You are making a post defending men against criticism
Wrong, you are really having a hard time with your english comprehension. So let's dissect it to help you understand, first show me where I defended men (I'm not sure whether you are suggesting all men or some subset so you need to clarify that as well) against criticism.
i suppose you don't appreciate the irony in your post
Then you failed to comprehend it because there isn't any, legitimate criticism is fine but that is not what this is. You are confusing making sweeping accusatory generalizations with criticism.
It's sexist statements like this that cause a lack of sympathy in the first place:
One of the consequences is that men are extremely sensitive to being criticized by women
This is something that is simply not true of all men so why make statements like that? Do you really expect people to actively defend your cause if you are openly hostile to them just because of they are of the same gender as the people you have a problem with? That's a terrible start to conflict resolution.
Also wrt the timeliness of information I wouldn't think that's an issue, if it's more technical focused than "news" then I doubt timeliness is an issue.
I don't know why you have this weird agenda of insisting that any Linux on the desktop (that isn't ChromeOS) needs to remain a niche.
It doesn't have to remain niche, but people won't change just for the sake of it, it needs to give people a reason to change.
You yourself cited FOSS desktop applications as something that people use, and that it doesn't matter what OS they use.
Right, but why would somebody switch from the incumbent operating systems?
It seems like either you're emotionally invested in being anti-Linux or you're just being difficult for the sake of it.
No, I'm not anti-Linux at all, you seem to not understand that you supplant an incumbent by differentiating in some way that consumers are going to say "wow that's so much better than what I have now". For example the iPhone vs Blackberry or the iPad vs the old Windows tablets. I'm a realist, I can see that that is what is missing in desktop Linux and that is the reason it hasn't supplanted Windows or OS X, it doesn't have a killer feature.
You have GIMP, LibreOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, Skype, Dropbox, VLC, Spotify, and an ever-increasing number of games offered through Steam. People who use those applications are not a 'niche'.
Agreed, but they all run on Windows and OS X too, so why switch to Linux? What's the killer feature?
Right so the people who don't need application compatibility will go ChromeOS or Android or iOS and those who do will stick with Windows or OS X. Those who want a system with a pre-installed desktop Linux distro (that isn't ChromeOS) will remain the tiny niche segment that they currently are.
This truly is a better MacBook Air than a MacBook Air.
But you just outlined how a MacBook Air doesn't suit your needs, so for that reason you went with something different that explicitly is not a MacBook Air because a MacBook Air is by definition not what you want. Doesn't your statement apply equally to pretty much every single product that isn't an S200E? Unless of course you understood the MacBook Air to be something other than what it actually is.
If I want all the functionality of Chrome OS and a couple other more conventional applications (e.g. GIMP, LibreOffice), then it makes more sense to just install something more like Ubuntu.
I guess I'm thinking that there aren't many people like that, they either want to run their specific OS X or Windows applications or - as you said - the applications they need have been pushed to the web like Google Docs/Office365 and Pixlr Editor.
And again, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to say, "Suggesting that people use Linux is dumb. They can just use Android or buy a Chromebook!" That's still Linux. If I want all the functionality of Chrome OS and a couple other more conventional applications (e.g. GIMP, LibreOffice), then it makes more sense to just install something more like Ubuntu.
Yeah that's why I didn't say that. We've had decades of being able to install other linux distros but ultimately there is no compelling reason to do so for the general populace because even when Windows changes Linux distros are still an unfamiliar environment but they don't run all your programs, if you have to adapt to a new environment it might as well be a compatible one.
So the point is, it would be trivial for a company like HP to take Ubuntu, include drivers for their own hardware, and brand it however they want.
I agree, and maybe you're right that they will do something like that but personally I don't see a switch from the incumbent desktop operating systems except to a web-based one if that fits the bill.
Especially as FOSS has grown and more applications have been pushed to the web, the 3rd party app lock-in isn't what it once was.
But that's why people care less and less about what operating system they run, it doesn't matter that much anymore, just look at the surge in Chromebook popularity. The other thing is the FOSS apps are - by their nature - portable to closed proprietary platforms like OS X and Windows meaning if vendors did make a move to a free operating system and an investment in FOSS programs then they're just shutting out their customers from the proprietary software vendors. People don't buy a computer and then go "ok now what can I do with it" - at least not anymore - they get them to run programs. If it's web-based then the OS doesn't matter, if it's FOSS then in most cases it doesn't either (Blender, GIMP, Ardour, etc...) and if it's proprietary applications (most prevalent is probably content creation) then you probably need OS X or Windows.
The free (or even some proprietary alternative) OS has no added value to the customer, sure you could have yet another Linux distribution but what would that achieve? We already have plenty that are dead simple to install. If you want desktop programs then Windows or OS X is still your best bet and if you can live with predominantly web-based applications then a Chromebook, an Android tablet or an iPad will probably do.
In other words: "because Microsoft can't do then no one can".
It's not just Microsoft there's also Ubuntu's Unity and the pretty much universally unused Launchpad in OSX then you have this VolksPC implementation which if anything is even more jarring than Windows 8. There's been hardware to do it with for years now, even Microsoft's own Surface Pro line can run Linux and Android. I'm not saying it's impossible just because nobody has done it, but there's been ample time and still nobody has got it even close yet.
It's more like "If Micrososft can't do it then EVERYONE ELSE can, will, and have done it for 10 years prior".
they failed to realize that people don't want an intelligent dryer and an intelligent toaster and an intelligent melon baller.
Maybe so but intelligent thermostats and lighting systems most definitely.
The reality is whatever fancy device you own that has any kind of transistor in it, much less a CPU-- a phone, a tablet, a TV-- you're having to fuss with it.
Nope, either you have never used a decent intelligent thermostat or you're doing it wrong. Or there's internet-connected appliances like air conditioners, the ability to control them remotely is great. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you mean by "having to fuss with it".
No I'm saying this isn't a case of "the people not knowing what's good for them". Uninformed opinion in that case was not even being presented with options, anybody can see why the idea of faster horses loses to cars if presented the options but why should net neutrality lose out?
I think you missed the big one: lots of people might actually start using Google+.
I doubt it, it was unpopular before the real names policy and I don't see the reversion of that policy increasing it's popularity.
Some people just didn't like the blatant privacy violations.
Sorry I'm not really familiar with Google+ - outside of the necessity of it to make use of Google services and the incessant nagging from Google that I create one - but what privacy violations does this change rescind? I did a bit of a search and found this but AFAIK that is still in effect (or maybe it isnt?).
Slashdot Mirror
You are making a post defending men against criticism
Wrong, you are really having a hard time with your english comprehension. So let's dissect it to help you understand, first show me where I defended men (I'm not sure whether you are suggesting all men or some subset so you need to clarify that as well) against criticism.
Well that sounds like a good method.
i suppose you don't appreciate the irony in your post
Then you failed to comprehend it because there isn't any, legitimate criticism is fine but that is not what this is. You are confusing making sweeping accusatory generalizations with criticism.
This woman thinks I'm asshole with no self-control for no other reason than because I have a penis. And she thinks I'm the one who's sexist?!
Damn straight! Sure that sort of attitude isn't going to turn anybody sexist but it isn't exactly going to win you any friends either.
It's sexist statements like this that cause a lack of sympathy in the first place:
One of the consequences is that men are extremely sensitive to being criticized by women
This is something that is simply not true of all men so why make statements like that? Do you really expect people to actively defend your cause if you are openly hostile to them just because of they are of the same gender as the people you have a problem with? That's a terrible start to conflict resolution.
Oh nevermind, I'm guessing it's purely subscriber driven.
Out of interest what is the advertising model?
Also wrt the timeliness of information I wouldn't think that's an issue, if it's more technical focused than "news" then I doubt timeliness is an issue.
The only secure Android phone is what is running Cyanogenmod.
If you take "secure" to mean "i don't know of any security vulnerabilities in it" then sure, but that's unlikely to be very secure.
"boots it off the network"
How exactly is that accomplished?
Through a deauthorization attack
Unlikely sir. They spell and pronounce their name differently.
Because of your statements, I must ask you: what is a MacBook Air?
This is a MacBook Air.
I don't know why you have this weird agenda of insisting that any Linux on the desktop (that isn't ChromeOS) needs to remain a niche.
It doesn't have to remain niche, but people won't change just for the sake of it, it needs to give people a reason to change.
You yourself cited FOSS desktop applications as something that people use, and that it doesn't matter what OS they use.
Right, but why would somebody switch from the incumbent operating systems?
It seems like either you're emotionally invested in being anti-Linux or you're just being difficult for the sake of it.
No, I'm not anti-Linux at all, you seem to not understand that you supplant an incumbent by differentiating in some way that consumers are going to say "wow that's so much better than what I have now". For example the iPhone vs Blackberry or the iPad vs the old Windows tablets. I'm a realist, I can see that that is what is missing in desktop Linux and that is the reason it hasn't supplanted Windows or OS X, it doesn't have a killer feature.
You have GIMP, LibreOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, Skype, Dropbox, VLC, Spotify, and an ever-increasing number of games offered through Steam. People who use those applications are not a 'niche'.
Agreed, but they all run on Windows and OS X too, so why switch to Linux? What's the killer feature?
While that's true, to the user they are the same thing.
Right so the people who don't need application compatibility will go ChromeOS or Android or iOS and those who do will stick with Windows or OS X. Those who want a system with a pre-installed desktop Linux distro (that isn't ChromeOS) will remain the tiny niche segment that they currently are.
This truly is a better MacBook Air than a MacBook Air.
But you just outlined how a MacBook Air doesn't suit your needs, so for that reason you went with something different that explicitly is not a MacBook Air because a MacBook Air is by definition not what you want. Doesn't your statement apply equally to pretty much every single product that isn't an S200E? Unless of course you understood the MacBook Air to be something other than what it actually is.
If I want all the functionality of Chrome OS and a couple other more conventional applications (e.g. GIMP, LibreOffice), then it makes more sense to just install something more like Ubuntu.
I guess I'm thinking that there aren't many people like that, they either want to run their specific OS X or Windows applications or - as you said - the applications they need have been pushed to the web like Google Docs/Office365 and Pixlr Editor.
And again, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to say, "Suggesting that people use Linux is dumb. They can just use Android or buy a Chromebook!" That's still Linux. If I want all the functionality of Chrome OS and a couple other more conventional applications (e.g. GIMP, LibreOffice), then it makes more sense to just install something more like Ubuntu.
Yeah that's why I didn't say that. We've had decades of being able to install other linux distros but ultimately there is no compelling reason to do so for the general populace because even when Windows changes Linux distros are still an unfamiliar environment but they don't run all your programs, if you have to adapt to a new environment it might as well be a compatible one.
So the point is, it would be trivial for a company like HP to take Ubuntu, include drivers for their own hardware, and brand it however they want.
I agree, and maybe you're right that they will do something like that but personally I don't see a switch from the incumbent desktop operating systems except to a web-based one if that fits the bill.
Especially as FOSS has grown and more applications have been pushed to the web, the 3rd party app lock-in isn't what it once was.
But that's why people care less and less about what operating system they run, it doesn't matter that much anymore, just look at the surge in Chromebook popularity. The other thing is the FOSS apps are - by their nature - portable to closed proprietary platforms like OS X and Windows meaning if vendors did make a move to a free operating system and an investment in FOSS programs then they're just shutting out their customers from the proprietary software vendors. People don't buy a computer and then go "ok now what can I do with it" - at least not anymore - they get them to run programs. If it's web-based then the OS doesn't matter, if it's FOSS then in most cases it doesn't either (Blender, GIMP, Ardour, etc...) and if it's proprietary applications (most prevalent is probably content creation) then you probably need OS X or Windows.
The free (or even some proprietary alternative) OS has no added value to the customer, sure you could have yet another Linux distribution but what would that achieve? We already have plenty that are dead simple to install. If you want desktop programs then Windows or OS X is still your best bet and if you can live with predominantly web-based applications then a Chromebook, an Android tablet or an iPad will probably do.
In other words: "because Microsoft can't do then no one can".
It's not just Microsoft there's also Ubuntu's Unity and the pretty much universally unused Launchpad in OSX then you have this VolksPC implementation which if anything is even more jarring than Windows 8. There's been hardware to do it with for years now, even Microsoft's own Surface Pro line can run Linux and Android. I'm not saying it's impossible just because nobody has done it, but there's been ample time and still nobody has got it even close yet.
It's more like "If Micrososft can't do it then EVERYONE ELSE can, will, and have done it for 10 years prior".
So where is it then?
they failed to realize that people don't want an intelligent dryer and an intelligent toaster and an intelligent melon baller.
Maybe so but intelligent thermostats and lighting systems most definitely.
The reality is whatever fancy device you own that has any kind of transistor in it, much less a CPU-- a phone, a tablet, a TV-- you're having to fuss with it.
Nope, either you have never used a decent intelligent thermostat or you're doing it wrong. Or there's internet-connected appliances like air conditioners, the ability to control them remotely is great. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you mean by "having to fuss with it".
I won't become a facebook slave, thanks.
That's a little melodramatic don't you think?
And Windows has the same thing in the Start Menu folder in Explorer.
No I'm saying this isn't a case of "the people not knowing what's good for them". Uninformed opinion in that case was not even being presented with options, anybody can see why the idea of faster horses loses to cars if presented the options but why should net neutrality lose out?
But Henry Ford didn't ask the people for opinion, nor did he - as is being done with net neutrality - present a choice and ask for feedback on that.
Henry Ford quipped. "If I asked the American people what they wanted, they would have said - faster horses".
How is that analogous? He didn't ask the people "do you want cars or faster horses".
I think you missed the big one: lots of people might actually start using Google+.
I doubt it, it was unpopular before the real names policy and I don't see the reversion of that policy increasing it's popularity.
Some people just didn't like the blatant privacy violations.
Sorry I'm not really familiar with Google+ - outside of the necessity of it to make use of Google services and the incessant nagging from Google that I create one - but what privacy violations does this change rescind? I did a bit of a search and found this but AFAIK that is still in effect (or maybe it isnt?).