On 2009-05-13, Ezekiel <nowhere-there@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:slrnh0m65i.rkf.jedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> On 2009-05-13, Ezekiel <nowhere-there@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Miguel de Icaza" <miguel.de.icaza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:54634db3-7456-452f-a527-6a954679922e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>>> > I do not think that Linux on the desktop is keeping folks at
>>>>> > Microsoft
>>>>> > awake at night. Our market share is still very small, we are deeply
>>>>> > fragmented and our quality control is terrible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Speak for yourself.
>>>>
>>>>It does not matter what my experience or yours is. What matters are
>>>>the actual market share numbers. Linux is still tiny.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>Of course I want to change that, and that is why I have worked for the
>>>>last 17 years in open source software.
>>>
>>> You worked for the past 17 years on open source software. Ask any of the
>>
>> This sort of approach would work a bit better if the person in question
>> didn't try to turn themselves into a sort of petty bridge troll
>
> So the best you can do is to resort to name calling.
That's perfectly descriptive of the given situation.
What's interesting is how this bridge troll then lashed out as at
the community as it sought to route around the damage.
>
>> or insisted on making Linux primarily a platform for running
>> Microsoft controlled technology.
>
> A worthless opinion from someone who has no clout or experience in the
> matter. Others who are better informed then some anonymous COLA poster have
> a different opinion.
I may not be able to drive policy but I can certainly comment on it.
Leaving the apps that we depend on to something akin to FAT patents is
hardly something that makes a lot of sense in the long term. It's one thing
to take on those vulnerabilities when you can't avoid it and quite another
to go looking for this sort of trouble.
>
>
>> Unix users not blind followers... fancy that.
>
> Says who? Just because you make some ridiculous statement like this doesn't
> make it true.
Microsoft makes it a habit of stabbing their partners in the back. They
have a long history of this and it starts from their very beginning. Weak
handwaving won't alter the facts.
>
>
>
>>> self-proclaimed "advocates" here what their contribution to open source
>>> software is. What applications, testing, documentation, code, etc has
>>> Schestowitz, Ahlstrom. midget, chrisv or anyone else here contributed to
>>> OSS.
>>>
>>> The answer is ZERO. They don't have the time to contribute to OSS but
>>> they
>>> have more than enough time to attack and criticize those who do
>>> contribute.
>>> Those who contribute nothing criticize those who do contribute if they
>>> think
>>> that the (free) contribution isn't the right kind of contribution.
>>>
>>> It's quite remarkable actually.
>>
>> ...and before that we criticized Microsoft without being Microsoft
>> employees. See how that works?
>
> I see exactly how this works... you make ridiculous statements in some sort
> of riddle format and somehow you think you're making a valid point.
The users matter.
As a Microsoft devotee, you might not believe that. You might pay
lip service to the idea while not really believing it. Many of us of
course have different ideas.
>
>
>> Unless you want to claim that somehow Microsoft is fundementally
>> a different company than it was before, all of it's past misdeeds are
>> very relevant.
>
> Why -- Just because *you* say so?
The facts, logic and human nature say so.
>
>
>> They call into question whether or not you want to
>> follow their lead in any respect.
>
> This has nothing about following their lead. It's about a bunch of freetards
> who contribute nothing criticizing those who do contribute because they
> don't like the *free* contributions that others are making. Not everything
> revolves around Microsoft.
I don't like my chosen platform disappearing because the monopoly
bully was able to kill it. Been there, done that.
This is why it is good that Linux has some genetic diversity.
[deletia]
--
Metallica is not worth the ruination of someone |||
who has pirated their music / | \
|
|
