The racist, liar and software thief Gary Stewart (flatfish) nymshifted:
< snip >
>>>>>> Like the Gartner Group? "Oh, we see oodles of merit in the SCO case!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet when Gartner writes a pro-Linux article you Linux loons are all
>>>>> over it.
>>>>> Same goes for the Guardian, Infoworld, PCweek etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're a bunch of hypocrites.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, you do see "oodles of merit in the SCO case"?
>>>
>>> No I don't.
>>> I think the entire thing is a sham.
>>>
>>> My point is that when a pro Linux article is written by a major rag, you
>>> seem to ignore and forget all the negative stuff that rag wrote in the
>>> past.
>>> But when they write a negative Linux article all of a sudden that
>>> particular rag is now satan.
>>>
>>> Not you specifically, but COLA nuts.
>>>
>>> It's hypocritical.
>>>
>>
>> You mean like the so often mentioned "stats" which "prove" that linux
>> has "insert random figure below 1%" market share.
>>
>> Yes, those things often get mentioned by idiots
>
> Like the BBC?
> They have Linux at around 0.8 percent.
>
> If all of these stats are wrong Peter, explain to me how the vast majority
> seem to agree with each other no matter the source?
>
> Do they *prove* Linux desktop usage is below 1 percent?
> No, but it seems plausible to conclude that since the same numbers keep
> coming up there has to be some truth in it.
Yes, that simply *has* to be the reason why google (easily the one company
which is used across the board by a lot of different user types, regardless
of OS) has dropped their desktop stats figures.
As they did not prove anything and where so unreliable to be unuseable.
--
Microsoft? Is that some kind of a toilet paper?
|
|
