannot back... as I
noted, your very first sentence is one you cannot back:

July brought another round of UI improvements

But when asked you cannot even think of any (I have pointed you in the
direction where you might be able to offer at least some support - but I bet
you are simply too ignorant of the topic to be able to follow the trail I
suggested for you... you really are just lost on the topic).

>> If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped
>> adoption then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated
>
> Then show where this adoption has occured. Back your statements up, for the
> first time ever.

It is amazing how you claim to be an expert in UI issues but then also show
such little belief in the importance of the value of a good UI. You cannot
even imagine that UI issues would have an impact on usage levels! This is a
concept that is completely foreign to you!

>> from other poorer desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in
>> distrowatch) but not to understand the benefits of a better,
>
> You mean, see how many have been dead in distrowatch for YEARS and then
> retroactively attribute this to new improvments made to the desktop UIs
> recently? Jesus Christ. Maybe I need to write it out in a way you'll
> understand? That logic is : literally the dumbest shit I've ever seen.

Your judgments on such are of *no* value. None.

>> cleaner more consistent UI is a sure sign you're clueless.
>
> You're a fucking moron. I've responded to you too many times to count that
> it's not that a better UI isn't beneficial.

You have been repeatedly denying the benefit of UI improvements. Just from
*today* and from this thread:

cc:
-----

I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
effect at all.

-----

> It's that a better UI isn't beneficial to Linux, due to all the other issues.

So there would be benefits in other cases? Such as? Can you think of a
single case where you actually think UI improvements are a benefit? LOL! I
bet not!

> You seemingly agreed with that before, but I guess Snit stopped giving you
> kisses so you have to change your tune again.

Poor cc... you just keep making a bigger and bigger fool of yourself.

Hey, let's Skype and record it. Come ready with your list of questions. I
will come ready with mine. Hey, I can even tell you my questions first so
you can be prepared... but will not even ask you to reciprocate. Surprise
me! Ask me any questions about UI issues and Linux (or other topics... but
I do reserve the right to say personal questions are none of your business).

And don't trip over those laces!

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 6:28 AM, in article
300f9299-567b-4ef7...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:52:40 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>
>> So are you recanting your OP that started this thread,
>> or did you just forget what you wrote?
>
> Wow.

That is not a yes or a no. It is a valid question being asked of you. You
started this thread with:

cc:
-----

July brought another round of UI improvements

-----

And you named the thread with a reference to these UI improvements.

But when asked you cannot even name the UI improvements you referenced! You
have no clue! And you spoke of the affect these improvements had by the
*August*... but what affects? You cannot say what you were in reference to
there, either!

In other words: you just made up a bunch of things... and when asked about
them you proved, again, you are completely clueless about UI issues... a
topic you have claimed to have expertise in.

> Read the OP carefully, then get back to me. Actually since you're fucking
> stupid, I'll give you a hint. Look at my predictions, which have remained
> steady, then determine if I ever thought improvements would make a difference
> month to month or at all. Does a 1% prediction every month seem like I'm
> expecting an increase?
>
> Apology accepted.

Ah, your excuse is this thread of yours contradicts past comments of yours
and thus you should not be held to what you said.

That is truly one of the most pathetic dodges I have ever seen on Usenet...
but at least you are not trying to hide your flip flopping in this case...
you are celebrating it and trying to use it as a "defense" of your current
backless claims!

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 6:48 AM, in article
344ec3c2-974a-4d5b...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 9:41:03 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 8:28 AM, cc wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:52:40 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So are you recanting your OP that started this thread, or did you
>>>> just forget what you wrote?
>>>
>>> Wow. Read the OP carefully, then get back to me.
>>
>> Do that yourself.
>>
>>> Actually since
>>> you're fucking stupid, I'll give you a hint. Look at my predictions,
>>> which have remained steady, then determine if I ever thought
>>> improvements would make a difference month to month or at all. Does a
>>> 1% prediction every month seem like I'm expecting an increase?
>>
>> Your OP says you were expecting an increase.
>
> If you don't understand obvious sarcasm...
> Or if you don't understand that the citation labels next to each segment of
> the first paragraph correspond to quotes and links at the bottom to statements
> made by someone else...
>
> I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of these posts seem
> like I'm expecting an increase?
>
> What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled as coming from
> Snit, or the part where I predict that it will stay the same?

You made claims you could not back... and your current excuse is you are
doing so to troll me... but if that is the case your "sarcasm" is based on
*not* understanding my position. Excellent... you are once again bragging
about your ignorance.

Oh, I would love to have a recorded Skype session with you. It would be so
much fun.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 5:20 AM, in article jvocqb$1g7$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

cc repeatedly makes absurd comments about UI issues... and claims to be an
expert in the area.

He is completely clueless on the topic.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 5:38 AM, in article hty5lsr...@news.eternal-september.org,

"Hadron" <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:

> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>>>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>>> .
>>>>
>>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
>>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>>>
>>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
>>> market share by the first of August.
>>
>> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have
>> any
>> effect at all. I'm not an idiot.
>
> Yes you are.
>
> The better the UI then the more chances people will be impressed by it
> and adopt/stick with it.

Absolutely correct... which, just to help cc, does not mean there are not
other significant issues with Linux adoption (say application options).

> If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped adoption
> then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated from other poorer
> desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in distrowatch) but not to
> understand the benefits of a better, cleaner more consistent UI is a
> sure sign you're clueless.

And the sad thing is he thinks he is an expert in this area!

I have shown evidence for the *massive* improvements in UI issues for
PCLOS... but cc thinks those who did the work to make those improvements
were doing *no* good. The value of those improvements is completely lost on
him.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 5:52 AM, in article jvoemv$4p1$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

Absolutely correct. Yes: he makes up stories about my views and then "rips
them apart" by making claims he cannot back. Then he wonders why people
refer to him as an idiot.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 1:03:03 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> I am asking you about *your* claim that there were huge
> improvements in *July*.

"Citation has several important purposes:... to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation

It would be dishonest of me to lay claim to ideas that were not mine, which is why I included the citation.

If you feel I have misrepresented your views, then please discuss why you feel an increased focus would not lead to what the developers felt were improvements, or when this increased focus stopped. I'm all ears and will include updated notes in the next go around of 1% Linux usage.

Nothing in the first paragraph is my own claim, which is why every portion is marked.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 1:31:27 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> I have shown evidence for the *massive* improvements
> in UI issues for PCLOS... but cc thinks those who did
> the work to make those improvements were doing *no* good.
> The value of those improvements is completely lost on him.

And yet all these improvements have brought no new users to Linux in general. I do not know for PCLOS in particular, but for Ubuntu all the UI improvements have brought in no new users from other distros either.

Bringing in new users is not the only value to changes. But the original discussion was based solely on UI improvements bringing in new users. There is value to the improvements, even as mundane as it presumably brought the developer some satisfaction to make them. But as far as bringing in new users is concerned, both Linux desktop usage, and usage for a distro cited by Hadron, these UI improvements have done nothing as they are both flatlined.

You and your faggot lover Hadron will dishonestly twist my statements and UIs. But the facts are there. You two were totally wrong about UIs and new users coming to Linux or even switching between distros.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 6, 7:05 am, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:38:20 AM UTC-4, Hadron wrote:

> > cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
> >>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> >>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
> >>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

> >>>>> <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
> >>> .
>
> >>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
> >>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>
> >>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
> >>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
> >>> market share by the first of August.
>
> >> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
> >> effect at all. I'm not an idiot.
>
> > Yes you are. The better the UI then the more chances people
>
> Changing your tune so quickly?
>

> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d543e0b25a...

>
> > will be impressed by it and adopt/stick with it.
>
> An impressive UI is the least of Linux's problems.
>
> > If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped
> > adoption then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated
>
> Then show where this adoption has occured. Back your statements up, for the first time ever.
>
> > from other poorer desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in
> > distrowatch) but not to understand the benefits of a better,
>
> You mean, see how many have been dead in distrowatch for YEARS and then retroactively attribute this to new improvments made to the desktop UIs recently? Jesus Christ. Maybe I need to write it out in a way you'll understand? That logic is : literally the dumbest shit I've ever seen.
>
> > cleaner more consistent UI is a sure sign you're clueless.
>
> You're a fucking moron. I've responded to you too many times to count that it's not that a better UI isn't beneficial. It's that a better UI isn't beneficial to Linux, due to all the other issues. You seemingly agreed with that before, but I guess Snit stopped giving you kisses so you have to change your tune again.
>
> --
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinearTrendLineCreation.mov> - Snit's ignorance of Excel and his hilarious attempt at statistical analysis

I also believe he's distorted what you've said to an extent. I could
be wrong (please correct me if this is the case here) but I've never
seen you claim it hasn't helped the adoption rate... it just hasn't
(yet, at least) affected it in such a way that would raise market
share. That I've seen, this has pretty much always been your main
point (the market share aspect).

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 10:52 AM, in article
b753556e-b17a-48ac...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 1:03:03 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> I am asking you about *your* claim that there were huge
>> improvements in *July*.
>
> "Citation has several important purposes:... to attribute prior or unoriginal
> work and ideas to the correct sources..."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation
>
>
> It would be dishonest of me to lay claim to ideas that were not mine, which is
> why I included the citation.
>
> If you feel I have misrepresented your views, then please discuss why you feel
> an increased focus would not lead to what the developers felt were
> improvements, or when this increased focus stopped. I'm all ears and will
> include updated notes in the next go around of 1% Linux usage.
>
> Nothing in the first paragraph is my own claim, which is why every portion is
> marked.

Your straw men and your lack of support for *your* claims is noted.

You are an ignorant fool who knows nothing of UI issues.

But since you asked about my views, here goes (not that you will understand
what you read here - your level of understanding on the issue is just too
messed up and convoluted for you to be able to understand anything on the
topic).

As a general rule there has been an improvement in UI issues on desktop
Linux - in some cases this has been quite extreme. An example of this is on
PCLOS where I have shown in quite some detail how improved it has become
over the last few years. I have also spoken of the massive work done on
Ubuntu and other distros. Many people have put massive amounts of work on
making the UI of desktop Linux better... which is not to say there are not
still some key areas of great importance where UI issues have been poorly
addressed, nor a suggestion that there are not other major issues with
desktop Linux. Still, the improvements I have seen - which were more than I
predicted on the show with Roy (and I openly acknowledged that as I did the
research after the show) - are heartening to see. And they are done for a
reason - they are done to make the distros more appealing to users and to
offer the benefits a better UI offers: greater productivity, reduced errors,
etc. Again, I have talked about this in length elsewhere.

As has been shown to you, there has been an increase in desktop Linux usage
over the years... though, of course, this does not prove that the UI
improvements are the only cause of this (nobody claims this is the case
anyway). This also does not exclude other causes nor diminish the need for
improvements in other areas.

We, of course, have discussed this in much more depth before. In the midst
of the discussion you pushed all sorts of bizarre side issues and proved
your inability to back your claims... some of those (and only some) are
briefly mentioned in my .sig. You have no answer for these things, no
explanation for

* Why you kept changing the data range you wanted to look at to try to
"prove" your point - nor any reason why you were unable to even provide the
set of data you finally decided was of key importance to you (the data going
back to 2007 that *I* provided).

* Why you still have not been able to point to any Excel Workbook nor other
form of evidence to support your claims of trends *nor* explain why when I
used the techniques you spoke of (and others) for finding outliers they did
not back your claims (the only way to do so was to include outliers defined
*not* based on the math you spoke of but by including other methods such as
finding regional data deemed to be anomalous). The bottom line is you flat
out made up claims based on statistical models which did not back your
claimed findings. You lied.

* You claimed I missed steps in forming a linear trend line - but when shown
the actual steps from the MS site (and others) you were never able to point
to *any* step I missed (for I missed none). Instead of admitting to your
error here, you then claimed that I should have done a different form of
analysis - the very form it was proved you *did* not do and *lied* about
doing!

As is your norm, you pretended to be knowledgeable in topics you are clearly
ignorant about. I, on the other hand, made a vague prediction about an
increase in usage based, at least in part, on UI improvements - with a time
delay that was never defined. At first the data seemed to back this
(thought the increase was larger than I expected - I had been vague and
cannot show that, and the question of timing was not possible to be shown
given how I had not stated any time). Even more damning to my comments, it
was later shown that the big jump was regional and this pretty much
eliminated any sign of the correlation I spoke of. Fair enough. Me, being
honest and basing my views on the known data, quickly acknowledged that the
data, once better understood and explained, was not backing my initial
off-the-cuff vague comment. Fair enough...

This, of course, does not disprove my general view: that UI improvements
better usability and enjoyment and reduce errors. We have seen backing of
this from Nelson's book and elsewhere in another conversation you showed
your extreme ignorance. Such improvements from UI changes, of course, are
bound to increase desire for use by users. The idea that this would *not*
be the case is somewhat silly, though admittedly most people, such as
yourself but also many others, are ignorant enough of UI issues where they
do not see the direct connection. Still, the UI issues are a *huge* part of
the user experience and people have an intuitive "feel" for what is good and
bad. This is shown with the high user satisfaction ratings of products with
well done UIs (such as Apple products and, I believe, a number of Sony
products... as well as many others).

UI matter. It matters a lot. It is a very important part of any computer
system or, really, any tool that is used (though how you define the "UI" of
a computer vs., say, a hammer is going to be very different).

Now my prediction: even though I spent time and energy to give you a rather
full answer to your questions, you will snip much of the above and pretend
it does not exist and continue to misrepresent my views (out of both malice
and ignorance on your part). You will continue to pretend my views are
different than what they are, and likely pull a single sentence or even
fragment out of context to "prove" that my view is whatever straw man you
want to push. This is your pattern. As is my norm, I am open to being
proved wrong - but it is very unlikely I will be. Your trolling and your
ignorance is simply too predictable.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 8:48 AM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 9:41:03 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 8:28 AM, cc wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:52:40 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So are you recanting your OP that started this thread, or did
>>>> you just forget what you wrote?
>>>
>>> Wow. Read the OP carefully, then get back to me.
>>
>> Do that yourself.
>>
>>> Actually since you're fucking stupid, I'll give you a hint. Look
>>> at my predictions, which have remained steady, then determine if
>>> I ever thought improvements would make a difference month to
>>> month or at all. Does a 1% prediction every month seem like I'm
>>> expecting an increase?
>>
>> Your OP says you were expecting an increase.
>
> If you don't understand obvious sarcasm... Or if you don't understand
> that the citation labels next to each segment of the first paragraph
> correspond to quotes and links at the bottom to statements made by
> someone else...

Does it tire you to backpedal like that?

> I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of these
> posts seem like I'm expecting an increase?
>
> What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled as
> coming from Snit, or the part where I predict that it will stay the
> same?

Your OP has something from Snit in it? Is he your co-author?

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:45:15 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:

> On 8/6/2012 8:48 AM, cc wrote:
>
> Does it tire you to backpedal like that?
>

What part do you think was a backpedal? The part where I've always predicted the next month Linux will 1%, or the part where I've always marked each individual portion with a quote from someone else?

Why don't you quote the portion where you think I was expecting an increase in Linux usage?

>> I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of these
>> posts seem like I'm expecting an increase?
>>
>> What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled as
>> coming from Snit, or the part where I predict that it will stay the
>> same?
>
> Your OP has something from Snit in it? Is he your co-author?

You're totally lost.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 3:24 PM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:45:15 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 8:48 AM, cc wrote:
>>
>> Does it tire you to backpedal like that?
>>
>
> What part do you think was a backpedal? The part where I've always
> predicted the next month Linux will 1%, or the part where I've always
> marked each individual portion with a quote from someone else?

The part where you denied expecting UI improvements made in July to
boost Linux market share by the first of August.

> Why don't you quote the portion where you think I was expecting an
> increase in Linux usage?

There's no need to quote your OP. Just go to the top of the thread and
read it yourself.

>>> I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of
>>> these posts seem like I'm expecting an increase?
>>>
>>> What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled
>>> as coming from Snit, or the part where I predict that it will
>>> stay the same?
>>
>> Your OP has something from Snit in it? Is he your co-author?
>
> You're totally lost.

That's what I get for following you.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> As a general rule there has been an improvement in UI
> issues on desktop Linux - in some cases this has been
> quite extreme.

There you go. Is there any reason to think that there hasn't been some work done on improvements in July? Is there any reason to think there won't be work done on improvements to the UI in the future. I just want to get an idea of what you consider start and stop points for these improvements.

[Nobody]

On 8/1/2012 7:18 AM, cc wrote:
> July brought another round of UI improvements [1] by HCI experts [2].
> Of course these experts apparently have no idea what they're doing
> [3]. Cognitive dissonance much? So with all these improvements, there
> should have been a correlated rise in Linux usage [4].
>
> Drum roll please...
>
> http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpaf=&qpcustom=Linux&qpcustomb=0
>
> Still 1%!

Here's where you expected UI improvements in July to increase Linux
market share by the first of August, all of your later denials
notwithstanding.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>

> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown that
> the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated
> any sign of the correlation I spoke of.

LOL, finally you admit you were wrong and I was right. Even recently you were claiming there was a correlation:

"but showing the correlation I did" - 6/19/2012
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/32250ce2e51a28e2?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

"The correlation fit the full data set. Now we know that this came from some
data in CA. This does not change the fact that the correlation fit the
whole data set." - 6/29/2012
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7f6d5991c98446fc?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

Well at least you finally understand outliers.

[cc]

So the paragraph where I label where each statement came from, then the link showing the exact opposite of what the retard who made those statements said, is an indication, to you, that I expected an increase? You clearly didn't get the joke. You clearly still don't get the joke. I can't believe I have to explain this to you, but since you're currently in the lead for the dumbest shitbag that posts in this group, I guess I will have to.

Snit made a bunch of statements (LINKED TO IN MY FIRST PARAGRAPH) about how UI improvements should be correlated with an increase in new users, which is fucking idiocy (should have been clear from the "cognitive dissonance, much" line, but I guess not). So I linked to a site showing it was still 1%. That fits the current trend for Linux, and comes remarkably close to my predictions each month, which I posted at the end (DID YOU NOT READ THAT FAR?). My prediction is always around 1%, which means I am not expecting an increase. Even if you didn't read my previous posts, you should be able to tell from my prediction that I am NOT expecting an increase.

You are seriously stupid if you think I of all people would expect an increase in Linux usage.

So you didn't understand the joke. That's fine. But by now it should be obvious to you that I don't expect Linux to increase any time soon. And unless something changes, I don't expect desktop Linux to increase ever. So next time you're wondering about whether or not I think desktop Linux usage will increase, or if I'm just joking at someone else's expense, save yourself the embarrasment: I'm just joking. Desktop Linux will continue to be 1% for the indefinite future.

[Nobody]

On 8/6/2012 3:57 PM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 4:32:23 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/1/2012 7:18 AM, cc wrote:
>>> July brought another round of UI improvements [1] by HCI experts
>>> [2]. Of course these experts apparently have no idea what they're
>>> doing [3]. Cognitive dissonance much? So with all these
>>> improvements, there should have been a correlated rise in Linux
>>> usage [4].
>>>
>>> Drum roll please...
>>>
>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpaf=&qpcustom=Linux&qpcustomb=0
>>>
>>>
>>>Still 1%!
>>
>> Here's where you expected UI improvements in July to increase Linux
>> market share by the first of August, all of your later denials
>> notwithstanding.
>
> So the paragraph where I label where each statement came from, then
> the link showing the exact opposite of what the retard who made those
> statements said, is an indication, to you, that I expected an
> increase?

The words that begin your OP show you expected an increase.

> You clearly didn't get the joke. You clearly still don't
> get the joke. I can't believe I have to explain this to you, but
> since you're currently in the lead for the dumbest shitbag that posts
> in this group, I guess I will have to.

Ah, the old "it was just a joke" backpedal. It took you a few replies
before it occurred to you.

[rant snipped]

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 11:03 AM, in article
de2f74ea-b920-43e6...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 1:31:27 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> I have shown evidence for the *massive* improvements
>> in UI issues for PCLOS... but cc thinks those who did
>> the work to make those improvements were doing *no* good.
>> The value of those improvements is completely lost on him.
>
> And yet all these improvements have brought no new users to Linux in general.
> I do not know for PCLOS in particular, but for Ubuntu all the UI improvements
> have brought in no new users from other distros either.
>
> Bringing in new users is not the only value to changes.

Nobody has claimed this is the case. Another of your straw men.

> But the original discussion was based solely on UI improvements bringing in
> new users.

No: in this thread the "original discussion" was you making claims you
cannot back about how there were UI improvements in July (which you cannot
name) which lead to an increase in usage in August (which you cannot show).

You made things up. You were called on it... and now you want to blame me
and your straw men for your own BS.

> There is value to the improvements, even as mundane as it presumably brought
> the developer some satisfaction to make them. But as far as bringing in new
> users is concerned, both Linux desktop usage, and usage for a distro cited by
> Hadron, these UI improvements have done nothing as they are both flatlined.

I would love for you to support this... esp. given how you have been shown
how there *has* been an increase... even when counting for outliers.

The raw data: <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/Linux_2007-2012-raw.pdf>
And then using pretty extreme mathematical methods to find and completely
remove outliers (which, contrary to your claims, which points are "outliers"
is not a "fact" but is largely based on opinion) and using non-math based
methods when removing the data we were shown to be localized:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/long-term-trend.pdf>

You can read through the whole process, but make sure you get to the last
page. Then see if you can figure out if the trend is going up, down, or
staying flat. Hint: anyone with half a brain can see it going upward, even
if not dramatically.

I am, of course, open to different forms of analysis but - and let us be
very clear on this - you are simply too ignorant of the process and the
concepts in general to even understand what I am showing you there, no less
offer a competing analysis which shows a different result based on *reason*
and *logic*. These things are simply beyond you.

Feel free to try to prove me wrong... but every time I have asked you to do
so you have run away. That is why it would be fun to have you on a
radio-format "show" and not let you run so easily. I would really enjoy
listening to your excuses and your dodges and your stammering as you made it
apparent even you know how over your head you are in such discussions. And,
yes, it is clear you know this.

One of the pieces of evidence, by the way, of how ignorant even you know
yourself to be is your BS homophobic attacks... which you repeat below.

> You and your faggot lover Hadron will dishonestly twist my statements and UIs.

Do you have any idea how poor of a light you just put yourself in by making
such an attack? I mean, really, is there any area where you are not proud
to display your ignorance?

> But the facts are there. You two were totally wrong about UIs and new users
> coming to Linux or even switching between distros.

Where I was wrong I openly admitted to it... something you refuse to do in
any of the areas you have been proved wrong. You think it speaks poorly of
me that I was wrong and admitted to it... where I see it completely
differently - the fact I openly admit to my mistakes speaks very well of me.
The fact you run from yours shows your lack of character. Well, to be more
accurate, it is one indication of your lack of character - there are many
others (such as your use of homophobic slurs in your trolling insults,
above... wow... such a poor light you present yourself in... but you show no
shame... it is as if you do not even understand how poorly you present
yourself as).

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:43 PM, in article
aa77071f-44bb-4e7c...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:

>> not stated any time). Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown

>> that the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated any sign of

> LOL, finally you admit you were wrong

Where do you think I ever denied my errors once the data showed it was an
error?

See: this is one of your problems - you are completely clueless about what
you read. And you are massively dishonest.

Also note how completely predictable it was how much you would snip and run.
Of the above you only quoted:

-----

Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown that the
big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated any
sign of the correlation I spoke of.

-----

That is it. You honed in to where I spoke of my being wrong - something
that has been covered in depth, and ran from the massive areas of your BS
and lies and errors. You show you have *no* character... no level of
honesty or moral code. You present yourself as a coward who will just run
from every discussion on your errors.

And this is why you would never Skype me and have us record it - you could
not so easily run like that. You would be in a position where it would be
hard to run from your own mistakes and lies and ignorance. Your whole
posting style is based on doing so.

> and I was right.

What do you think you were right about? And why not speak of all of your
errors and lies and the like I note, above... that you just snipped.

You get all excited about my having made one error - one I never denied as
the data was shown the vague off-the-cuff correlation I spoke of was not
apparent.

> Even recently you were
> claiming there was a correlation:
>
> "but showing the correlation I did" - 6/19/2012
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/32250ce2e51a28e2?dm
> ode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>
> "The correlation fit the full data set. Now we know that this came from some
> data in CA. This does not change the fact that the correlation fit the
> whole data set." - 6/29/2012
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7f6d5991c98446fc?dm
> ode=source&output=gplain&noredirect

As you have been shown, there has been an increase - so the correlation does
exist... though it does not prove cause and effect. But we have covered
this and you are not capable of understanding it.

> Well at least you finally understand outliers.

See how you make up straw men. Amazing!

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:02:21 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>
> The words that begin your OP show you expected an increase.

Those words were clearly marked as coming from Snit. Did you not see the "[1]", "[2]", "[3]", or "[4]"?

Are you trying to say that I am wrong about myself, and that I actually expected an increase? And that each month I expect an increase, only to end my post with a prediction that it will stay the same?

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:27 PM, in article
997533a9-3e81-4f8a...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> There you go.

Showing all you can do is snip and run. Yup. Here is the post you ran
from.

---------

On 8/6/12 10:52 AM, in article
b753556e-b17a-48ac...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 1:03:03 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> I am asking you about *your* claim that there were huge
>> improvements in *July*.
>
> "Citation has several important purposes:... to attribute prior or unoriginal
> work and ideas to the correct sources..."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation
>
>
> It would be dishonest of me to lay claim to ideas that were not mine, which is
> why I included the citation.
>
> If you feel I have misrepresented your views, then please discuss why you feel
> an increased focus would not lead to what the developers felt were
> improvements, or when this increased focus stopped. I'm all ears and will
> include updated notes in the next go around of 1% Linux usage.
>
> Nothing in the first paragraph is my own claim, which is why every portion is
> marked.

Your straw men and your lack of support for *your* claims is noted.

You are an ignorant fool who knows nothing of UI issues.

But since you asked about my views, here goes (not that you will understand
what you read here - your level of understanding on the issue is just too
messed up and convoluted for you to be able to understand anything on the
topic).

As a general rule there has been an improvement in UI issues on desktop

--------

Respond to the post or do not. No running and selecting tiny sections where
you think you can get some stupid Usenet "point" for your trolling.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:24 PM, in article
ce86a488-874f-4f37...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:45:15 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>> On 8/6/2012 8:48 AM, cc wrote:
>>
>> Does it tire you to backpedal like that?
>>
>
> What part do you think was a backpedal?

The part where you started a thread speaking about UI improvements in July
increasing Linux usage in August - a claim that was uniquely yours... and
now a claim you no longer show any signs of believing or backing in any way.

So, yes, you back pedaled in a massive way. This is not a debate - it is
simply a fact. You, again, showed off how ignorant you are on the whole
issue and how you are willing to lie and twist and otherwise be repulsive
just to try to save face.

> The part where I've always predicted the next month Linux will 1%, or the part
> where I've always marked each individual portion with a quote from someone
> else?
>
> Why don't you quote the portion where you think I was expecting an increase in
> Linux usage?

You cannot find your first post from this thread?

-----

July brought another round of UI improvements [1] by HCI
experts [2]. Of course these experts apparently have no idea
what they're doing [3]. Cognitive dissonance much? So with
all these improvements, there should have been a correlated
rise in Linux usage [4].

-----

Some of the claims you made:

1) July brought another round of UI improvements
2) These improvements where from HCI experts
3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August

So far you have not only failed to back any of your claims you have denied
you even *believe* the claims you made. But you also deny having back
pedaled.

Do you see now why it is trivial to point out how amazingly ignorant you are
on the UI topics?

>>> I'll ask again. Does a 1% prediction in every single one of these
>>> posts seem like I'm expecting an increase?
>>>
>>> What part says I was expecting an increase? The part I labeled as
>>> coming from Snit, or the part where I predict that it will stay the
>>> same?
>>
>> Your OP has something from Snit in it? Is he your co-author?
>
> You're totally lost.

LOL! He called you on your BS... and you deny it. And you belittle him for
it. How long until you start using homophobic slurs against him to try to
"back" your claims. What a pathetic little man you are.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:57 PM, in article
8504876b-6885-473e...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

You used straw men and lies to try to support your blaming of me for your
absurd claims and your back pedaling. Be a man and accept you were wrong
(wait, you are cc.. you are incapable of doing so). Some of the claims you

made:

1) July brought another round of UI improvements
2) These improvements where from HCI experts
3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August

So far you have not only failed to back any of your claims you have denied
you even *believe* the claims you made. But you also deny having back
pedaled.

Do you see now why it is trivial to point out how amazingly ignorant you are
on the UI topics?

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:11 PM, in article
5da0803d-c211-4d34...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:02:21 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>
>> The words that begin your OP show you expected an increase.
>
> Those words were clearly marked as coming from Snit. Did you not see the
> "[1]", "[2]", "[3]", or "[4]"?
>
> Are you trying to say that I am wrong about myself, and that I actually
> expected an increase? And that each month I expect an increase, only to end my
> post with a prediction that it will stay the same?

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 12:45 PM, in article jvp6sh$mot$2...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

In no way, shape, or form back cc's claims (though there may have been some
improvements in UI issues, it would be rather extreme to think this would
lead to a measurable affect by the start of August and not something I have
ever supported). I have also never belittled UI / HCI experts in general
nor claimed that all UI decisions made by those who make open source
products are made by experts or even follow the advice of the experts.

In short: cc made absurd claims... and is now trying to blame me for them,
but his excuses are based on out and out lies about my views.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:21:13 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> Some of the claims you made:
> 1) July brought another round of UI improvements
> 2) These improvements where from HCI experts
> 3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
> 4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August

At the end of each of those statements, in my original post, I included a number in brackets. Does that have any meaning to you? Or am I the only one in this discussion who passed 5th grade English?

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:26 PM, in article jvp9aq$tal$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:

> On 8/6/2012 3:24 PM, cc wrote:
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:45:15 PM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>>> On 8/6/2012 8:48 AM, cc wrote:
>>>
>>> Does it tire you to backpedal like that?
>>>
>>
>> What part do you think was a backpedal? The part where I've always
>> predicted the next month Linux will 1%, or the part where I've always
>> marked each individual portion with a quote from someone else?
>
> The part where you denied expecting UI improvements made in July to
> boost Linux market share by the first of August.

Absolutely. This is a claim I have never said nor suggested would be true.

>> Why don't you quote the portion where you think I was expecting an
>> increase in Linux usage?
>
> There's no need to quote your OP. Just go to the top of the thread and
> read it yourself.

You assume he has that capacity. To help him, here are some of the claims
cc made:

1) July brought another round of UI improvements
2) These improvements where from HCI experts
3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August

So far cc has not only failed to back any of his claims he has denied he
even *believed* the claims he made. To make it worse, cc also denies having
back pedaled.

It is trivial to point out how amazingly ignorant cc is on UI topics?
...

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> On 8/6/12 1:43 PM, in article aa77071f-44bb-4e7c...@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
>>> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown
>>> that the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated any sign of
>>> the correlation I spoke of.
>

A short while later...

> As you have been shown, there has been an increase -
> so the correlation does exist...

Contradict yourself much?

As you have been shown, there was no increase, either to desktop Linux as a whole, or to Ubuntu specifically. So you better stick with the top statement, that the correlation has been eliminated, unless you want to look retarded...

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:27:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> (though there may have been some improvements in UI issues,
> it would be rather extreme to think this would lead to a
> measurable affect by the start of August and not something
> I have ever supported).

What a bald-faced lie. You said that there should be a correlation between UI improvements and number of users, and you said that your prediction had already come true. So not only did you think it would lead to a measureable effect by August, you falsely believed that it there was already a correlated increase. This is the second time in this thread you have done a complete one-eighty. I sincerely hope you continue.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:28 PM, in article
b113270c-da3b-4956...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:21:13 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> Some of the claims you made:
>> 1) July brought another round of UI improvements
>> 2) These improvements where from HCI experts
>> 3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
>> 4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August
>
> At the end of each of those statements, in my original post, I included a
> number in brackets. Does that have any meaning to you? Or am I the only one in
> this discussion who passed 5th grade English?

The fact you incorrectly thought your statements were backed by things I had
said is irrelevant to the fact you have *not* offered any *real* backing for
your claims. It also does not change the fact you have now back pedaled and
claimed you no longer even believe these things you asserted.

You trolled me with making ignorant claims based on straw men about my
views... and you were called on it.

Now be a man and admit to it. But you will not... you want this thread to
continue forever as you snip and run. What a sad little coward you are.
Here is my favorite post you ran from:

given how I had not stated any time). Even more damning to my comments, it

was later shown that the big jump was regional and this pretty much

Your lack of response to that is a tacit admission that you know I am right.
It really is that simple.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:33:36 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> It also does not change the fact you have now back pedaled
> and claimed you no longer even believe these things you
> asserted.

So you don't understand what the brackets mean. Fine.

But your position is now that I thought there should be a correlated rise between Linux usage and UI improvements, and I have now backpedaled on that? Really? Well, I can't lie, you have said stupider things...

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:18 PM, in article
fe99f4f3-a728-4de0...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:12:04 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> On 8/6/12 1:43 PM, in article
>> aa77071f-44bb-4e7c...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>> <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>>>> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown
>>>> that the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated any sign of
>>>> the correlation I spoke of.
>>
>
> A short while later...
>
>> As you have been shown, there has been an increase -
>> so the correlation does exist...
>
> Contradict yourself much?

Nope. But you are too ignorant to understand what is being discussed in the
two quotes. If you want to continue this BS "debate" you need to stop
running. Respond to these posts in an honest and complete way:
<http://goo.gl/RnooG> and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>.

This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me... you know I
would call you out on your running and it would be much harder for you to
just ignore it. Sure, it is obvious now how wrong and cowardly you are, but
in a radio format it would be even more so and more directly humiliating for
you.

> As you have been shown, there was no increase, either to desktop Linux as a
> whole, or to Ubuntu specifically. So you better stick with the top statement,
> that the correlation has been eliminated, unless you want to look retarded...

The fact this is not true was discussed in detail here:
<http://goo.gl/P7dY3>

But you just ran from that and ignored the facts. It is what you do.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:33 PM, in article
7caab734-805e-4eaa...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:27:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>> (though there may have been some improvements in UI issues,
>> it would be rather extreme to think this would lead to a
>> measurable affect by the start of August and not something
>> I have ever supported).
>
> What a bald-faced lie.

I am not denying you lied in your first post of this thread where you made
such claims.

> You said that there should be a correlation between UI improvements and number
> of users, and you said that your prediction had already come true. So not only
> did you think it would lead to a measureable effect by August, you falsely
> believed that it there was already a correlated increase. This is the second
> time in this thread you have done a complete one-eighty. I sincerely hope you
> continue.

If you want to continue this BS "debate" you need to stop running. Respond

to these posts in an honest and complete way: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,
<http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>.

This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me... you know I
would call you out on your running and it would be much harder for you to
just ignore it. Sure, it is obvious now how wrong and cowardly you are, but
in a radio format it would be even more so and more directly humiliating for
you.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 1:32 PM, in article jvp9ku$tt3$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

He flip flops like a fish out of water.

He also lies and claims I contradicted myself without acknowledging it - but
he ignores the fact I fully responded to his accusations and then he ran:
<http://goo.gl/RnooG>.

Bottom line: not even cc believe his own BS. If he did he would not run as
he does. I would love to have him on a Skype "radio" show and speak to him
about these things directly where he could not so easily run. He and I
could both record it - so no possibility of monkey play with the "show".

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:39 PM, in article
9a9d1c3b-a2e1-460a...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:33:36 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> It also does not change the fact you have now back pedaled
>> and claimed you no longer even believe these things you
>> asserted.
>
> So you don't understand what the brackets mean. Fine.
>
> But your position is now that I thought there should be a correlated rise
> between Linux usage and UI improvements, and I have now backpedaled on that?
> Really? Well, I can't lie, you have said stupider things...

If you want to continue this BS "debate" you need to stop running. Respond
to these posts in an honest and complete way: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,

<http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>. In those posts I have
fully responded to your BS and lies and other nonsense. You know this, I
know this, and anyone else who cares about this thread knows this. This is

why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me... you know I would call
you out on your running and it would be much harder for you to just ignore
it. Sure, it is obvious now how wrong and cowardly you are, but in a radio
format it would be even more so and more directly humiliating for you.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 6, 2:32 pm, Nobody <inva...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/2012 7:18 AM, cc wrote:
>
> > July brought another round of UI improvements [1] by HCI experts [2].
> > Of course these experts apparently have no idea what they're doing
> > [3]. Cognitive dissonance much? So with all these improvements, there
> > should have been a correlated rise in Linux usage [4].
>
> > Drum roll please...
>

> >http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpaf=&qpcustom=Linu...

>
> >  Still 1%!
>
> Here's where you expected UI improvements in July to increase Linux
> market share by the first of August, all of your later denials
> notwithstanding.

Your sarcasm detector is broken again ;)

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:44:31 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me...

What fucking Skype radio show are you even talking about? Jesus Christ you've gone mental.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 6, 3:44 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 8/6/12 2:33 PM, in article
> 7caab734-805e-4eaa...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>

> <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:27:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> >> (though there may have been some improvements in UI issues,
> >> it would be rather extreme to think this would lead to a
> >> measurable affect by the start of August and not something
> >> I have ever supported).
>
> > What a bald-faced lie.
>
> I am not denying you lied in your first post of this thread where you made
> such claims.
>
> > You said that there should be a correlation between UI improvements and number
> > of users, and you said that your prediction had already come true. So not only
> > did you think it would lead to a measureable effect by August, you falsely
> > believed that it there was already a correlated increase. This is the second
> > time in this thread you have done a complete one-eighty. I sincerely hope you
> > continue.
>
> If you want to continue this BS "debate" you need to stop running.  Respond
> to these posts in an honest and complete way: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,
> <http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>.
>
> This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me...

Like anyone with a brain he knows you'd be as dishonest on it as you
are here.

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 2:48 PM, in article
52b0e5f0-ea84-4588...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:44:31 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me...
>
> What fucking Skype radio show are you even talking about? Jesus Christ you've
> gone mental.

Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype discussion with me
on this topic? If so I am game. When do you want to do it.

Oh. You will not. You will run, just as you ran from these posts:

<http://goo.gl/RnooG>, <http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>. In
those posts I have fully responded to your BS and lies and other nonsense.

Once again you have proved yourself ignorant, dishonest, and bigoted.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 6, 4:11 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 8/6/12 2:48 PM, in article
> 52b0e5f0-ea84-4588...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>

> <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:44:31 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> >> This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me...
>
> > What fucking Skype radio show are you even talking about? Jesus Christ you've
> > gone mental.
>
> Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype discussion with me
> on this topic?

Uh... Snit? "a recorded Skype discussion" is not necessarily a
"radio" show. Now put the crack pipe down ;)

> If so I am game.

Why aren't you "game" right here... you know, where the discussion is
actually taking place?

> When do you want to do it.
>
> Oh.  You will not.  You will run

The idea of "a recorded Skype discussion" is another of your red
herrings... and it doesn't hide the fact that you're the one running.

BTW... I suggest you start your own "radio" show podcast like Tim is
doing... you could combat the stuff you were combatting on that
website you had up. There are lots of things you could cover... but
stick to real topics, though, not a continuation of usenet BS. I think
this would give you some positive attention... a good thing for you.

[DFS]

On 8/6/2012 4:43 PM, cc wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown that
>> the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated
>> any sign of the correlation I spoke of.
>

> LOL, finally you admit you were wrong and I was right. Even recently you were claiming there was a correlation:

>
> "but showing the correlation I did" - 6/19/2012
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/32250ce2e51a28e2?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>
> "The correlation fit the full data set. Now we know that this came from some
> data in CA. This does not change the fact that the correlation fit the
> whole data set." - 6/29/2012
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7f6d5991c98446fc?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>

> Well at least you finally understand outliers.

Good Lord Above!

6 months later and you and Snit are still arguing about his 'prediction
and correlation'.

Glad you two like to rub each others' bellies so much.



(but seriously, wouldn't it be nice to know why the
marketshare.hitslink.com Linux numbers were up so much Aug 2011 - Jan
2012. I think Microsoft got wind and paid up...)

[Snit]

On 8/6/12 4:50 PM, in article jvpl8p$t5v$1...@dont-email.me, "DFS"

Of note: I am merely responding to cc's ignorant claims he is now trying to
"defend" by claiming his straw men of my views somehow defend his position.

In the end, cc once again made a complete fool of himself. He made claims
he cannot backup:

1) July brought another round of UI improvements
2) These improvements where from HCI experts
3) These experts have no idea what they are doing.
4) These improvements should have shown an increase in usage by August

So far cc has not only failed to back any of his claims he has denied he
even *believed* the claims he made. To make it worse, cc also denies having
back pedaled.

It is trivial to point out how amazingly ignorant cc is on UI topics?

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 6:11:57 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype
> discussion with me on this topic?

I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about. You're saying I won't do something that was never even offered to me in the first place.

I don't see what the difference will be, unless you're somehow honest on recorded conversations, but sure I will do it. I'll tell you what, you get Onion Knight and Hadron on there and we'll set a date. Three (shit) birds, one stone.

[cc]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 7:50:46 PM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
> On 8/6/2012 4:43 PM, cc wrote:
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>
>>> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown that
>>> the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated
>>> any sign of the correlation I spoke of.
>>
>> LOL, finally you admit you were wrong and I was right. Even recently you were claiming there was a correlation:
>>
>> "but showing the correlation I did" - 6/19/2012
>> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/32250ce2e51a28e2?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>>
>> "The correlation fit the full data set. Now we know that this came from some >> data in CA. This does not change the fact that the correlation fit the > whole data set." - 6/29/2012
>> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7f6d5991c98446fc?dmode=source&output=gplain&noredirect
>>
>> Well at least you finally understand outliers.
>
> Good Lord Above!
>
> 6 months later and you and Snit are still arguing
> about his 'prediction and correlation'.
>
> Glad you two like to rub each others' bellies so much.

Hah, well it is entertaining seeing him squirm and dig himself into holes he can't get out of. I guess I can't help myself, especially when it was so obvious he was incorrect and he refuses to acknowledge it.

> (but seriously, wouldn't it be nice to know why the
> marketshare.hitslink.com Linux numbers were up so much
> Aug 2011 - Jan 2012. I think Microsoft got wind and paid up...)

They were up so much because California was skewing the results. It could be a measurement error. But more than likely it was just a freak occurance of a bunch of people "doing weird things." Maybe they took a bong hit, got in their Prius's, went to their local socialist gathering, and came back home and decided to try Linux. A couple of months later they realized it wasn't for them. Who knows? Sometimes weird things happen.

Or there's another possibility. Spin in circles for twenty seconds, then run straight into a wall seven times. Now tell yourself the numbers were up because of UI improvements. Hopefully you will have forgotten the preceding and succeeding months around that brief blip by slamming your head into the wall.

I guess it will remain a mystery.

[Snit]

On 8/7/12 5:35 AM, in article
3feec2fd-f6b3-4963...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, August 6, 2012 6:11:57 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>
>> Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype
>> discussion with me on this topic?
>
> I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about.

Ah, Ok. Skype is a program that allows people to have voice conversations -
pretty much free Internet conversations. Here: <http://www.skype.com>.
They can be easily recorded. Sorry, I figured you would know that.

In any case, I would love to discuss our current and recent debates - the
current one where you claimed there were UI improvements in July which lead
to an increase in Linux usage by August and our recent debate where we can
discuss the points I make in my .sig and similar points - as well as
whatever points you want to make.

Hope that helps you to understand.

> You're saying I won't do something that was never even offered to me in the
> first place.

Ah, I made no formal offer. Well here it is: I would love to have such a
"show" with you and then post it - we can both record it so no monkey play
can be done by either of us.

> I don't see what the difference will be, unless you're somehow honest on
> recorded conversations, but sure I will do it. I'll tell you what, you get
> Onion Knight and Hadron on there and we'll set a date. Three (shit) birds, one
> stone.

I will not speak for others. Just you and me... I do not need anyone else
to prove you wrong. And let us agree that when we are done with this Skype
conversation the debate is done. Deal?

My guess: you will *never* agree to this... on Usenet you can run, as you
snipped and ran from the points made in these posts: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,
<http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>. On a recorded show you
cannot so easily do so. So you will never accept such an offer. You will
make excuses and run... I would love to have you prove me wrong on this.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 7, 6:50 am, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 7:50:46 PM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
> > On 8/6/2012 4:43 PM, cc wrote:
> >> On Monday, August 6, 2012 3:38:53 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> >>> Even more damning to my comments, it was later shown that
> >>> the big jump was regional and this pretty much eliminated
> >>> any sign of the correlation I spoke of.
>
> >> LOL, finally you admit you were wrong and I was right. Even recently you were claiming there was a correlation:
>
> >> "but showing the correlation I did" - 6/19/2012

> >>https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/32250ce2e5...

>
> >> "The correlation fit the full data set. Now we know that this came from some >> data in CA. This does not change the fact that the correlation fit the > whole data set." - 6/29/2012

> >>https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7f6d5991c9...

>
> >> Well at least you finally understand outliers.
>
> > Good Lord Above!
>
> > 6 months later and you and Snit are still arguing
> > about his 'prediction and correlation'.
>
> > Glad you two like to rub each others' bellies so much.
>
> Hah, well it is entertaining seeing him squirm and dig himself into holes he can't get out of. I guess I can't help myself, especially when it was so obvious he was incorrect and he refuses to acknowledge it.
>
> > (but seriously, wouldn't it be nice to know why the
> > marketshare.hitslink.com Linux numbers were up so much
> > Aug 2011 - Jan 2012. I think Microsoft got wind and paid up...)
>
> They were up so much because California was skewing the results. It could be a measurement error. But more than likely it was just a freak occurance of a bunch of people "doing weird things." Maybe they took a bong hit, got in their Prius's, went to their local socialist gathering, and came back home and decided to try Linux.

LOL!

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 7, 10:25 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 8/7/12 5:35 AM, in article
> 3feec2fd-f6b3-4963...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>

> <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 6, 2012 6:11:57 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> >> Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype
> >> discussion with me on this topic?
>
> > I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about.
>
> Ah, Ok.  Skype is a program that allows people to have voice conversations -
> pretty much free Internet conversations.  Here: <http://www.skype.com>.
> They can be easily recorded.  Sorry, I figured you would know that.
>
> In any case, I would love to discuss our current and recent debates - the
> current one where you claimed there were UI improvements in July which lead
> to an increase in Linux usage by August and our recent debate where we can
> discuss the points I make in my .sig and similar points - as well as
> whatever points you want to make.

Earth to Snit: You are and can continue to discuss these things...
right here.

> Hope that helps you to understand.
>
> > You're saying I won't do something that was never even offered to me in the
> > first place.
>
> Ah, I made no formal offer.  Well here it is: I would love to have such a
> "show" with you and then post it

You're having it... right here.

>- we can both record it so no monkey play
> can be done by either of us.

Why bother? It's being made and recorded... right here.

> > I don't see what the difference will be, unless you're somehow honest on
> > recorded conversations, but sure I will do it. I'll tell you what, you get
> > Onion Knight and Hadron on there and we'll set a date. Three (shit) birds, one
> > stone.
>
> I will not speak for others.  Just you and me... I do not need anyone else
> to prove you wrong.  And let us agree that when we are done with this Skype
> conversation the debate is done.  Deal?

Translation: Snit STILL doesn't want to admit to his error and doesn't
want cc to continue to do what so many have doen with Snit when Snit
asks for proof of his "wrongs" (this is how he was ridden out of
CSMA).

>
> My guess: you will *never* agree to this

Why would he need to do this? Everything you're taking about can be
done right here with far less effort.

> ... on Usenet you can run

No, he can't and contrary to your delusion, neither can you; doesn't
stop you from trying, though.

> , as you
> snipped and ran from the points made in these posts: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,
> <http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>.  On a recorded show you
> cannot so easily do so.

Horseshit! It'd be much worse on an audio show... turn on Jerry
Springer for a clue. Text is the far better medium to have such
discussions.

> So you will never accept such an offer.  You will
> make excuses and run... I would love to have you prove me wrong on this.

This is a one of your more stupid red herrings.

[cc]

On Tuesday, August 7, 2012 12:25:51 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> On 8/7/12 5:35 AM, in article 3feec2fd-f6b3-4963...@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, August 6, 2012 6:11:57 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>
>>> Are you saying you are willing to have a recorded Skype
>>> discussion with me on this topic?
>>
>> I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about.
>
> Ah, Ok. Skype is a program that allows people to have
> voice conversations - pretty much free Internet
> conversations. Here: <http://www.skype.com>. They can
> be easily recorded. Sorry, I figured you would know that.
> In any case, I would love to discuss our current and
> recent debates - the current one where you claimed there
> were UI improvements in July which lead to an increase in Linux usage
> by August and our recent debate where we can discuss the points I make
> in my .sig and similar points - as well as whatever points you want
> to make. Hope that helps you to understand.
>

If you want me to join you on Skype and you're going to continue to pull shit like above where you're pretending I'm asking what Skype is, then you're fooling yourself.

The ball is in your court.

>> You're saying I won't do something that was never even offered to me in the
>> first place.
>
> Ah, I made no formal offer.

Not only did you make no formal offer, you claimed I refused already. Why should I believe your dishonesty wouldn't extend to the recorded conversation?

> Well here it is: I would love to have such a "show" with you and
> then post it - we can both record it so no monkey play can be
> done by either of us.

I feel no need to record it. You've demonstrated your lack of morals, so I have no doubt you will post an editted version, but I could really care less.

>> I don't see what the difference will be, unless you're somehow honest on
>> recorded conversations, but sure I will do it. I'll tell you what, you get
>> Onion Knight and Hadron on there and we'll set a date. Three (shit) birds, one
>> stone.
>
> I will not speak for others.

You won't have to. They will be there.

> Just you and me... I do not need anyone else to prove you wrong.

This is a one time only deal for me, so if I'm doing it, I'm smacking you all down at once. Obviously Hadron is a pussy and since he refuses to back up his bullshit statements in writing, I don't doubt he will refuse to do it verbally. So I'll consider giving him a pass and just going on with you and Onion Knight.

> And let us agree that when we are done with this Skype conversation
> the debate is done. Deal?

The debate is already done. It was an academic math problem. You failed horribly and have done nothing but squirm and try to get out of it. You won't let it go after I smack you down again on Skype, so why even try to say you will?

So get the others (preferrably both) set up and ready to go, and I'm game. If it can't be done by the end of this week, then I more than likely won't be able to verbally beat you down until the beginning of September. So plan accordingly.

[TomB]

On 2012-08-07, the following emerged from the brain of Steve Carroll:

8<

> Horseshit! It'd be much worse on an audio show... turn on Jerry
> Springer for a clue. Text is the far better medium to have such
> discussions.

Absolutely agreed.

[TomB]

On 2012-08-07, the following emerged from the brain of Steve Carroll:

8<

>> They were up so much because California was skewing the results. It
>> could be a measurement error. But more than likely it was just a
>> freak occurance of a bunch of people "doing weird things." Maybe
>> they took a bong hit, got in their Prius's, went to their local
>> socialist gathering, and came back home and decided to try Linux.
>
> LOL!

LOL all you want, but he made a very good point right there. Wasn't
the "up" during the summer months by the way?

>> A couple of months later they realized it wasn't for them. Who
>> knows? Sometimes weird things happen.
>>
>> Or there's another possibility. Spin in circles for twenty seconds,
>> then run straight into a wall seven times. Now tell yourself the
>> numbers were up because of UI improvements. Hopefully you will have
>> forgotten the preceding and succeeding months around that brief
>> blip by slamming your head into the wall.

Now *this* is worth a LOL!

A good user interface is a very nice thing to have (it's why I use
awesome and mostly terminals god dammit!), but if tomorrow someone
creates a desktop environment for GNU/Linux that has all the best and
none of the worst of all worlds, and all distributions adopt it as
their standard desktop, this will do jack shit for GNU/Linux in the
usage share numbers. There are far more important "issues" to tackle,
and none of those "issues" have to do with quality, not on the
front-end and not on the back-end.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

After swilling some grog, TomB belched this bit o' wisdom:

If that is true, then why have seething blustering trolls turned COLA
into a Jerry Springer show?

--
I know th'MAMBO!! I have a TWO-TONE CHEMISTRY SET!!

[Chris Ahlstrom]

After swilling some grog, TomB belched this bit o' wisdom:

> A good user interface is a very nice thing to have (it's why I use
> awesome and mostly terminals god dammit!), but if tomorrow someone
> creates a desktop environment for GNU/Linux that has all the best and
> none of the worst of all worlds, and all distributions adopt it as
> their standard desktop, this will do jack shit for GNU/Linux in the
> usage share numbers. There are far more important "issues" to tackle,
> and none of those "issues" have to do with quality, not on the
> front-end and not on the back-end.

Exactly.

cc, Snit, and Steve -- a tempest in a teapot.

--
In case you missed it the Scottish fella did a bunk from Spamowitz and
Gobbler's muppet show because Roy kept claiming things such as Skype was
already more buggy since MS "bought it". He was that incredulous that he
upped and went from what I heard. Gobbler remained to suck up to Roy and
generally vex Chris Ahlstrom who, it has been reported, had wanted that
roll and was sorely put out that his Master Roy left him to rot here in
COLA with a whole legacy of google links to his lies and outrageous
attacks on FOSS developers, not to mention his foul language and
references to "wiping pee pees".
-- "Hadron" <cw7h9c1...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Steve Carroll]

What issues do you have in mind?

[chrisv]

TomB wrote:

>> Text is the far better medium to have such discussions.
>
>Absolutely agreed.

With the greatly increased efficiency of talking, it would be
ridiculously easy to thrash the Wintrolls.

Could you imagine a public debate, and them bringing-up their
anti-choice nonsense?

--
'surely even you can see how thousands of choices make it hard to be
"informed"?' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

[DFS]

On 8/8/2012 8:56 AM, chrisv wrote:
> TomB wrote:
>
>>> Text is the far better medium to have such discussions.
>>
>> Absolutely agreed.
>
> With the greatly increased efficiency of talking, it would be
> ridiculously easy to thrash the Wintrolls.
>
> Could you imagine a public debate, and them bringing-up their
> anti-choice nonsense?

I could imagine you whining in real-time, turdv, refusing to choose and
explain 10 PC component combinations because too much choice makes it a
serious hassle.


From www.newegg.com as of June 21 2012 (desktop-oriented):

Intel CPU: 48 choices socket 1155 and up
Intel mobo: 322 choices socket 1155 and up
AMD CPU: 25 choices socket AM3/3+/FM1
AMD mobo: 114 choices socket AM3/3+/FM1
memory: 65 choices of 2x2GB, 240-Pin DDR3, 1333+
internal SSD: 271 choices between 80GB and 256GB
internal hard drive: 252 choices between 500GB and 2TB
optical drive: 20 non-slim SATA CD/DVD burners
video card: 569 choices of PCI Express 2.x
power supply: 270 choices between 500W and 1000W
case: 419 choices of ATX-sized

You can see how I already greatly restricted the choices to minimize
your silly whining.

The above are mostly combinatorial ignoring incompatibilities in
mobo/memory voltages, memory speed, type of PCI slot, etc.

Let's count the "massive choice" that you love so much:

Intel: 48*322*65*271*252*20*569*270*419 = 8.83284E+19
AMD: 25*114*65*271*252*20*569*270*419 = 1.62873E+19

And those numbers could easily be quadrupled.

You're a runaway hypocrite chump, turdv. If there were just 3 choices
of each component you would still run away: 3^9 = 19683 available
combinations.

Too much choice defeated you easily.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

After swilling some grog, chrisv belched this bit o' wisdom:

> TomB wrote:
>
>>> Text is the far better medium to have such discussions.
>>
>>Absolutely agreed.
>
> With the greatly increased efficiency of talking, it would be
> ridiculously easy to thrash the Wintrolls.
>
> Could you imagine a public debate, and them bringing-up their
> anti-choice nonsense?

DFS and Zeke would make their mikes malfunction with the spittle.

--
Marti has been prancing around telling everyone how he took Gregory
Sheaman's "advice" and went out on some date to meet some hot beef cake
who used Windows. I assumed it was you. . . .
Because you wear a wig and Marti already bored us all with how much he
fancies you. Why do you ask? It reminds me of the Joe Pesci character in JFK.
***Brrrr...*
-- "Hadron" <h70rob$k8l$3...@news.eternal-september.org> and
-- "Hadron" <h72m9d$3u4$5...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 8, 6:56 am, chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> TomB wrote:
> >> Text is the far better medium to have such discussions.
>
> >Absolutely agreed.
>
> With the greatly increased efficiency of talking, it would be
> ridiculously easy to thrash the Wintrolls.

I'm sure this will offend you but it isn't meant as an offense... if
you think you'll be more 'efficient' by talking than what you write in
COLA I'd consider making a donation to your favorite charity to hear
you ;)

> Could you imagine a public debate, and them bringing-up their
> anti-choice nonsense?

That's exactly what you have the opportunity to do in COLA (where you
have far more time to compose a response). You don't seem to
understand the 'talking' format very well... if you did, you'd
understand why I made the Jerry Springer reference.

[Steve Carroll]

On Aug 8, 7:41 am, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@xzoozy.com> wrote:
> After swilling some grog, chrisv belched this bit o' wisdom:
>
> > TomB wrote:
>
> >>> Text is the far better medium to have such discussions.
>
> >>Absolutely agreed.
>
> > With the greatly increased efficiency of talking, it would be
> > ridiculously easy to thrash the Wintrolls.
>
> > Could you imagine a public debate, and them bringing-up their
> > anti-choice nonsense?
>
> DFS and Zeke would make their mikes malfunction with the spittle.

Here is what it would be like with chrisv

Someone: Well, what about the...

chrisv: PLONK!

Someone else: That's a good point and I'd like to add...

chrisv: Plonk! PLONK! PLONK!

First someone again: Could be... but...

chrisv: you bleep filthy rotten bleep! Plonk!

Second someone: True... but consider the...

chrisv: you stinkin' Winturds are a bunch of bleeping bleeps! Plonk!
Pa Plonk! PLONK! PLONK!

[Hadron]

Yup. Thats the turd.

For all his farting I'm yet to see a coherent post from the turd that
actually advocates Linux and FOSS. Its all me too and frothing
filth. He's not quite as stupid as Gortard, as sycophantic and
hypocritical as Creepy Chris Ahlstrom or as plain useless as Dumb Willy
Poaster but he's a good mixture of them all.


--
A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be a Linux
user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
(Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM...@comcast.com>

[Nobody]

On 8/8/2012 11:21 AM, Hadron wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fretw...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Aug 8, 7:41 am, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@xzoozy.com> wrote:
>>> After swilling some grog, chrisv belched this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>> TomB wrote:
>>>

[...]

>
> For all his farting I'm yet to see a coherent post from the turd that
> actually advocates Linux and FOSS.

[...]

The same can be said for you, in spite of your headers and claims to be
a Linux Advocate.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

After swilling some grog, Nobody belched this bit o' wisdom:

"Hadron" lies in most of his posts.

--
Nice try Gobbler.
But he isn't "defensive" - he has merely pointed out that you're a lying
hypocritical sack of shit when you claim you dont hate MS. You
constantly post anti-ms bullshit regardless of the source credibility.
How's Linphone coming along? Figured out that IPs in the range
192.168.0 etc are local LAN? *chuckle*.
--
Simon
-- "Hadron" <vmpqnhc...@news.eternal-september.org>

[chrisv]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>> Hadron quacked:

>>>
>>> For all his farting I'm yet to see a coherent post from the turd that
>>> actually advocates Linux and FOSS.
>

>"Hadron" lies in most of his posts.

"Hadron" lies *constantly*, and the above was simply another of his
bald-faced lies.

Cue the asshole to apply "Ezekiel"-caliber "logic", and point out that
I curse at trolls, as if that is some sort of evidence that I never do
quality posts.

--
"Too many clueless weenines like the COLA faithful havent a CLUE about
the GPL and consequences." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

[William Poaster]

Here is a facsimile from Chris Ahlstrom who, on 8/8/2012 18:22, wrote:

> After swilling some grog, Nobody belched this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On 8/8/2012 11:21 AM, Hadron wrote:
>>> Steve Carroll <fretw...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Aug 8, 7:41 am, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@xzoozy.com> wrote:
>>>>> After swilling some grog, chrisv belched this bit o' wisdom:
>>>>>
>>>>>> TomB wrote:
>>>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> For all his farting I'm yet to see a coherent post from the turd that
>>> actually advocates Linux and FOSS.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> The same can be said for you, in spite of your headers and claims to be
>> a Linux Advocate.
>
> "Hadron" lies in most of his posts.

In the *majority* of them, I'd say.

--
NEW Micro$oft SLOGAN: It's Close Enough, We Say So.

Micro$oft, the company that makes spreading malware easy.

Microsoft exec Ron Markezich was quoted saying that for every $1
companies spend on Microsoft software, they need to spend $6 getting
it to work right. -- April 2011 SanFrancisco Chronical --

"We have no intention of shipping another bloated OS and shoving
it down the throats of our users."
-- Paul Maritz, Microsoft group vice president --

What's bad about Micro$oft:
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html

[Foster]

On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:22:27 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:


>
> "Hadron" lies in most of his posts.

Is this your new technique Chris Ahlstrom?

Just make up lies and wait for dumb, empty suits like William
Poaster to come along and agree with you?

Bad idea....

[Onion Knight]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 11:08:22 AM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Aug 6, 7:05 am, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:38:20 AM UTC-4, Hadron wrote:
>
> > > cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > >> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:20:20 AM UTC-4, Nobody wrote:
>
> > >>> On 8/6/2012 7:01 AM, cc wrote:
>
> > >>>> On Friday, August 3, 2012 4:08:00 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> > >>>>> On 8/1/12 5:18 AM, in article
>
> > >>>>> bb8c3566-470e-4978...@googlegroups.com, "cc"

>
> > >>>>> <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> July brought another round of UI improvements
>

> > >>> .
>
> >
>
> > >>>> If you are now denying the huge focus on usability in KDE, Gnome,
>
> > >>>> Ubuntu, and Mint then I would be happy to update my post.
>
> >
>
> > >>> Please update your post with an explanation of why you expected
>
> > >>> improvements made in July to cause a massive rise in Linux
>
> > >>> market share by the first of August.
>
> >
>
> > >> You misunderstand. I don't expect UI improvements to desktop Linux to have any
>
> > >> effect at all. I'm not an idiot.
>
> >
>
> > > Yes you are. The better the UI then the more chances people
>
> >
>
> > Changing your tune so quickly?
>
> >
>
> > https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d543e0b25a...
>
> >
>
> > > will be impressed by it and adopt/stick with it.
>
> >
>
> > An impressive UI is the least of Linux's problems.
>
> >
>
> > > If you dont think the work done by Ubuntu and Mint has helped
>
> > > adoption then you're an idiot : sure people might have migrated
>
> >
>
> > Then show where this adoption has occured. Back your statements up, for the first time ever.
>
> >
>
> > > from other poorer desktop Linux distros (see how many are dead in
>
> > > distrowatch) but not to understand the benefits of a better,
>
> >
>
> > You mean, see how many have been dead in distrowatch for YEARS and then retroactively attribute this to new improvments made to the desktop UIs recently? Jesus Christ. Maybe I need to write it out in a way you'll understand? That logic is : literally the dumbest shit I've ever seen.
>
> >
>
> > > cleaner more consistent UI is a sure sign you're clueless.
>
> >
>
> > You're a fucking moron. I've responded to you too many times to count that it's not that a better UI isn't beneficial. It's that a better UI isn't beneficial to Linux, due to all the other issues. You seemingly agreed with that before, but I guess Snit stopped giving you kisses so you have to change your tune again.

>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinearTrendLineCreation.mov> - Snit's ignorance of Excel and his hilarious attempt at statistical analysis
>
>
>

> I also believe he's distorted what you've said to an extent. I could
>
> be wrong (please correct me if this is the case here) but I've never
>
> seen you claim it hasn't helped the adoption rate... it just hasn't
>
> (yet, at least) affected it in such a way that would raise market
>
> share. That I've seen, this has pretty much always been your main
>
> point (the market share aspect).

Good to see you back Snit in saying UI improvements can increase usage rates.

[Onion Knight]

On Monday, August 6, 2012 2:54:53 PM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Aug 6, 3:44 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> > On 8/6/12 2:33 PM, in article
>
> > 7caab734-805e-4eaa...@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>
> >
>
> > <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Monday, August 6, 2012 5:27:10 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>
> > >> (though there may have been some improvements in UI issues,
>
> > >> it would be rather extreme to think this would lead to a
>
> > >> measurable affect by the start of August and not something
>
> > >> I have ever supported).
>
> >
>
> > > What a bald-faced lie.
>
> >
>
> > I am not denying you lied in your first post of this thread where you made
>
> > such claims.
>
> >
>
> > > You said that there should be a correlation between UI improvements and number
>
> > > of users, and you said that your prediction had already come true. So not only
>
> > > did you think it would lead to a measureable effect by August, you falsely
>
> > > believed that it there was already a correlated increase. This is the second
>
> > > time in this thread you have done a complete one-eighty. I sincerely hope you
>
> > > continue.
>
> >
>
> > If you want to continue this BS "debate" you need to stop running.  Respond
>
> > to these posts in an honest and complete way: <http://goo.gl/RnooG>,

>
> > <http://goo.gl/P7dY3>, and <http://goo.gl/5RMOZ>.
>
> >
>

> > This is why you would never do a Skype "radio" show with me...
>
>
>
> Like anyone with a brain he knows you'd be as dishonest on it as you
>
> are here.

WHy don't you do a Skype show with Snit and challenge him one to one where you can't just run like the fucking asshole coward you are? I would love to be on the show as well and talk to you about your slut of a wife screwing pilots as you run off to screw your whore. Pick a date asshole.

[Hadron]

Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@xzoozy.com> writes:

> After swilling some grog, Nobody belched this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On 8/8/2012 11:21 AM, Hadron wrote:
>>> Steve Carroll <fretw...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Aug 8, 7:41 am, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@xzoozy.com> wrote:
>>>>> After swilling some grog, chrisv belched this bit o' wisdom:
>>>>>
>>>>>> TomB wrote:
>>>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> For all his farting I'm yet to see a coherent post from the turd that
>>> actually advocates Linux and FOSS.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> The same can be said for you, in spite of your headers and claims to be
>> a Linux Advocate.
>
> "Hadron" lies in most of his posts.

You wont mind pointing out these lies then Creepy. Off you go now. I can
and will post links AGAIN to you telling lies and getting caught out if
you like.

[TomB]

On 2012-08-08, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:

8<

> I could imagine you whining in real-time, turdv, refusing to choose
> and explain 10 PC component combinations because too much choice
> makes it a serious hassle.

Just a couple of weeks ago I ordered the parts to build my new desktop
machine. It took me less than an hour to choose a mobo, cpu, gpu
board, case and psu from http://www.alternate.be

I'm very happy with the resulting machine.

Lots of choice is great.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

After swilling some grog, TomB belched this bit o' wisdom:

> On 2012-08-08, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>
> 8<
>
>> I could imagine you whining in real-time, turdv, refusing to choose

>> and explain 10 PC component combinations because...

... responding to yet another impertinent puling demand from a vile
troll is a waste of time. No one owes the idiot squat.

> Just a couple of weeks ago I ordered the parts to build my new desktop
> machine. It took me less than an hour to choose a mobo, cpu, gpu
> board, case and psu from http://www.alternate.be
>
> I'm very happy with the resulting machine.
>
> Lots of choice is great.

Of course.

--
But dont kid yourself. Video is still a major issue with Linux desktops
and the freetards scare off developers. Sure some open source "remake"
of the best of the commercial engines is nice if you want to hack but
dont expect many top tier games from them. They're simply not good
enough. Most "advocates" pretend to be unaware of the advances in gaming
engines. Just take a look at something like Uncharted 2 for the PS3, or
Black Ops. It's amazing stuff.
-- "Hadron" <m6mxinp...@news.eternal-september.org>

[chrisv]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>
>>> I could imagine you whining in real-time, turdv, refusing to choose
>>> and explain 10 PC component combinations because...
>
>... responding to yet another impertinent puling demand from a vile
>troll is a waste of time. No one owes the idiot squat.

I already spanked the troll on that issue.

Of course, "Ezekiel" won't admit that, preferring to side with obvious
lies and idiocy.

[DFS]

s/spanked/ran like a pansy from

[Snit]

On 8/8/12 10:15 PM, in article 201208090...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"

Excellent. My new iMac showed up just a couple of days ago... I am very
happy with it as well.


--
* cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.

[TomB]

On 2012-08-07, the following emerged from the brain of Steve Carroll:
> On Aug 7, 12:17 pm, TomB <tommy.bongae...@gmail.com> wrote:

8<

>> A good user interface is a very nice thing to have (it's why I use
>> awesome and mostly terminals god dammit!), but if tomorrow someone
>> creates a desktop environment for GNU/Linux that has all the best
>> and none of the worst of all worlds, and all distributions adopt it
>> as their standard desktop, this will do jack shit for GNU/Linux in
>> the usage share numbers. There are far more important "issues" to
>> tackle, and none of those "issues" have to do with quality, not on
>> the front-end and not on the back-end.
>
> What issues do you have in mind?

It all comes down to the entrenchment of Microsoft Windows in the PC
market. We can have a lenghty debate about why and how that happened,
and we will agree on some points and disagree on others, but simply
put that's the main reason for the relative failure of GNU/Linux as a
desktop OS.

As a result of this one simple fact, GNU/Linux faces a number of
issues that prevents it from becoming mainstream:

* Commerial and closed source software vendors do not create a
GNU/Linux version of their titles, and if they do it often is an
inferior version (eg. Skype or Flash).

* Hardware vendors do not release GNU/Linux specific drivers and
application software. If they do, installing the driver often means
jumping through some hoops.

* PC and laptop vendors generally do not offer GNU/Linux on their
machines, and if they do it is treated like a second class citizen
or explicitly advertised as "for advanced users".

* GNU/Linux remains a relatively unknown option to must PC users. My
guesstimate is that at least 70% of computer users doesn't even know
that it exists.

On top of that GNU/Linux still carries the weight of being looked at
as the "expert" of "geek" OS. While many years ago it certainly was
(more so than Windows or OSX of the same era), this is in no way true
anymore today.

It is obvious that the reasons mentioned above have put GNU/Linux in a
vicious circle that is very hard, if not impossible, to break out of.
As long as industry support won't grow, the user base won't grow,
which in turn means that industry support won't grow.

The inherent user experience of GNU/Linux is more than good enough for
about any type of user (from n00bs to ubertechies) and in places even
surpasses what's offered by Windows or OSX. The claimed "lack of
quality" in the UI deparment (which I strongly disagree with) is in no
way the reason for its slow uptake.

[TomB]

On 2012-08-09, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:

> On 8/8/12 10:15 PM, in article
> 201208090...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
><tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-08-08, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>
>> 8<
>>
>>> I could imagine you whining in real-time, turdv, refusing to
>>> choose and explain 10 PC component combinations because too much
>>> choice makes it a serious hassle.
>>
>> Just a couple of weeks ago I ordered the parts to build my new
>> desktop machine. It took me less than an hour to choose a mobo,
>> cpu, gpu board, case and psu from http://www.alternate.be
>>
>> I'm very happy with the resulting machine.
>>
>> Lots of choice is great.
>
> Excellent. My new iMac showed up just a couple of days ago... I am
> very happy with it as well.

Puh. At leas I had the joy of spending a couple of hours to put the
machine together, and then another couple of hours to install Gentoo
on it.

Beats unwrapping an iMac, plugging in one cable and push the power
button!

[Snit]

On 8/9/12 3:21 PM, in article 201208100...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"

I prefer getting work / play done than fiddling with the computer - which is
not to say I do not customize things. Happily OS X is very good at bringing
forward the old settings... I just started the new Mac with the Time Machine
backup connected and told it to get the data from there. I will say my Mail
rules got lost for some reason (and that is a bit annoying) and I played
with some of the new settings in Mountain Lion... but it was right to work
with all my old data. The only time really needed was moving the 500+ GB
over from the backup to the new machine. I did also have to de-authorize
some programs on the old computer and then authorize them on the new (the
Adobe suite and 2-3 other programs... not that big of a deal).

Also a couple of programs and drivers were updated when I went into the
"Software Update" - both some Apple programs and non-Apple programs and even
things like HP drivers. I did have two programs which needed to be updated
outside of that process (add-ons for Mail and Safari which are not a part of
the Apple store).

> Beats unwrapping an iMac, plugging in one cable and push the power
> button!

Yeah, who wants things to be easy and just work. :)

[Nobody]

Snit wrote:
> On 8/9/12 3:21 PM, in article 201208100...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
> <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-08-09, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> On 8/8/12 10:15 PM, in article
>>> 201208090...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>>> <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2012-08-08, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>>>

[...]

>
>> Beats unwrapping an iMac, plugging in one cable and push the power
>> button!
>
> Yeah, who wants things to be easy and just work. :)

You wouldn't think the guy who wants people to believe he set up a
computer lab with Ubuntu PCs and who claims to support Ubuntu "clients"
would limit his own computer to being an iMac.

[Snit]

On 8/10/12 1:29 AM, in article k02g4o$b5v$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

I advocate using the best tool for the job, considering the needs and the
constraints. Why would I not do that for myself as well as my clients?

[Nobody]

On 8/10/2012 9:51 AM, Snit wrote:
> On 8/10/12 1:29 AM, in article k02g4o$b5v$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"
> <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>> On 8/9/12 3:21 PM, in article 201208100...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>>> <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-08-09, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>>> On 8/8/12 10:15 PM, in article
>>>>> 201208090...@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>>>>> <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2012-08-08, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>>>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Beats unwrapping an iMac, plugging in one cable and push the power
>>>> button!
>>>
>>> Yeah, who wants things to be easy and just work. :)
>>
>> You wouldn't think the guy who wants people to believe he set up a
>> computer lab with Ubuntu PCs and who claims to support Ubuntu "clients"
>> would limit his own computer to being an iMac.
>>
> I advocate using the best tool for the job, considering the needs and the
> constraints. Why would I not do that for myself as well as my clients?

Never trust a chef who won't eat his own food.

[Snit]

On 8/10/12 11:10 AM, in article k03iqn$itf$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

Which is why I use OS X, Windows, and various flavors of desktop Linux. You
seem to think my having a Mac somehow prevents that.

Pretty much you made a silly comment - talking about getting a Mac somehow
being a limitation that would prevent me from running and using other OSs
than OS X. Now you know, though, that this is not true... so I am happy we
had this discussion. Always happy to help educate people on such things.

[Nobody]

I don't believe you. I think the most you've done is play around with
Linux in a VM.

> You seem to think my having a Mac somehow prevents that.

You need a Mac to make things easy for you and shield you from all those
frightening choices. Hardly the traits of someone who sets up
computers for other people.

[...]

[Snit]

On 8/10/12 11:47 AM, in article k03kvo$noo$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"

What you believe about me is irrelevant.

>> You seem to think my having a Mac somehow prevents that.
>
> You need a Mac to make things easy for you and shield you from all those
> frightening choices.

What choices do you believe it is preventing me from selecting? And why do
you find those choices "frightening"?

> Hardly the traits of someone who sets up
> computers for other people.

Again: what you believe about me is irrelevant.

[Nobody]

Thanks for the confirmation.

>>> You seem to think my having a Mac somehow prevents that.
>>
>> You need a Mac to make things easy for you and shield you from all those
>> frightening choices.
>
> What choices do you believe it is preventing me from selecting?

You prevent yourself from selecting. You need things easy, and limited.

> And why do you find those choices "frightening"?

I don't find them frightening, you do. Given your inability to
understand the meaning of a single sentence, how could you possibly have
the competence to set up computers for other people?

>> Hardly the traits of someone who sets up
>> computers for other people.
>
> Again: what you believe about me is irrelevant.

Thanks for the confirmation.

[Snit]

On 8/10/12 12:08 PM, in article k03m7d$q2v$1...@news.albasani.net, "Nobody"
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:

...

>>> You need a Mac to make things easy for you and shield you from all those
>>> frightening choices.
>>
>> What choices do you believe it is preventing me from selecting?
>
> You prevent yourself from selecting. You need things easy, and limited.

You did not list a single choice. You cannot think of any. Got it.

>> And why do you find those choices "frightening"?
>
> I don't find them frightening, you do.

You, not I, referred to the choices as "frightening". Do not push your own
comments onto me.

> Given your inability to understand the meaning of a single sentence, how could
> you possibly have the competence to set up computers for other people?

I understand you wish to troll me to change the topic, but the fact is it
was you who referred to the choices as "frightening". Now you rescind that
claim. Excellent - you have joined me in not being frightened by choice.
Good to see that growth from you... or if it was merely a misstatement on
your part so be it.

>>> Hardly the traits of someone who sets up
>>> computers for other people.
>>
>> Again: what you believe about me is irrelevant.
>
> Thanks for the confirmation.

I will confirm that your opinions about me are irrelevant as many times as
you need it to sink it, or at least try to. In your case it might take
forever.