Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Target: Lusers

Just came across this wonderful email from the Fedora Advisory Board. In it, they try to describe who they're creating the Fedora distribution for. Here are their four criteria:

  1. is voluntarily switching to Linux
  2. is familiar with computers, but is not necessarily a hacker or developer
  3. is likely to collaborate in some fashion when something's wrong with Fedora
  4. wants to use Fedora for general productivity, either using desktop applications or a Web browser
This seems like a reasonable thing to do. I mean, it's always good to try to understand your user, right? Unfortuantely, the above description fails fantastically in so many ways. Look closely, and you'll see what they're really trying to say:
  1. You're a freetard. If you're voluntarily switching to Linux, so that means you already find intrinsic value in it. Well, the software itself isn't up to par with the other stuff around, so what does Linux have that other's don't? We all know the answer to that one: freedom. But you know, the best way to improve your general purpose operating system is to build it for the tiny number of specific people who have already chosen to use your system. Everybody knows that.
  2. You don't need any support, cuz you ain't gettin' any!
  3. You can tolerate bugs, because our shit is full of bugs. You are also willing to file bug reports, only to see them linger forever. Another way of reading that is: you don't actually have a real life and you don't have anything else that you need to get done.
  4. You only need a subset of features that Windows 98 had.

Brilliant! I think they've just created a nice 4-point summary why Linux is still on the sidelines of the desktop OS battlefield.

5124 flames:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 5124   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

First!

Anonymous said...

LH's (increasingly sporadic) posts are getting weaker and weaker. He should have stayed retired and gone out on top.

Anonymous said...

Linux and "Open Source" software are "free". This means their license is a "free license", and the most common is the GPL (General Public License). This license states that anyone is allowed to copy the software, see the source code (the "recipe"), modify it, and redistribute it as long as it remains licensed with the GPL.

So what do you care about freedom? Imagine that Microsoft disappears tomorrow (okay, that's not very likely, but what about in 5 years, 10 years?). Or imagine it suddenly triples the price for a Windows or Office license. If you're tied to Windows, there's nothing you can do. You (or your business) relies on this one company, on its software, and you can't possibly make things work without it (what good is a computer without an operating system?). Isn't that a serious problem? You're depending on one single company and trusting it wholeheartedly to let something so important nowadays as your computers work the way they should. If Microsoft decides to charge $1000 for the next version of Windows, there's nothing you can do about it (except switch to Linux, of course). If Windows has a bug that bothers you very much and Microsoft won't fix it, there's nothing you can do (and submitting bugs to Microsoft isn't that easy, see the "Report bugs" section).

With Open Source, if a particular project or support company dies, all the code remains open to the community and people can keep improving it. If this project is especially useful to you, you can even do this yourself. If a particular bug annoys you, you can submit it, talk with the developers, but even better, you can fix it yourself (or hire someone to do so), and send the changes back to the upstream developers so that everyone gets the improvement as well. You're free to do (nearly) whatever you want with the software.

Anonymous said...

@ October 27, 2009 11:24 AM

So, your entire reason for using Linux rests on hypothetical future scenarios.

Even if any of these things happened, no one would switch to Linux. Some other proprietary product(s) would fill the void.

Anonymous said...

Viruses, trojans, adwares, spywares... Windows lets all these enter your computer pretty easily. The average period of time before a Windows PC (connected to the Internet and with a default "Service Pack 2" installation) gets infected is 40 minutes (and it sometimes takes as little time as 30 seconds).

So you can either 1) install a firewall, 2) install an antivrus program, 3) install an anti-adware program, 4) get rid of Internet Explorer and Outlook (replacing them with Firefox and Thunderbird), and 5) pray that pirates aren't smart enough to overcome these protections and that, if a security flaw is discovered, Microsoft will take less than a month to make an update available (and this doesn't happen very often). Or you can install Linux and sleep soundly from now on.

As we have already said in the "virus" section, Open Source software (e.g. Linux) means more eyes to check the code. Every programmer on Planet Earth can download the code, have a look, and see whether it might have security flaws. On the other hand, the only people allowed to look at the Windows source code (its "recipe") are people working for Microsoft. That's hundreds of thousands of people (maybe millions) versus a few thousand. That makes a big difference.

But actually, it isn't exactly a matter of how many flaws a system has, compared to the others. If there are many flaws, but nobody has discovered them yet (including pirates), or they are minor (they don't compromise an important part of the system), pirates won't be able to do great damage. It is really a matter of how fast a security flaw can be solved once it has been discovered. If a security flaw is discovered in an open source program, anyone in the open source community can have a look and help solve it. The solution (and the update) usually appears within a few days, sometimes even a few hours. Microsoft doesn't have that much manpower, and usually releases security patches within about a month after the flaw has been discovered (and sometimes published): that's more than enough for pirates to do whatever they want with your computer.

Anonymous said...

If you find a bug in Windows, you can basically wait and pray that Microsoft will fix it fast (and if it compromises your system's security, you would have to pray twice as hard). You might think that reporting that bug to Microsoft (so that they can fix it more quickly) must be easy. Well, think again. Here is an interesting article about this. What if Microsoft doesn't even notice the bug? Well then, let's hope the next version of Windows will fix it (but you'll need to pay another few hundred bucks).

Nearly all open source software (including Linux distributions) have a bug tracking system. You can not only file bug reports (and you're encouraged to do so!) explaining what the problem is, but you can see what happens next : everything is open and clear for everyone. Developers will answer, they also might ask a little extra information to help them fix the bug. You will know when the bug has been fixed, and you will know how to get the new version (still for free, needless to say). So here you have people taking care of your problems, keeping you informed about it, and all that for free! If the problem is solved on your system, it will be on everyone else's : it's in everyone's interest to work together to make software better. This is how open source works.

Ohio Ham 2 said...

linux hater not understand perpose of fedor redhat linux. fedor redhat linux perposed to bleedingly edge features showcase. this mean that nothing work. you turn on computer, hard drive explode due to ntfs error. you click icon, motherboard fry. linux hater want all bugs fixed at once but not understanding that just around the corner.

Anonymous said...

If you already know what fragmentation is, and are already used to defragmenting your disk every month or so, here is the short version : Linux doesn't need defragmenting.

Now imagine your hard disk is a huge file cabinet, with millions of drawers (thanks to Roberto Di Cosmo for this comparison). Each drawer can only contain a fixed amount of data. Therefore, files that are larger than what such a drawer can contain need to be split up. Some files are so large that they need thousands of drawers. And of course, accessing these files is much easier when the drawers they occupy are close to one another in the file cabinet.

Now imagine you're the owner of this file cabinet, but you don't have time to take care of it, and you want to hire someone to take care of it for you. Two people come for the job, a woman and a man.

The man has the following strategy: he just empties the drawers when a file is removed, splits up any new file into smaller pieces the size of a drawer, and randomly stuffs each piece into the first available empty drawer. When you mention that this makes it rather difficult to find all the pieces of a particular file, the response is that a dozen boys must be hired every weekend to put the chest back in order.

The woman has a different technique: she keeps track, on a piece of paper, of contiguous empty drawers. When a new file arrives, she searches this list for a sufficiently long row of empty drawers, and this is where the file is placed. In this way, provided there is enough activity, the file cabinet is always tidy.

Without a doubt, you should hire the woman (you should have known it, women are much better organized :) ). Well, Windows uses the first method ; Linux uses the second one. The more you use Windows, the slower it is to access files ; the more you use Linux, the faster it is. The choice is up to you!

Anonymous said...


So what do you care about freedom?


You mean Stallman's own definition of freedom.

The communists had their own definition as well.

Anonymous said...

LH's post quality and quantity may both be going downhill, but at least we'll soon get thousands of supporting flames from sad OS fanboys. Any minute now..

Anonymous said...

Whoa, a flood of Freetards right from the beginning. Let's start from:


As we have already said in the "virus" section, Open Source software (e.g. Linux) means more eyes to check the code.


Just like the sad state of Linux kernel security? Right?

Many eyes means shit when no one is really looking.

AntiFundies said...

"You only need a subset of features that Windows 98 had."

Surely you jest?

Unlike Linux, Windows 3.1 had decent working multimedia.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 11:32 AM:

A good parody!

A bug-tracking system!

Everyone works! Community!

The merry merry happy-happy land!

Unfortunately majority of Ubuntu users do not even know how to file a good bug report, while the minority is busy closing the existing ones, and the few that are paid are desperately trying to resolve even few. All this while the head honcho keeps touting how great things are in the happy-happy land!

Anonymous said...

Popular open source projects die just like proprietary ones. XMMS is still the only method of playing certain formats in UNIX yet it's been dead for over half a decade. From what I understand it barely compiles these days and needs massaging patches that almost equal original code!

Even if any of these things happened, no one would switch to Linux. Some other proprietary product(s) would fill the void.

Same thing happens in FOSS land. When XMMS died we got BMP, which called itself a fork but really wasn't. They looked at the code, dismissed using it, and called themselves the legitimate successor to XMMS for some stret cred.

Truth is, when some project dies, it's usually cheaper to replace it with something using modern techniques rather than sinking 6-24 months understanding the structure of a dead project that probably wasn't really maintained for some time before its official demise.

Anonymous said...

OMG OMG a new post

Anonymous said...

It was predicted that Linux Hater Himself would return after around the 4000th post on the other thread.

Making note of this is my only contribution here, for now.

Anonymous said...

Sun's Latest Whitepaper, "Cutting Costs With Open Source"

Registration required. I guess so they can sell you a real solution after the open source shit fails.

Anonymous said...

If you already know what fragmentation is, and are already used to defragmenting your disk every month or so, here is the short version : Linux doesn't need defragmenting.

If it doesn't need defragmenting why are there defrag tools then (e2defrag, Shake, defrag) and why does ext4 contain a defragger as well? In fact, the truth of the matter is that ext2, ext3 and ext4 partitions do get fragmented over time and freetards have twisted how these filesystems are more resistant to fragmentation into saying that they never get fragmented at all. Basically, it's all a lie.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 12:25 PM

IWantToBelieve(TM)

Microsoft is the great Satan, and the legions of open source coders are clearly able to walk on water and defy the principles of filesystem design.

Anonymous said...


Just like the sad state of Linux kernel security? Right?

Many eyes means shit when no one is really looking.


Actually, if you really care about security, this statement should be extended.

The phrase of "many eyes" means likely also many hands touching the code. And if you care about security, you should primarily limit the amount of hands that touch security critical code such as the kernel.

Anonymous said...

Linux doesn't need defragmenting.

you motherfucker, if linux is science you should know that every system suffer from defragmentation.
Stop writing bash scripts and read some books about CS.

Anonymous said...

One of the great assets of the Open Source community (and Linux in particular), is that it's a real community. Users and developers really are out there, on web forums, on mailing lists, on IRC channels, helping out new users. They're all happy to see more and more people switch to Linux, and they're happy to help them get a grip on their new system.

So if there's something you don't understand, a program that doesn't behave the way you would expect, or a feature that you can't seem to find, don't hesitate to go and ask for help. If there's somebody near you (family? co-workers?) who is using Linux, he or she will probably be happy to help you out. Otherwise, just go online and you'll find literally thousands of places where nice people will answer you and walk you out of your problem most of the time: geeks actually are very nice people, if you ask your question politely. Just type "linux help" (or replace "linux" with whatever distribution you chose -- see the install section) in Google and you'll undoubtedly find everything you need.

Anonymous said...

The good old latter from

UseTheForceLuke(tm)
UseTheFreedomLuke(tm)
ForceTheFreedomLuke(tm)

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 12:41 PM:

JustGoogleIt(tm)

(I think there is even a web page for that.)

ThereIsNoRTFM(tm)

KernelHackingIsEasy(tm)

EveryoneCanBeAC++Coder(tm)

YouDontGetFlamedOnLKML(tm)

EveryoneHasTimeToGoogleShitAllDayLong(tm)

and finally the greatest fallacy,

WikisAndForumsMakeAGoodExcuseForTheLackOfDocumentation(tm)

Well, maybe I'll add one more, being a coder and all,

EveryC++CoderHasTimeToWadeThroughTenThousandLinesOfShittyCodeToFixABugForSomeGuyInTheInternet(tm)

Anonymous said...

Oh, I forgot that blogger runs on Linux and does not accept long lines. Hey, there is a bug for you! Go fix it! Google it!

Because

WikisAndForumsMakeAGoodExcuse
ForTheLackOfDocumentation(tm)

and

EveryC++CoderHasTimeToWadeThrough
TenThousandLinesOfShittyCodeToFixA
BugForSomeGuyInTheInternet(tm)

Anonymous said...

ROFL. Get with the program noobs. The last two versions of Windows automatically defrags on a weekly basis. Even if it didn't you can schedule it to run. What is it about these Linux users that prevents them from using built-in tools in Windows? It has a fucking task scheduler so you should use the fucking task scheduler if you're tired of manually running something. How fucking stupid are you people?

Further, all file systems fragment. It is impossible to make a file system that cannot fragment files.

I swear, Linux users are some of the dumbest fucking computer users there are.

Namenlos said...

@ October 27, 2009 12:39 PM

"Stop writing bash scripts and read some books about CS."

Gold!

(I had to bring it out of retirement for that one!)

Anonymous said...

For the record - would you volatile people please recognize you twitterific overlord and cap you posts at 140 characters! However, as common sense suggests, neither will I adhere to my own, me angering, rules, nor will I say anything else than "karmic is polished as hell", though Linux Hater is right. Period!

Anonymous said...

Way back in the past, LH had some sense. This post didnt have any. =(

alvare#ClrnD said...

he u caz me lolz !

No really, this is bullshit.
The article is not funny, and because your intelect is behind a low pass filter the only purpose of your articles is to make me laugh, and this one isn't, so I'll assume you failed.

And what about Vista 7 !? It is shit after all the propaganda (and before too), so ... what will you do now? use Window 98 where at least you can play Fallout 1 ??

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 12:41 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. One only has to go to the UbuntuForums and read the average open sores program's bugtracker or mailing list to see that this is a bunch of bullshit. That this idiot freetard thinks anyone believes this open sores utopia of helpfulness is hilarious.

Anonymous said...

In a GPL World:

1) Open Source killed the soft industry

2) Lots of small companies will day because they are forced to release source code, no one donates money to them (like in the present day)

3) Lots of unemployed programmers take revenge and start killing lusers

sounds pretty

Anonymous said...

will die *

:P

Anonymous said...

Well did the goals of Fedora make any sense?

"We want users who run Linux, like to collaborate in open source development, do some work with computers, and possibly run a web browser".

I mean could they be any more specific? Truly sounds like shit designed by a committee, Fedora Advisory Board in this case.

Anonymous said...

For the computer ricers in the audience this site and this site have everything you need to rice up that gaming rig or render station!

Anonymous said...

o one donates money to them (like in the present day)

Right, lunduke?!

Anonymous said...

Oh and here are even more case mods for you too. Rice out motherfuckers!

Anonymous said...

and possibly run a web browser


Sounds like running a browser in fedora is an epic achievement

Anonymous said...

Hey guys I heard that Oombooboo Lactating Llama is finally going to contain the best combination of Tomboy, Fspot, Firefox, OOo than any other Oombooboo version before it! And it has an even more shit-colored brown theme to it!

Anonymous said...

Many eyes means shit when no one is really looking.

...or even understand what they are looking at.

Anonymous said...

If Linux doesn't need defragmentation, why does/did MythTV bitch about it so often? And why did they produce detailed, highly accessed "how to combat fragmentation" guides?

Just about all "Linux doesn't need defrag" information comes from armchair quarterback bloggers who know nothing about filesystems. If they did, they wouldn't so easily conflate FAT32 and NTFS, which they all do. They also base their negative assumptions of Microsoft's filesystems on the reporting tools, which are far superior to what's available in Linux. Finally, it's inevitable: the more a finite region gets re-written, the more fragmented it gets. Oh yeah, this applies to memory, too. We just don't talk about it because there aren't performance penalties to non-contiguous access, and paging solved the rest of the problems decades ago. Claiming that filesystem X "never" fragments shows a total lack of the principals behind data storage.

Anonymous said...

“Although it’s still often used as an argument, it seems quite clear to me that the “many eyes” argument, when applied to security, is not true.”
— Ben Laurie, Director of Security, Apache Foundation

Freetards get pwned big time.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 1:28 PM:

A good pick! And Ben knows his shit, unlike these no-defragmentation loons.

Anonymous said...

"When a new file arrives, she searches this list for a sufficiently long row of empty drawers, and this is where the file is placed."

A new file arrives all at once? If an app is writing a file half a kilobyte at a time, how does the OS know beforehand how big the file is going to be?

BTW, is it true that the ext file systems of Linux do not have an online defragmentation facility? God, what a ridiculous system this Linux is! When is it going to be 21st Century in the Linux land?

Anonymous said...

Oh and let's not forget how the many eyes helped catch that Debian OpenSSL bug. Oh wait, it was able to stay around for 2 fucking years. And even at this point there may be unpatched debian systems using weak keys.

Anonymous said...

Ben Laurie is a paid M$ $hill!

Anonymous said...

BTW, is it true that the ext file systems of Linux do not have an online defragmentation facility? God, what a ridiculous system this Linux is! When is it going to be 21st Century in the Linux land?

ext4 is supposed to have an online defrag tool. I don't know if it has yet been implemented or not.

Anonymous said...

I heard it's really just the format tool aliased to defrag.

Anonymous said...

Okay, so yes ext4 finally is the first version to have an online defrag tool. Gee only took 4 revisions and 16 years, but Loonix has finally achieved something that Windows has had for over a decade.

Anonymous said...

EveryoneHasTimeToGoogleShitAllDayLong(tm)


LOL I like that one! nice TM!

Anonymous said...

Hey don't start with me!!! I'll just add some -fZOOMG, and -fOpTiMizE and my little Loonix game rig flies!!!

http://funroll-loops.info/
b

Anonymous said...

Imagine that Microsoft disappears tomorrow (okay, that's not very likely, but what about in 5 years, 10 years?).


Yeah, remember how the Atari went out of business and stopped making the 2600? Remember how we couldn't play Atari 2600 games after that? Remember how the consoles just shut down and nobody built any emulators?

If Microsoft magically disappeared, their software would still work. If people saw value in it they'd continue to run it and emulate it if they had to use it on the magical hardware of the future.

What happens if a F$F project gets abandoned? Oh wait, that happens all the time and nobody bothers to step in an pick it up again, they just re-invent the wheel.

If Microsoft disappeared, people would simply pick up and move on to a different operating system. Just like they would if their washing machine broke down. A computer is a fucking appliance.

Anonymous said...

I just bought a monster nVidia GX28101GTXTX Xtreme Elite Pro and installed Linux so I only use 1% of its processing power. Did the same with my Intel Pre-cognitive Processor.

Anonymous said...

What is it about these Linux users that prevents them from using built-in tools in Windows? It has a fucking task scheduler so you should use the fucking task scheduler if you're tired of manually running something. How fucking stupid are you people?


Exactly. Its easier to automate a task in Windows yet the fosstards claim it was so hard they just had to switch to Linux so they could use the command line to set up cron jobs on the command line.

Anonymous said...

As we have already said in the "virus" section, Open Source software (e.g. Linux) means more eyes to check the code. Every programmer on Planet Earth can download the code, have a look, and see whether it might have security flaws. On the other hand, the only people allowed to look at the Windows source code (its "recipe") are people working for Microsoft. That's hundreds of thousands of people (maybe millions) versus a few thousand. That makes a big difference.

I have an objection to your statement freetard. You can look at the code of windows by signing an agreement. (As we point it out million of times already.) Hundreds of thousands of programmers? Do you mean that the ones that are rookies when it comes to security? Have a high amount of programmers doesn't mean jackshit freetard. If they have no idea on what there are doing, then what's the point of open source an OS?

Anonymous said...

A new file arrives all at once? If an app is writing a file half a kilobyte at a time, how does the OS know beforehand how big the file is going to be?


You forget that linux users never create files, they simply copy them as they install distro after distro after distro. This is why they've never hit the magical "unknown file size" issue.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 1:39 PM

Are you also making sure that you never utilize more than 2% of your RAm? You must know that actually utilizing your computing resources to their fullest just means you're running bloated programs. You're computer should be pampered from actually having to do it's job and compute things. That's unfair.

Anonymous said...

"ext4 is supposed to have an online defrag tool. I don't know if it has yet been implemented or not."

Wikipedia says:
"ext4 (Linux) is rumored to support online defragmenting, but as of the current kernel (v2.6.30), such a utility does not exist."

Anonymous said...

Yeah, remember how the Atari went out of business and stopped making the 2600? Remember how we couldn't play Atari 2600 games after that? Remember how the consoles just shut down and nobody built any emulators?

Remember how for 20 years there were warehouses full of the stuff, desperate for "buyers" to just take the stuff so they wouldn't have to foot the cost of disposing of it? Or how tons of it ended up in the landfill anyway? And despite that how all but the prototype cartridges generally sell for a few bucks on eBay? Or how people reverse engineered the design and built superior units after the fact?

Yeah, too bad it wasn't all open source cuz then we'd still be playing two color Space Invaders instead of Grand Theft Auto IV.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 1:39 PM:

You forgot that if you use the shitty but WeStoleTheWordFreedom(tm) driver, you get to utilize 0.00000001 % of the GPU's capabilities.

(As has been already discussed previously by the Linux hater.)

Anonymous said...

I have 256GB of RAM but I installed a custom built version of Linux that only utilizes 256Kb of it. I also 32-bit monitor but I set my display to only use 8-bits and 1:8th of the resolution.

Anonymous said...

the truth of the matter is that ext2, ext3 and ext4 partitions do get fragmented over time and freetards have twisted how these filesystems are more resistant to fragmentation into saying that they never get fragmented at all. Basically, it's all a lie.


When all you do is install a new distro ever few weeks, your hard drive does't have a chance to get fragmented, that's why they never notice it, and therefore, believe its unnecessary.

That would be like buying a new phone every few days and claiming phones no longer need to be recharged.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget to throttle your bandwidth down. You wouldn't want to use it all either.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 1:43 PM:

Now, now, you don't have to go the last century.

The internet is even today, as we speak, full of completely free Loonix distributions. The problem is that no one wants them.

Anonymous said...

You're computer should be pampered from actually having to do it's job and compute things. That's unfair.


When you buy a computer, what you're actually doing is submitting to a life of servitude. You become the computer's butler and housekeeper.

Anonymous said...

I'm honestly surprised freetards aren't picking up on SSD and taking the "fragmentation doesn't matter anymore" stance. Then again, that would require them to adopt new technology, which we all know they hate. It would also force them to acknowledge that SSDs effectively level the landscape and totally eliminate the "advantages" they've been clinging to all these years. All of a sudden, FAT is a performance file system again. Wow!

Anonymous said...


WRONG!

I WANT HANNAH MONTANA LINUX!


You know, the greatest technological achievement of Linux.

Almost twenty years of blood, tears, and development, and the result is Hannah Montana Linux.

If I was a Freetard, I would be prod of Hannah Montana Linux, the essence of the Linux ecosystem and its great capability for innovation.

Anonymous said...

"You forget that linux users never create files, they simply copy them as they install distro after distro after distro."

Heh. Even the copy program reads the input file and writes the output file in chunks, so the OS doesn't really know what's coming.

Anonymous said...

I see three major issues with the notion that "many eyes" will yield bug-free code:

1) Not many people are looking. Most people who use Linux don't actually look at the source code, despite their vocal demands to "open the source". Even if they did look, they probably wouldn't just be able to understand it at a glance.

2) Not many CAN contribute. Most of these people aren't developers. They're hobbyist who think they're IT admins because they got debian installed. IT != development.

3) Not many are qualified. The quality of code is reflected by the experience of the programmer. A programmer with no security experience isn't going to write very secure code. Likewise, a programmer with no real graphics experience is going to make The GIMP.

So basically, the "many eyes" relies on people who are either not interested in, unable to, or unqualified to work on the source code in the first place.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 11:32 AM:

These myths have been debunked so many times that is not funny any more. Take for instance the classic of

One bug report to rule them all

But then again, I've always been amazed by the ability of Linux people to spread FUD and accuse others of spreading FUD.

Anonymous said...

omg... the stories at LHB are getting more and more lame... not only that it takes years until he posts anything new... no the stories are lame like a dead donkey... no hate, no fun, no swearing

shit!

maybe I should post this as a bugreport at Microsoft too... hopefully Steve B. comes down into the LHB dungeon and kicks the Linux Hater to post something more entertaining!

Anonymous said...

Open Source software (e.g. Linux) means more eyes to check the code. Every programmer on Planet Earth can download the code, have a look, and see whether it might have security flaws.

You are not a programmer, are you?

Cause if you were, you probably would agree that it is hard enough to maintain your own code and keep it in mint condition for your customers. Trying to understand what others have written requires time, money, and dedication.

I call bs here.

Anonymous said...

NO NO NO

The biggest achievement by linux is Rannah Montana Linux, built to be run on Render Stations

Anonymous said...

To render spinning cubes?

Anonymous said...

Hey what do you know? Our old freetard friend is back! We miss you freetard who called windows seven, vista 7.

Anonymous said...

omg... the stories at LHB are getting more and more lame...

not as lame as Linux

Anonymous said...

not as lame as Linux

yeah, cause we know that LH is actually Stallman

14f13 said...

@October 27, 2009 11:24 AM
...If Microsoft decides to charge $1000 for the next version of Windows, there's nothing you can do about it ...

You know what would happend.. Microsoft's shareholders would call urgent meeting where they would tear managements asses apart, substitute them with some sane people and discount next version by 30%!

... Windows has a bug that bothers you very much and Microsoft won't fix it...
If it affects a lot people it affects they business so they have to do something about this, if it affects only you.. you doing it wrong freetard!

14f13 said...

@October 27, 2009 11:24 AM
...If a particular bug annoys you, you can submit it, talk with the developers, but even better, you can fix it yourself (or hire someone to do so), and send the changes back to the upstream developers so that everyone gets the improvement as well...

Yeah, I can see how core maintainers are just anxiously waiting for hundreds of patches from wannnabe linux developers daily. Or maybe you are thinking about forking everything to apply you patches?
As to hiring someone to patch your bugs, why don't pay upfront for a decent product? Or buy product with actual support? I'm sure that paying for a licence once is less then hiring professional develper...

Anonymous said...

Windows has a number of design flaws, resulting in it becoming slower and slower and not lasting very long. You've probably heard more than once someone say "My computer is getting sluggish, I'm gonna reinstall". Reinstalling Windows solves the problem... until next time.

You may think this is just how computers work: they're very new technology, and not really stable yet. Well, try Linux and you'll be surprised. Five years from now, your system will be just as fast and responsive as the day you installed it, not to mention that you won't have any viruses, adwares, trojans, worms, etc., that would force you to reinstall anyway.

I have managed to convince many people to switch to Linux, while keeping Windows on their hard disk, because they needed to use some piece of software that Linux doesn't have (eg Autocad), so they use both systems. Since the day they switched, most of them have reinstalled Windows about once in a year or two; but Linux didn't let them down, and is still running perfectly well and is still snappy today.

Linux lets you spend more time working, less time reinstalling over and over again.

Anonymous said...

Linux lets you spend more time working, less time reinstalling over and over again.
Obvious false statement is obvious.

Anonymous said...

How can Linux be different from Windows when it comes to environment, you might ask? After all, they're both just pieces of software with little impact on pollution or climate change. Well, choosing Linux can actually have an influence on the environment:

1. Windows and Mac OS are sold in boxes. This means that massive amounts of paper and plastic need to be manufactured before the boxes get to your nearby store's shelves (and be disposed of after you buy them). Linux is freely downloadable from the Internet; no amount of plastic or paper is involved.

2. Proprietary applications for Windows or Mac OS are also, most of the time, sold in local stores, in boxes, whereas you can download the vast majority of software for Linux from the Internet, for free (again, a whole lot of saved paper and plastic!).

3. As the hardware requirements for Windows or Mac OS get higher and higher, a lot of computers are made obsolete, and would need to be disposed of... but since Linux runs pretty well even on very old machines, they can be recycled for various purposes (storage, internet access, multimedia box, etc.) instead of being thrown out!

4. Millions of CDs are pressed to hold Windows or Mac OS boxes and are sold to customers. Linux also needs to be burnt on a CD before installation (in most cases at least -- installation from the network or from a hard disk is also quite common). However, most people choose to burn it on a rewritable CD ("CD-RW"), which can be reused for other purposes after the installation is over (unlike proprietary operating systems, you don't need to keep the CD around after you've installed the software, you can always download it again later).

justAroundTheCorner(TM) said...

haha.. Well. I thought it was a grrreat post. :D

captcha: extste .

ext4 is soon going to be replaced by this WHOLE NEW filesystem, which is even moar bleeding edge. - and by the way, it's going to be immune to dataloss due to powerloss.

Anonymous said...

"3. As the hardware requirements for Windows or Mac OS get higher and higher, a lot of computers are made obsolete, and would need to be disposed of... but since Linux runs pretty well even on very old machines, they can be recycled for various purposes (storage, internet access, multimedia box, etc.) instead of being thrown out!"

Well why wouldn't I want my operating system to be able to use a piece of hardware to its fullest. The Linux runs on old hardware thing has been debunked many, many times. I take said old hardware to EPC, as long as one person can pick up the box I pay a whopping $5 to have it recycled properly and not dumped in some village in China.

I've tried giving away 50 Pentium 4 3.x whatever that top P4 was to school districts and used the "well you could always put Linux on them" and been told, "We're trying to educate out students on what they'll be using in a professional environment."

Seriously, whoever your are, just go away. Put your lame ass sermon on Queef's site or something.

We've all been there, done that with Linux and you're not going to suddenly get us to convert.

On the fragmentation thing, you're an idiot. Try running MythTV or any piece of software that is continually accessing your drives on ext3 or ReiserFS. Why do you think they push XFS so much. Oh, by the way, XFS has a defrag utility.

And its not "They can take our lives but they'll never take our Freedom!" If its so Freedomy why do you find the need to continually shove it down our throats like some dictator. I'll choose what I want to use based on my own personal research, not what some 16 year old who's never worked a day in their life and whines when mommy doesn't buy them the newest PS3/XBox tells me I should because otherwise babies will die.

Go look up the definition of "Cult" in the dictionary. You might be enlightened.

Then again, here's hoping Stallman takes 900+ Freetards to some island and makes them drink his "special" toejam coolaid so we don't have to put up with them anymore.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 4:01 PM

so cannonical and opensolaris are doomin our planet cause of the free cd's (well... canonnical no more)... at least people dont waste windows or mac cd's cause they cost money

Anonymous said...

Microsoft is an USA company, and its success is great for the American economy.

But if you don't live in the USA, when you buy propietary software (eg Windows), about a half of the money goes directly to the software company's HQ (eg Microsoft's): that money leaves your country, while the other half stays in (sales commissions, etc.: no technical benefits). Your country is not producing anything, and you don't even need qualified people to sell boxes. That leads to IT professionals with no high level knowledge who only install and configure proprietary software without the option of modifying/learning/customizing it.

With Free Software (eg Linux), the economy (and IT professionals' knowledge) of your country could improve, since there could be a lot of small/medium companies customizing solutions, providing support, consulting, etc.

People who know how to do things and retain money in your country will benefit from it, rather than people who just sell boxes with a predefined sales pitch, sending your money offshore, leaving IT professionals without real knowledge about how things work.

Anonymous said...

Well, try Linux and you'll be surprised. Five years from now, your system will be just as fast and responsive as the day you installed it

We know running a Linux install for more than 8-12 months is largely bullshit, but I actually had a multi-year Debian Unstable install. By year 3 it was so fucked up that I could barely use it. There are things that don't get done with a dist-upgrade, and over time these things build up. By the end I was struggling to update system configs and figuring out what utilities and libraries I needed that weren't being pulled in by dist-upgrade.

Anonymous said...

With Free Software (eg Linux), the economy (and IT professionals' knowledge) of your country could improve, since there could be a lot of small/medium companies customizing solutions, providing support, consulting, etc.

WHAT FUCKING KIND OF SOLUTIONS, IF YOU ARE FORCING EVERYONE TO RELEASE SOURCE CODE!

"hey, i want to buy this p2p app"
"why would you buy it, i can compile it for you... thanks to stallman coders work for free now!"

Anonymous said...

If Linux users want to save the planet they can kill themselves. Help everyone out and just kill yourselves.

Anonymous said...

or linux users can find a solution to the cancer

there are more important things than source code

Anonymous said...

Each new person on the planet increases the amount of pollution and decreases the resources available to everyone. They are better off killing themselves and not trying to find the cure to cancer.

The good news is, they won't reproduce.

Anonymous said...

His arguments are getting weaker.

To all the gimp haters here. Please watch the video http://meetthegimp.org/no-cymk-for-gimp-but-something-better-plates/ . At this point you wake up Photoshop has a huge mother of a design flaw. Gimp developers refused and refused to take in cymk because it seamed wrong. When look at how printing presses and printers work they were right. Most printers have more than cymk in them. Lets give user direct control of the ink that is in there printer instead of having todo double translation. rgb to cymk then cymk to what the printer really uses is not what you call a nice process.

With the ext4 retirement NTFS is also basically to the same point. Linux history there have been two major file-systems swaps both were mostly glitch-less to those who wait.

Ok using something before developers tell you its production ready for production is kind of stupid.

Of course as normal Linux hater pointing blame where it does not own. Distributions here and there are not Linux.

subset of features that Windows 98

Ok when was the last time you used 98. I am sorry to say that is way out. Firewall for 98. What firewall that worked. 98 gets no more secuirty updates so is a dead OS.

If Linux is only a subset of Windows 98 list the features that are missing. Now a wise person would have said a subset of Windows 2000. Here is the big thing Windows 2000 runs rings around in performance of the currently existing windows versions on single core machines and beats Linux in memory usage. Why not XP because Windows 2000 is stable. Some dumb developer at MS removed memory protections around direct x in XP. So making XP far more likely to BSOD than 2000.

2000 was MS best OS and its been down hill from there.

Same cannot be said for Linux distributions. If you pull up distributions from the year 2000 they are basically pricks to install. Today's distributions are far simpler.

Issue here Windows 7 feature list was ran against Linux distributions feature list. Guess what there is only 1 major feature different. Administration in Linux needs to be more graphical.

So saying feature lacking is far from the truth.

But you know, the best way to improve your general purpose operating system is to build it for the tiny number of specific people who have already chosen to use your system. Everybody knows that.

I please see the gimp video above. Peter Sikking and others you are insulting here. Open Source world has only so many interface design architects. There job is purely to look at everyone who is and could be using the program and create design documents to allow there usage and workflow to be meet. They are always around looking for feed back on what people want. True pros at there job. At this stage they have not been through every program. Of course there plans can take years to be fully implemented at times.

Basically Linux Hater should have quit. 2 and 3 points equally apply to windows to be correct more apply to windows. Windows is the only OS that I know of that people charge you to read there forums on it.

Anonymous said...

you didnt answered my question

@October 27, 2009 5:00 PM

Anonymous said...

Windows and Mac OS are sold in boxes.

This is not the main business model for either. Linux is also sold in boxes, anyway, so this observation is nuked.

Proprietary applications for Windows or Mac OS are also, most of the time, sold in local stores, in boxes

What year is this? 1998? All kinds of software for Mac and Windows is available over the Internet.

since Linux runs pretty well even on very old machines, they can be recycled for various purposes (storage, internet access, multimedia box, etc.) instead of being thrown out!

internet access: I'm assuming this means setting up an old computer as a gateway, otherwise it's redundant given that we've already bought a new PC.

Your run of the mill Linksys draws 5-10 watts while that old computer might take 100. At this rate it'll only take a few months for the Linksys to pay for itself, and most people use these for years and years, until a power spike kills it.

multimedia box: gotta be kidding with this one. Media centers have some of the highest requirements of any task today. In fact, a lot of people use their best computer for the media and their second best as their every day system.

But the real truth is people have no need for piles of junk. You hoarders justify your behavior all you want, but that PC isn't killing the earth any less in a landfill than it is gathering cobwebs in your closet (which all we know is the true fate of your "media center"). And you definitely can't get around the fact that powering on computer that has no use is more damaging than the computer never being used again. See a psychiatrist and get over your abandonment issues.

Anonymous said...

However, most people choose to burn it on a rewritable CD ("CD-RW")

This one's bullshit. I haven't even seen these for sale in several years. I'm sure they are, but they aren't at eye-level grabbing range with the rest of the one use disc media. CD-RW never took off. It was too expensive, and consumers didn't trust its integrity.

Anonymous said...

"Or imagine it suddenly triples the price for a Windows or Office license."

This is a very commonly cited scenario that has, like so many other Linux-F$F/Stallmanite/GNU/Freetard scenarios, nothing to do with reality. Right now, I own a copy of XP and I own a copy of Office. I thereby own a license to that software, and I own that license in perpetuity . I bet that I can even leave those licenses to my heirs. But the point is, that there is nothing that Microsoft can do in order to get more money out of me for the use of that software, nor can they stop me from using that software - I can continue to use it for the rest of my life. If MS subsequently triples the price of new XP licenses or Vista or Win 7 or Win 8 licenses, that has NO effect on me. And if they decide to alter the license terms and conditions, that has no retroactive effect as a matter of law.

Anonymous said...

That leads to IT professionals with no high level knowledge who only install and configure proprietary software without the option of modifying/learning/customizing it.

This entire argument hinges on the supposition that development is impossible past the operating system when, in fact, the operating system is a tool for developers.

Anonymous said...

still no answer @October 27, 2009 5:00 PM


ask about economy to a lintard and enjoy the stage fatality/flawless victory

Anonymous said...

Even if Microsoft were to have an Enron-style collapse tomorrow, Windows/Office represents a multi-billion dollar per quarter revenue stream. Someone (probably IBM) would just pick right up where they left off.

Hypotheticals about Microsoft disappearing expose freetards as basement-dwelling circlejerkers with absolutely no knowledge of the real world.

And as for being dependent one company, just watch what happens when Oracle kills off OpenOffice development. Get ready to say hello to maintenance mode, forever.

The truth is that there's only a small number of organizations in the open sores world who can manage large scale project development. Everything you've read from ESR about coders magically appearing out of the blue is a lie. (It essentially only happened once, with the Linux kernel.)

So it really comes down to whether you'd rather bet on a strong company like Microsoft or one with shaky financials like RedHat.

Anonymous said...

Hi oiaohm.

We weren't convinced with your Someday(TM) GIMP arguments last time, and nothing's changed. Whatever GIMP's developers did or didn't do had nothing to do with printing presses because they've never seen one and wouldn't know what to do with it if the occasion came up. No matter how you cut it, GIMP has been an inadequate tool for professionals from 1996-present, which is a pretty long history of fail. Even if it magically turns it all around tomorrow, people will be skeptical for a long time.

Ok using something before developers tell you its production ready for production is kind of stupid.

Yeah, how dare people try using a file system that was marked as stable months prior. ShiftBlameOnOthers(TM).

Ok when was the last time you used 98.

A few weeks ago.

What firewall that worked. 98 gets no more secuirty updates so is a dead OS.

Not needed. No one connects Windows 98 directly to the Internet. Even if they did, there's noting to fear between 98 not actually offering enough to make it useful to attackers and being such a small target (even smaller than Linux!) that no one's gonna bother.

Windows 2000 runs rings around in performance of the currently existing windows versions on single core machines

When's the last time a single core computer was sold at the general consumer level? Three years ago? Even the Atom is dual core now.

Peter Sikking and others you are insulting here.

Who? The fuck do I care if he's insulted? Tell him to change his tampon and take some Midol.

Anonymous said...

"internet access."
Linux boxs make great information terminals running firefox. Less requirements than Windows Vista and Windows 7 more lockable than XP. So internet access works from Linux.

"multimedia box"
Thinking the wrong thing. Media center front end like LinuxMCE the client machines don't need to be huge. One huge machine may smaller clients. The large machine is doing the heavy lifting.

Of course personally I would be going for a fan-less box over a old PC for the client on pure noise factor.

For a media center I would personally like to use 100 core TILE-Gx far more suited for the job than x86 processes and needs less cooling and power. This is the big problem at monent. MS windows don't run on the processors that are most suitable for a lot of jobs.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 5:05 PM

Just see how HaterTards will ignore you because they know you're right.

Anonymous said...

Everything you've read from ESR about coders magically appearing out of the blue is a lie. (It essentially only happened once, with the Linux kernel.)

Typical of a Lintard, isn't it? Find something that works in some niche then assume it's the ideal solution for every problem.

Anonymous said...

What firewall that worked. 98 gets no more secuirty updates so is a dead OS.


ZoneAlarm has always worked on Windows.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 5:41 PM

why are you talking to yourself?

Anonymous said...

yes answer mr freetard, please:

With Free Software (eg Linux), the economy (and IT professionals' knowledge) of your country could improve, since there could be a lot of small/medium companies customizing solutions, providing support, consulting, etc.

WHAT FUCKING KIND OF SOLUTIONS, IF YOU ARE FORCING EVERYONE TO RELEASE SOURCE CODE!

"hey, i want to buy this p2p app"
"why would you buy it, i can compile it for you... thanks to stallman coders work for free now!"

Anonymous said...

So what do you care about freedom? Imagine that Microsoft disappears tomorrow (okay, that's not very likely, but what about in 5 years, 10 years?).

Still not likely. They've been around for 34 years, and they've shown that they have the vision and foresight to know when to cut and run for greener pastures, even when they're on top of the market.

They did it when they chanhed their business strategy from Basic to Unix. And then they got out of the Unix market when Xenix had outsold and outdeployed all of their competitors combined.

Or imagine it suddenly triples the price for a Windows or Office license.

They wouldn't sell any new licenses.

If Microsoft decides to charge $1000 for the next version of Windows,

It won't happen. It wouldn't sell.

(except switch to Linux, of course).

Or any of the other competitors, but even then, all this assumes that all things are equal when that may or may not be the case. If Windows is the only thing that does the job, companies will pony up for it. Just like people pony up the $40,000 Oracle EE license fee, or Maya's license fees, or Fujitsu/Sun hardware, or Adobe's Creative Suite, or $3500 for Native Instruments' Kore, or any other high end product that is instrumental to your line of work.

It's the cost of doing business.

If Windows has a bug that bothers you very much and Microsoft won't fix it, there's nothing you can do

Except they do, because they like having paying customers.


So your argument hinges on a bunch of inplausible hypotheticals and a sorely lacking understanding of how business, the market and economics work.

In short "switch to linux and let your productivity suffer because maybe, one day, a rogue comet will crash into Redmond and then you'll be fucked". Brilliant. I'm sold.

With Open Source, if a particular project or support company dies, all the code remains open to the community and people can keep improving it.

The cases where this actually happens without corporate backing are few and far between, not to mention exceptions rather than the rule.

Firefox is supported and developed by Mozilla Corporation and backed by Google.

OpenOffice is developed by Sun/Oracle, except they still sell StarOffice.

Mono and Evolution? Novell.

Apache? Has a bunch of companies behind it.

QT? Nokia and Trolltech.

Linux itself? Fucktonnes of companies behind it, supporting development, and trust your non-arguments apply here, too. If ever they go under, or lose interest in Linux, where does that leave Linux development? Exactly.

If this project is especially useful to you, you can even do this yourself.

Because everyone is a programmer.

If a particular bug annoys you, you can submit it, talk with the developers,

This is how it works in the proprietary world as well.

but even better, you can fix it yourself

Because everyone is a programmer.

(or hire someone to do so)

Just like in the proprietary world!

and send the changes back to the upstream developers so that everyone gets the improvement as well.

Because when a proprietary company fixes a bug that you submited, in their proprietary product, only your copy is affected, right? They never release patches or fix bugs between releases, or make fixes available in future releases. Widespread bugfixing only occurs in open source, right?

You are so full of shit, it's fucking hilarious.

Anonymous said...

Thinking the wrong thing. Media center front end like LinuxMCE the client machines don't need to be huge. One huge machine may smaller clients. The large machine is doing the heavy lifting.


Ugh, not again. The only reason media centres exist is for centralized storage, not centralized processing! We already have Media Center Extenders.

But really, these days, we have such powerful computers, why exactly do we need to offload processing to a server farm anymore? Distributed source control and distributed computing are the big deal these days.

YearOfTheThinClient(TM)

Anonymous said...

Just to reinforce how dependant OSS is on specific companies:

Office Suite - OpenOffice - Oracle.

Extremely complex product with 20 years of legacy code. Nobody's going to pick this up when Oracle fires 80% of them. Expect only cosmetic changes from here out.


Linux Server - RedHat/Novell.

Solid market niche, but either company could be bought out any day now, particularlly Novell (who makes far more money from NetWare than Linux). These two companies are responsible for the vast majority of core kernel/OS development.


Linux Desktop - Ubuntu - Canonical.

Contrary to Linzealot belief, this company is not a charity. If there's no IPO on the horizon, you guys better find another rich freetard or 'The Year of the Linux Desktop' is going to have to wait another 10+ years.


Web Browser - Mozilla Foundation.

When (not if) Google cuts off their search revenue stream, Linux users better get used to having a second tier browser.


Database - MySQL - Oracle?

MySQL's FUD practially writes itself :)


The only major Open Source organization which I would bet on being around in ten years is the Apache Foundation.

Anonymous said...

Linux boxs make great information terminals running firefox.

That doesn't answer the question of who uses this computer. I already bought a new one, why do I need junk plugged into the wall burning electricity for no reason?

Media center front end like LinuxMCE the client machines don't need to be huge.

LinuxMCE is a half-assed eyesore that doesn't support what people want in media centers. You also neglect to mention that LinuxMCE is a teaser to get you to buy a proprietary vendor's home automation hardware.

Wake up, oiaohm. People want to watch Blu-Ray movies and record HD cable feeds. Linux doesn't help with either of these.

One huge machine may smaller clients. The large machine is doing the heavy lifting.

Or I could just buy one unit and eschew the whole spider network of eyesore PCs strewn around my house.

For a media center I would personally like to use 100 core TILE-Gx far more suited for the job than x86 processes and needs less cooling and power. This is the big problem at monent. MS windows don't run on the processors that are most suitable for a lot of jobs.

HTPC is headed toward the appliance market, and you know that. This is just more of your pointless "anything but x86" campaign. Hey, the 80s called, they want their RISC vs. CISC arguments back.

Anonymous said...

Linux users better get used to having a second tier browser.

Some would argue this has already happened. Extensions keep Firefox in the running, but take them out and Firefox has difficulty differentiating itself from default browsers IE and Safari.

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 5:41 PM

why are you talking to yourself?


So that's all you have to say?

HaterTards, you can't prove him wrong, can you? Read this and prove him wrong. I guess I'll wait forever...

Anonymous said...

well, im waiting for:

With Free Software (eg Linux), the economy (and IT professionals' knowledge) of your country could improve, since there could be a lot of small/medium companies customizing solutions, providing support, consulting, etc.

WHAT FUCKING KIND OF SOLUTIONS, IF YOU ARE FORCING EVERYONE TO RELEASE SOURCE CODE!

"hey, i want to buy this p2p app"
"why would you buy it, i can compile it for you... thanks to stallman coders work for free now!"

I guess I'll wait forever...

Anonymous said...

Stable does not mean production.

Stable means the API and DISK format us no longer changing for filesystems.

Production means its been tested and confirmed to be fine. Production status is 6 month window with no defects from the declare of stable on a file-system at min. Conservative use a 12 month window. Ext4 has not even now made to Production status even by optimistic.

Its a simple case of not knowing what the terms mean. Then complaining about it. Partly MS fault here for abusing terms and never in there history really releasing a production status application.

Who? The fuck do I care if he's insulted? Tell him to change his tampon and take some Midol.

Exactly. You don't have a single clue who interface design architects are. Most likely you did not have a clue that they even existed.

Most interface design architects don't code they are not developers. They are the people who make programs usable to everyone.

Its simple for a project to get a few 1000 developers compared to getting 1 interface design architect. Closed or open.

The existence of interface design architects and there directions being followed by open source projects undermines Linux Hater complete claim that open source development only targets a small subset.

The issue here is not the open source developers willingness to support what everyone wants. Its having the person to extract the information of what everyone needs.

You try finding people who can be interface design architects. Its also part of the reasons why some closed source software suxes as well.

Its insulting that Linux Hater is trying to act like they don't exist. Most likely for the same reason you are. Who would guess Open Source world would have such formal structs.

Lot of projects are turning around not just gimp. Blender and its insanely hard interface another pack of interface design architects has been in there and that will be replaced.

KDE project has there own team of interface design architects. Along the way implementing some of the design hurt end design will be very good.

Basically these changes are on going due to the limited supply of interface design architects sections of the open source worlds have to wait for them to complete off one application before they can move on to the next.

The lack of interface design architects effects all open source programs including the ones people use on windows. Its a critical problem.

Of course if Linux Hater had done his homework would have know that the issue is the lack of a particular class of people.

Good thing about great interface design is once its done right it don't need to be changed for a long time. Something MS fails to get.

Anonymous said...

Your run of the mill Linksys draws 5-10 watts while that old computer might take 100. At this rate it'll only take a few months for the Linksys to pay for itself, and most people use these for years and years, until a power spike kills it.

Linux lusers will never understand this because Mom pays the electric bill for their collection of junk "boxen".

Schools around here won't even take donated computers because of the lifecycle costs. If you want to help people, forget about Linux and put in some volunteer time sysadmining for a non-profit.

Anonymous said...

You don't have a single clue who interface design architects are. Most likely you did not have a clue that they even existed.

So? Does this mean I need to name the entire Photoshop design team in order to use the program? What a pointless statement, even for you.

Anonymous said...

haha, now tell us that you freetard also build render stations

Anonymous said...

So, who is the freetard who has been copying essays, verbatim, from some F$F propaganda site?

I've read all of that mom & apple pie drivel before - many times.

Tyler Durden is a more effective troll than you are, you asymmetric cuntflap of a pussy

Ben said...

Weak post!

Anonymous said...

Gimp developers refused and refused to take in cymk because it seamed wrong. When look at how printing presses and printers work they were right.

Hi. Someone who both works in the print industry and isn't brain damaged here.

The presses work in four-colour CMYK process, except with inks and dyes instead of pixels. Except the newer ones, the industry is slowly moving to six-colour process Hexachrome.

Most printers have more than cymk in them. Lets give user direct control of the ink that is in there printer instead of having todo double translation. rgb to cymk then cymk to what the printer really uses is not what you call a nice process.

Users? USERS? LMAO! You think this CMYK talk is about the inkjet on your desk? LMAO, you're so clueless Oiaohm, it's fucking epic.

When people talk about the print industry, CMYK, Hexachrome or Pantone, they're talking about industrial printing. The presses use CMYK (except the newer ones that use Hexachrome).

Step 1: Artwork is done in RGB.
Step 2: Atwork is then converted to CMYK, using Pantone spot colours.
Step 3: The Pantone CMS is then used to replicate the CMYK version with ink. That's the whole point of this, after all, to have the presses output what you see on the screen exactly.

There's a reason why four-colour process is used in print, adter all, and the most basic one is that you cannot reproduce pure black with red blue and green. Try it. You're get progressively darker shades of brown. but never pure black.

There's no "converting from RGB to CMYK to whatever your printer uses" You don't convert to raw CMYK. You convert to CMYK using Pantone, which IS what the press uses (unless you're on a hexachrome press, then you convert to hexachrome instead of CMYK/Pantone). That's what Pantone is for - to mix the inks and dyes appropriately to match the colour to what's on screen.

OMG it's like fucking brain sugery, isn't it?

With the ext4 retirement NTFS is also basically to the same point. Linux history there have been two major file-systems swaps both were mostly glitch-less to those who wait.

If by "glitch free" you mean rampant dataloss for no reason, I agree.

Ok using something before developers tell you its production ready for production is kind of stupid.

And yet the rampants dataloss bugs in ext4 occured after developers and distributions insisted it was ready for production, which is exactly why they were so rampant.

Of course as normal Linux hater pointing blame where it does not own. Distributions here and there are not Linux.

Of course not. Everyone knows code elves and pixies are Linux.


Ok when was the last time you used 98. I am sorry to say that is way out. Firewall for 98. What firewall that worked. 98 gets no more secuirty updates so is a dead OS.

ZoneAlarm worked with 98. I do believe Kaspersky's firewall worked too, but I could be wrong about the latter.

Second, way to miss the point of the comparison. Linux today offers a limited subset of the functionality Windows 98 did, in 1998. Even at that, you're confusing support for functionality. You even fail at non-sequiturs. That, my friend, takes talent (or several blows to the head, you decide).

Anonymous said...

If Linux is only a subset of Windows 98 list the features that are missing.

We've done that about a thousand times. Learn to read, and learn to understand what you're reading, and then work on retaining that information for more than 3 minutes.

Now a wise person would have said a subset of Windows 2000. Here is the big thing Windows 2000 runs rings around in performance of the currently existing windows versions on single core machines and beats Linux in memory usage.

Okay, so it's doesn't offer a subset of the functionality of an 11 year old OS, it's only 9 years behind. Way to shoot yourself in the foot there.

Even at that, now you're confusing performance with functionality. OiaohmRidestheFailTrain(tm)



Some dumb developer at MS removed memory protections around direct x in XP. So making XP far more likely to BSOD than 2000.

Except on my nearly three year old XP installation, I've never witnessed a BSOD. This isn't 1997. Windows doesn't bsod every 15 minutes.


Same cannot be said for Linux distributions. If you pull up distributions from the year 2000 they are basically pricks to install. Today's distributions are far simpler.

Way to move the goalposts there. First you're talking stability, now you're talking ease of install. Is it even possible for you to hold a train of thought for more than 37 seconds?

Issue here Windows 7 feature list was ran against Linux distributions feature list. Guess what there is only 1 major feature different. Administration in Linux needs to be more graphical.

Right, because things like WaveRT, MMCSS, a centralized grand unifying application and RAD framework, standardized stable centralized multimedia frameworks, stable APIs and ABIs as well, extensive high quality (as opposed to quantity) device driver support, extensive third party software support, support for exotic MIDI equipment, the abundant supply of professional tools (as in tools that expressly target professionals), Blu-Ray playback, legal DVD and MP3 playback, 20 years of backward compatibility and separating the driver model from the kernel so that your graphics driver can die and reboot itself in the background while you don't lose work are all FUD and don't really exist.

So saying feature lacking is far from the truth.

Your stabdards are just vastly lower than ours.

But you know, the best way to improve your general purpose operating system is to build it for the tiny number of specific people who have already chosen to use your system. Everybody knows that.

That's the opposite of general purpose.

Open Source world has only so many interface design architects.

The attrocious UI is the least of Gimp's concerns.

They are always around looking for feed back on what people want. True pros at there job.

And yet there's been 15 years of telling us that we don't really need CMYK, 16-bit colour, 32-bit EXR, HDR, exposure combining, tonemapping, Pantone, non-destructive editing, adjustment layers, large format support or any of the hundreds of feature requests made over and over throughout the years. Gimp devs have an easy job. You want to know what professionals want - look at what Adobe is doing, that's what the pros want.

At this stage they have not been through every program.

By "every" I think you really mean "any".

Of course there plans can take years to be fully implemented at times.

This should be done befofe a piece of software is ever released. It's called QA.

Windows is the only OS that I know of that people charge you to read there forums on it.

That's your closing statement? You are a waste of oxygen.

Anonymous said...

You've got to help me guys! I installed Windows 7 and everytime I log in I have nothing in the system to dick with. No files to configure, no problems to fix. All I have to do is my work and entertain myself. My computing experience is empty and hollow.

Anonymous said...

$$$HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLL!!!11111

Anonymous said...

Wow, good debunking.

Anonymous said...

QA and Linux go together like cow pies and Saturn.

Fling it all out into the wild and let the users figure out what works. Don't bother to refine and finish it, however, just fork it or pull out the fucking carpet from under it when something newer and more shiny catches your eye. You don't need or even like your users, after all.

Linux - The Alpha OS (and that's not Alpha as in #1)

Call me when it's finished and I'll give it a fair and unbiased tryout. Until then, go flog your pre-beta shit to the next generation of angry anti-establishment "rebels" and other tossers who think that computing should hurt or otherwise be a challenge that will show the world just how damn smart they are when they figure out how to edit their menu.lst.

As for Fedora. LH nailed it, because only a Luser (as in loser) would use THAT splat of diarrhea for anything other than wasting a few hours to see whether or not it actually installs and runs without pooching itself.

OpenSuSE is the superior enterprise-backed distro. Too bad they're so damn evil with DRMinfe$ted$leepingwithMicro$ucka$$rapingyourfreedum$givingyouM0n0n0n0andkillingpuppiesinafrica.

Tyler Durden agrees with me. He says freetards do it greek style with RM$

Tyler Durden said...

I agree with you

Anonymous said...

Is it just me, or is Ohio Ham talking to himself?

Anonymous said...

Its simple for a project to get a few 1000 developers compared to getting 1 interface design architect. Closed or open.

Wrong. In the proprietary world, where people get paid for their work, there are plenty of designers (for fuck's sake, designers are designers, not architects, and what you're talking about are useability experts, since they aren't architects either) and useability experts.

See, professionals expect to get paid, and professionals whose skillsets are in high demand, such as useability experts and designers, don't work for free, that's why they aren't easy to come upon in the free software world.

Anonymous said...

When people talk about the print industry, CMYK, Hexachrome or Pantone, they're talking about industrial printing. The presses use CMYK (except the newer ones that use Hexachrome).

Step 1: Artwork is done in RGB.
Step 2: Atwork is then converted to CMYK, using Pantone spot colours.
Step 3: The Pantone CMS is then used to replicate the CMYK version with ink. That's the whole point of this, after all, to have the presses output what you see on the screen exactly.


Moron. You did not watch the video did you. Look at you basic packaging. Milk carton. Most don't go above 7 colors none CMYK or Hexachrome heck most of the time the colors are not Pantone either. Plate printing style ie mass production printing.

You do up some packaging in photoshop produce CMYK it has to be converted back at printing location to be plate compatible. So leading to extra problems for the printing location of colors not matching right due to color leveling to reduce amount of ink required to reduce cost.

Why because those Pantone colors on a press plate machine may be used as the direct ink or a color offset from the Pantone like halfway between two Pantone colors even some cases independent color samples sent. There is a very important reason why current photoshop production is time costing at presses.

Gets worse not all print head based printing presses are Hexachrome or CMYK. Some have extra inks for gloss and mat. So double Hexachrome or CMYK or some have a clear gloss ink. So level of mat/gloss can be controlled. Guess what neither CMYK or Hexachrome allows for this. There are also some old print systems before Hexachrome come a standard that are 4 color inks not 5. Reason 1 ink is for perfectly stable predictable color that has been used heavily over the document avoiding mixing over and over again also stablises the draw on ink so leveling up refill times.

Now even more fun were does reflective inks fit into CMYK or Hexachrome. They don't. Pantone does not cover reflective either.

Even more fun impressed watermarks how do you do that with CYMK.

Basically do the leg work and truly visit some of the high end printing locations. You find out that photoshop truly cannot use what is there. Instead you are locked in a small pool unable todo what lot of the presses truly can do.

MYK, 16-bit colour, 32-bit EXR, HDR, exposure combining, tonemapping, Pantone, non-destructive editing, adjustment layers, large format support
Same area by the way. Until they had a design and were no longer fighting over how the back-end could work there was no way for progress. Lack of one type of person the pure problem.

Interface design architects. Are not just GUI designers. They are interface designers. Others have sorted out the design of the backend to cover all those features.

Not exactly 15 years of tell you that you don't need X. But they could not see where what people were asking for made any practical sense to the operation of the program.

Most requests for CYMK were to use it completely internally. This has caused a lot of delays. Particularly when you are hearing back from printing locations that CYMK really does not cover everything there printing systems can do and is not as compatible with there systems as adobe makes out. Its more that they are hacking there systems to fit.

Of course hacking to fit is costing time and money.

Particular programs have been through the formal design process. Number is growing.

Results are where it is done the ABI and API also stablises.

Anonymous said...

"If Linux users want to save the planet they can kill themselves. Help everyone out and just kill yourselves."

Thumbs-Up!

Anonymous said...

"I just bought a monster nVidia GX28101GTXTX Xtreme Elite Pro and installed Linux so I only use 1% of its processing power. Did the same with my Intel Pre-cognitive Processor.
October 27, 2009 1:39 PM"

Thats some mighty mean wobbly windows you can do there. Who cares about using it for intense "windows" direct x 11 gaming, we wouldn't want to prematurely wear the your gpu. :) Remember guys, memory and cpu and gpu is scarce like p_ssy in a freetard meeting.

Anonymous said...

Basically, what oiaohm's saying is that if it can't be absolutely perfect to the last detail on the first try then it's not worth doing at all and instead of getting something somewhat useful out the door ten years ago GIMP developers decided to destroy themselves by indulging in some misguided perfectionism ideal, resulting in nothing of note being done for a decade.

Anonymous said...

"Don't forget to throttle your bandwidth down. You wouldn't want to use it all either.
October 27, 2009 1:48 PM"

And be sure to limit blogger line text to 140 characters cuz blogger would blow up not knowing what to do with a long URL.
Save Da Inetrnetz!

Anonymous said...

GEGL was originally conceived as a GIMP core replacement in 2000, finally in 2006 the external API was deemed stable enough and capable of replacing the GIMP core.

Why the fuck did it take 6 years to determine that the API was stable enough to replace the old GIMP core? We are approaching 2010 and Duh Gimp's gimpy developers still haven't finished GEGL but they keep promising it'll come JustAroundTheCorner(TM). It's rather sad that people like Oiaohm are so gullible that they keep believing this line. It's like an abuse victim that keeps coming back to their abuser cause the abuser claims that they've changed and they will never abuse the other person again.

Anonymous said...

OWNED. Come on HaterTards, prove him wrong.

Anonymous said...

"Good thing about great interface design is once its done right it don't need to be changed for a long time. Something MS fails to get."

You mean like the Vista UI that KDE stole and Ribbon UI that opensoresffice is trying to poorly implement. If Gimp is the epitome of great interface design than scratch my eyes out!

Anonymous said...

@October 27, 2009 9:22 PM

Why are you referring to yourself in the third person oiahomo?

Anonymous said...

Good thing about great interface design is once its done right it don't need to be changed for a long time. Something MS fails to get.

You mean how Chicago's UI has remained virtually untouched and that Windows 7 represents the biggest change in almost 15 years? I love your doubletalk, too. In another argument you would use Microsoft's static design principles as a negative--"proof" that they weren't innovating. Meanwhile Linux interfaces seem to change on a daily basis, but not toward improvement--toward entropy.

Anonymous said...

"You've got to help me guys! I installed Windows 7 and everytime I log in I have nothing in the system to dick with. No files to configure, no problems to fix. All I have to do is my work and entertain myself. My computing experience is empty and hollow.
October 27, 2009 6:59 PM"

Well you can try installing the the win7 64bit version, but dang everything works tehre 2. Sorry can't help ya, I'm playing counterstrike source while watching BD porn on my dual monitor setup.

Anonymous said...

Just real quick, some freetard made the claim that Linux file systems do not fragment, and just real quick once again, that is a myth and Linux file fragmentation and the kernel devs inability to address it killed both the mythtv project and the asterisk phone system project and continues to cause concurrency issues in samba.

So here we are 5 years on with Linux having no facility to defragment file systems and kernel devs admitting it's a problem and multiple project casulties and freetards are still making the claim that Linux file systems do no fragment.

Oh, and the apparent originator of the mythology is in prison for murder.

Oh and the reason freetards are not experiencing the severe issues caused by this is you guys reinstall the thing every six weeks...

Anonymous said...

Milk carton. Most don't go above 7 colors none CMYK or Hexachrome heck most of the time the colors are not Pantone either.

Hows about you man a press one day, maybe get some work experience in printing (I do silkscreen btw), and how about you learn to read a little?

When you're working with inks and dyes, you need a system that can reproduce the colours in the original artwork. Generally speaking, digital art gets converted to CMYK/Pantone (obviously when you're working with four-colour process, hexachrome if you're working with six-colour process, blah if you're working with blah-color process, this isn't fucking complicated). Pantone is used as the de facto example because of its ubituity. The purpose of it is to ensure that your on-screen colours are reproduced exactly with inks. That is the purpose of any colour matching system.

Now, obviously plate printing may be different, silkscreen, however, relies largely on four-colour process.

Plate printing style ie mass production printing.

It's a kind of mass production printing, yes. It is, however, not the only form of printing, nor the only kind of printing that is capable of mass production. They have different requirements that we do.

You do up some packaging in photoshop produce CMYK it has to be converted back at printing location to be plate compatible.

*sigh*. The printshop handles the colour conversion and matching you imbecile. You send them your artwork, they convert to the appropriate colour space. Also, FWI, Photoshop isn't the best tool for the job in this regard, unless the graphics in question are in a 1:1 scale. You generally want vectors, and we charge a lot of money to redraw/vectorize, people eventually learn to send in vectors instead.

Anyway, that's why the customer doesn't do the colour matching, and sends their graphic in rgb to the printshop: The printshop will do the colour conversion to what their prersses are tooled for: four-colour process CMYK/Pantone, or six-colour process Haxachrome in a silkscreen shop. Plate shops convert to whatever it is they use.

Your argument hinges on the customer doing their own colour matching (nobody does this, and when they try, 99% of the time, we have to redo the colour-matching anyway), and that they'd be taking it to a plate shop, and not a screen shop. In other words: Fail.

So leading to extra problems for the printing location of colors not matching right due to color leveling to reduce amount of ink required to reduce cost.

That's why you leave the colour-conversion and matching to the print shop, otherwise you're just wasting your own time, and theirs. b) That's why print shops use colour matching systems like Pantone or Hexachrome - to save ink. You don't fuck around with trial and error while mixing inks. You look up the colour designation and follow the recipe.

On the topic of mixing inks, you're tidbit about most jobs requiring less than four colours is misguided. Inks aren't like paints you buy at an art store. There aren't hundred of cans of ink of say varying shades of blue, the hues and colours are made by mixing certain base colours in certain proprtions. Let's sake a job that requires only a certain dark shade of violet - you're going to need to mix certain cyans with certain magentas and maybe even a touch of K (black) to get the right tone.

There is a very important reason why current photoshop production is time costing at presses.

And that reason is PEBKAC, people thinking they'll save some money by doing colour matching themselves instead of leaving it up to the fucking print shop.

Anonymous said...

Gets worse not all print head based printing presses are Hexachrome or CMYK.

Then you colour convert to the colourspace/matching system your presses use. This isn't fucking rocket science, and it's yet another reason to leave the colour matching up to the fucking print shop.

Some have extra inks for gloss and mat. So double Hexachrome or CMYK or some have a clear gloss ink.

Pantone does metallics, matte and gloss amongst others, btw. But again, you obviously don't convert to CMYK/pantone if your presses aren't CMYL/pantone. And I can't stress the YOUR PRESSES enough, the customer should never, ever, for any reason do the colour matching themselves.

So level of mat/gloss can be controlled. Guess what neither CMYK or Hexachrome allows for this.

Guess what. Pantone does mattes, glosses and metallics, amongst other things. I do this for a living, I know.

There are also some old print systems before Hexachrome come a standard that are 4 color inks not 5.

Hex means 6, not 5 you dumbass. And yes, THAT WAS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT ABOUT FOUR-COLOUR PROCESS CMYK Cyan (1) Magenta (2) Yellow (3) Key/Black (4).

Now even more fun were does reflective inks fit into CMYK or Hexachrome.

Nice thinly veiled attempt at a purposely stupid comparison between a colour space (CMYK) and a colour matching system (Hexachrome, remember, "hex" as in 6, not 5). Pantone, which is the de facto CMS for four-colour process (four as is 4, not 5 and not 6), does reflective colours and metallics.

They don't. Pantone does not cover reflective either.

It does actually. But hey, if Oiaohm says it it must be true right?

Even more fun impressed watermarks how do you do that with CYMK.

The same way you do with any other colour space - but hey, maybe you mean something other than the generally accepted norm when you say watermark. That's usually the case with you.

Basically do the leg work and truly visit some of the high end printing locations.

Unless you work with CMYK/Pantone or Hexachrome. Best. Tool. For. The. Job. It isn't complicated. Obviously, if you work with non-hexachrome or non-pantone presses and inks, you're a fucking moron for using tools that don't support the matching system you use.

Why don't you follow your own advise and actually visit a silkscreen printshop instead of pretending you know everything?

You find out that photoshop truly cannot use what is there. Instead you are locked in a small pool unable todo what lot of the presses truly can do.

You'll find that ANY raster-based graphics application is a poor choice for print unless you're working on a 1:1 scale.


Same area by the way. Until they had a design and were no longer fighting over how the back-end could work there was no way for progress. Lack of one type of person the pure problem.

That's just one of many poor excuses. Funny how every week you present a new excuse, inni't?

Interface design architects. Are not just GUI designers. They are interface designers.

Interface designers design interfaces. Backend designers design backends. They're neither mutually inclusive nor mutually exclusive.

igen.

Anonymous said...

Not exactly 15 years of tell you that you don't need X. But they could not see where what people were asking for made any practical sense to the operation of the program.

15 was an arbitrary figure. Though I find it kinda hilarious that the foss crowd fusses and musses about supplying feedback, feature requests and bug reports, only to be ignored and told that either I don't really need that functionality or that it makes no sense to add it in.

First. Who the fuck are software developers to tell me what I do and do not need for my line of work which has absolutely fuck all to do with theirs? Second, why ask for what I require if you're just going to convince me that I don't really need it? Third, why not just flat out say "we're not going to implement that" rather than engage in some diatribe about how it makes no sense? Don't ask questions to which you don;t want to hear the answers. Fourth, seriously, non-destructive editing makes no practical sense? 16-bit colour makes no practical sense? Industry standard matching systems don't make practical sense?

You're a neverending pit of sad excuses, aren't you?

Particularly when you are hearing back from printing locations that CYMK really does not cover everything there printing systems can do and is not as compatible with there systems as adobe makes out.

It's still the standard for four-colour process printing. Obviously if you're not using four-colour process, it doesn't cover what you're using. Have you ever, even for a second, stopped to think that maybe, just maybe the people asking for CMYK and Pantone are asking for it because they actually use four-colour process?

No, of course not. They couldn't possibly be asking for something they actually use, could they?

Results are where it is done the ABI and API also stablises.

There's no reason for a released product to not have a stable API and ABI. unstable ABI/ABI for internal development is fine, but make sure it's bloody stable when you release it into the wild. This is called SDM (Sane Development Model).

You are a waste of oxigen

Anonymous said...

side note, if by waterparking, you mean embossed or debossed imprints on the print material, that has nothing to do with colour spaces or matching systems.

Depending on the type of watermarking required and the material needed, you go with any of the many available methods - embossing, debossing, acid-etching, diecuts and a metric fuckton of others.

Unless you thought those were done with ink o_O

Anonymous said...

Seriously, why does Ohio Ham keep refering to himself in the third person?

Anonymous said...

I can't believe oiaohm is claiming print press experience now. I thought he worked in data recovery. What printing press employs full time data recovery? As usual, oiaohm's lying.

Anonymous said...

oiaohm is the shit.

John Stamos said...

^^ He's off his meds again.

Anonymous said...

I want to know why freetards feel ok to continue sputtering utter horseshit???

Like the Linux file fragmentation myth...

Really fundamental stuff that Linux fails at.

Anonymous said...

Or how it makes no practical sense to implement things like non-destructive editing or industry standards.

Linux is the future! (if you're living in 1962).

Anonymous said...

But at least ext4 doesn't suffer from that NTFS bug where you lose data if you demagnetize your drive, set it on fire, piss it out, run it over with a zomboni and toss it into an incinerator.

Anonymous said...

It's not just the myth of "Linux never fragments", it's that they portray NTFS as being just as bad as FAT, which has no guards against fragmentation whatsoever. What these idiots don't realize is that back in the 90s their older brothers were championing the original "never fragments" file system: OS/2's HPFS. Unfortunately, idiocy must run in the family because the moron older brothers similarly ranted against NTFS without realizing it was a descendant of HPFS. The lineage is so close that it shares the same partition IDs and partition managers couldn't tell them apart for the longest time; in fact I'm pretty sure some of them still identify 0x07 as "HPFS/NTFS" even when data is present.

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah, what did the OS/2 zombies do when confronted with the truth? They grumbled for a year or two before moving to Linux and making the same claims about ext2, 3, reiser, and whatever. You'd think they would have gone to NT since they loved HPFS so much.

Anonymous said...

GEGL internals also has been delayed over this fighting over cymk that would not die down and no findable solution.

Shocking is lot of print press makers were saying not to bother about cymk at all. They want rgb with reference colors. Now why would they want this. Something so simple. They scan the printed document out the press and automatically compare it to the rgb file and automatically next print is corrected.

So the cymk you send to the printing location has to be converted back in rgb for the automatic color control. Hello double conversion.

Exactly like you taking color sample into paint shop having it scanned and producing the right color paint almost exactly.

Plates solution gives something that no one asked for yet is bendable to do all the different requests.

Lot of areas of open source are suffering for them same problem.

The open source programs were just cloning what closed source programs had done don't suffer from this problem.

Being haters don't help cure issue. Its also haters who have kept on causing flames over cymk so slowing progress on gimp.

Lot of the haters here have the same problem no understanding of big picture so are complete useless people to developers. So most of your requests would have been nothing more than basic junk mail with no useful ideas in them for the developers.

We need more people in the open source world who can step back and see the big picture and help developers on the right path. Same is true in the closed source world. Lot of requests from users end up in the shredder because they will never work.

Watermarking done in ink is infrared and ultraviolet reactive inks. Basically outside human view.

Note I was not counting key black. Depends on the book depends on if black and white are colors or shades.


That's why you leave the colour-conversion and matching to the print shop.
Guess what moron that is where some of these screw ups happen. Producing person sends you a image that looks 5 color. For plate printing you level to 5 colors problem is you just removed details customer wanted.

Plates in gimp are so customer can decide what details are not important so screw ups like you using 5 colors instead of 6 don't happen even worse if its like 10 000 items that are now junk.

Plate system is not about color matching its about details so at a printshop you know what details customer is happy to live without.

Plate system in gimp is based off how to reduce risk printshops screwing up orders as they are now.

No, of course not. They couldn't possibly be asking for something they actually use, could they?
Yet there are requests for 3 color through to 12 color in the gimp feature requests.

The request for vector the one person just made is why some of the gimp developers said stuff it no our problem. Since if vector is what fits presses better we should stick to screen only.

Anonymous said...

NTFS might be related to HPFS. But big thing smart allocation code that was in HPFS is IBM's not MS. MS NTFS drivers don't have it. So is far more likely to fragment than HPFS.

HPFS had a basic online defragger. That would defrag if it was required without user knowning as part of driver.

NTFS still does not have this feature. NTFS fragmentation resistance is also stuffed by high priority writes by passing the anti-fragment system. Does give a little bit extra disk access speed.

MS has a history of taking things that are quite good then screwing them up. NTFS is no different.

Anonymous said...

Reason for scanning of prints is inks a different between batches. So to give constant results high end printing presses have to scan and cannot depend on cymk for stable quality.

Sorry to say its stuffed. Items people have been requesting are bad and they don't know it.

Anonymous said...

"I have 256GB of RAM but I installed a custom built version of Linux that only utilizes 256Kb of it. I also 32-bit monitor but I set my display to only use 8-bits and 1:8th of the resolution."
-October 27, 2009 1:45 PM

WAKE UP !!! .... It has been 10 years now you are sleeping. Year 2009 is about to end pretty soon now!

And secondly, what you exactly *do* on that *custom built Linsux old machine with 32-bit monitor with 8-bit and 1:8th resolution* .... I guess you either stare it to see how pretty it looks when it boots and shuts down, or maybe play TIC-TAC-TOE all the day! And if that TIC-TAC-TOE doesnt work, you got the source code you dumb ass, just figure out the bug and recompile it. Plus, look, you got whole day to google it.

GET OFF MY LAWN you fsck-ing freetard !!!

Anonymous said...


Reinstalling Windows solves the problem... until next time.
Well, try Linux and you'll be surprised. Five years from now, your system will be just as fast and responsive as the day you installed it


HAHAHAHA. This is hilarious. Most Linux systems needs to be reinstalled every six months because they can only hold the system together about six months with duct tape.

Joey Gladstone said...

GEGL internals also has been delayed over this fighting over cymk that would not die down and no findable solution.

The solution is simple. You either implement it, or you don't, say you're not going to implement, ans take your head out of your ass and stop trying to convince people that they should use your produxct that does not do what they need it to, and never will, because they know your needs better than you do, and they say should toss out your presses because you don't need that.

Shocking is lot of print press makers were saying not to bother about cymk at all. They want rgb with reference colors.

Citation? Right. There isn't one, because you don't understand the concept of RGB being a device-dependant additive colour model intended for 'digital' use (tvs, digicams, screens, camcorders, etc).

RGB presses? RGB presses that use inks and dyes, that use subtractive colour model (hint: subtracive colour is the explaination for the mixing of dyes, inks, paints and other natrual pigments to create a full colour spectrum. Inks and Dyes are subtractive. CMYK is subtractive. That's why it is used in four-colour process printing.

You can't apply RGB to inks and dyes, because the RGB colour model, additive colour can't be applied to substances which by nature adhere to the subtractive model!

Now why would they want this. Something so simple. They scan the printed document out the press and automatically compare it to the rgb file and automatically next print is corrected.

Busted. That's not how it works. You don't print first and trial and error your way to colour matching. You color convert digitally to the CMS you use (Pantone for four colour process, for example), get the colour designations and mix accordingly. Why the hell do you think such systems exist? You get the designation, fetch the appropriate recipe and fix the ink.

You don't waste ink. You get it right the first time.


So the cymk you send to the printing location has to be converted back in rgb for the automatic color control. Hello double conversion.


Are you illiterate or just painfully retarded, or both? You don't sent the press CMYK. You send them RGB and they do the color conversion to whatever they use with their presses. You, the customer, don't do the colour conversion.

Hello double conversion.

Hello complete and utter lack of reading comprehension.

Exactly like you taking color sample into paint shop having it scanned and producing the right color paint almost exactly.

BZZT. No. They'd have to colour convert to get an exact replica. Paint is subtractive, RGB is additive.

Plates solution gives something that no one asked for yet is bendable to do all the different requests.

Including producing additive colour from subtractive pigments? Right.

Being haters don't help cure issue. Its also haters who have kept on causing flames over cymk so slowing progress on gimp.

Right. First it's YouDontNeedThat(tm) now it's ItsYourFaultWeSuck(tm). No, the reason CMYK is an issue is because gimp folk continue to insist that we should all be using their shitty product, but refuse to implement the features needed for that to be an option. Progress was slowed to a crawl because they couldn't either just implement CMYK and give people what they want, or stop incisting that it's the best tool for the job even though it isn't.

Progress was slowed to a halt not because of users or haters, but because of an inept developer team with ego problems.

Lot of the haters here have the same problem no understanding of big picture so are complete useless people to developers.

And developers who don't listen to their users and display that kind of attitude, where feature requests are "junk mail" are useless to users. That's the reason we hate. And that's the reason we don't use their shitty products.

Either supply something that gets the job done, or STFU about telling what I should and should not use in MY line of work.

Joey Gladstone said...

junk mail with no useful ideas in them for the developers.

Pretty much, because they're software developers, not printers and not media professionals. Clearly they don't understand why people need the things they do. And clearly they don't understand why non-destructive editing is important, or why 16 and 32 bit colour depths are useful, or why people need to deal with extremely large files, or why workflow matters, or why people require that the industry standard be implemented.

ProgrammersKnowEverything(tm).

We need more people in the open source world who can step back and see the big picture and help developers on the right path.

That's what some of us have been trying to do for over a decade.

Same is true in the closed source world. Lot of requests from users end up in the shredder because they will never work.

Except in the proprietary world companies tend to listen to their customer's input, and the vendors of the higher end suites actively seek out and target professionals, rather than try to convince them that they don't need what they need, and they know better, and said professionals should use their sub par tool that does nothing they need for their work just because they said so.

Watermarking done in ink is infrared and ultraviolet reactive inks. Basically outside human view.

You should specify when you're talking about fingerprinting (invisible watermarks) or watermarking (visible watermarks).

You've however, invalidated your own previous (non) argument. 'invisible' inks are outside of the scope of a colour matching system aimed at visible inks and preserving colour integrity. You'd print the 'invisible' IR in a second pass, over top of the whatever is supposed to be visible, regardless of the underlying matching system.

Note I was not counting key black. Depends on the book depends on if black and white are colors or shades.

In this context, no it doesn't. You're talking about hexachrome, the only book that matters here is the hexachrome matching guide, especially when it's called HEXachrome. Hex = six, Chrome = colour, meaning six colours, not five.

Guess what moron that is where some of these screw ups happen. Producing person sends you a image that looks 5 color.

Guess what moron, it's called proofing. You do the conversion, and you check back and forth with the client before you okay the printing. And you clearly don't understand how this works. 6 colour process doesn't mean there are only six colours. It's refers to the mixing process, where all colours are derived from various combinations of the six base colours (Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Key/Black, Orange and Green in Hexachrome for example). The concept of colour matching and colour conversion is to convert a graphic from one colour space to another, and matching the visible colours.

There's no missing colours, you see a certain shade of green, you match it in the new colour space. Furthermore, and further evidence that you know piss all about printing, only a fucking moron okays a print job without first proofing, people like that don't last long in this line of work.

Joey Gladstone said...

Plates in gimp are so customer can decide what details are not important so screw ups like you using 5 colors instead of 6 don't happen even worse if its like 10 000 items that are now junk.

a) You're completely retarded. You don't print without proofing first.

b) You're completely retarded and don't understand the concept of colour matching.


Plate system is not about color matching its about details so at a printshop you know what details customer is happy to live without.


So colour integrity isn't considered something the customer can't live without? Your ineptitude knows no bounds.

Plate system in gimp is based off how to reduce risk printshops screwing up orders as they are now.

So it targets people who're too bloody inept to take the time to do a job properly and rush a print job without proofing, and for people who don't give a shit about weather the colours match or not. Wonderful.

Yet there are requests for 3 color through to 12 color in the gimp feature requests.

That was sarcasm you mental midget.

The request for vector the one person just made is why some of the gimp developers said stuff it no our problem. Since if vector is what fits presses better we should stick to screen only.

I agree, adding full vectors into gimp is pointless. Vectors are the prefered format for screen printing, unless your bitmap is at a 1:1 or larger scale, hence the need to large format support in a bitmap-based editor.

See, a smart company like Adobe or Corel gets that and knows how to use common sense to reach that conclusion, the gimp devs, apparently use it as a cop-out.

It seems like they produce more excuses than they produce useful code.

Joey Gladstone said...

So to give constant results high end printing presses have to scan and cannot depend on cymk for stable quality

Learn to read.

People don't rely on CMYK for colour consistency, they rely on Pantune which uses the CMYK gamut.

CMYK is a subtractive colour space specifically made to work with dyes, inks, paints and other natural pigments, not a colour matching system.

Sorry to say its stuffed. Items people have been requesting are bad and they don't know it.

Sorry to say that you've clearly fallen on your head too many times. You're understanding of the subject matter is so bad, off base and unexisting and you don't even know it.

Anonymous said...

OhioHamIsFullOfShit(tm)

Anonymous said...

Reposted comment from ZDNET:

Linux is predicted by research firm Gartner to unseat Apple for the #2 position and have 7.5% of the desktop market.

This was supposed to happen in 2008

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/35688.html

Writing pro-Linux articles (there have been thousands) and adding comments about how you have switched your grandma isn't working.

It just isn't working.

Enough with the propaganda war already. Linux obviously has problems if it has this much trouble getting adopted. Stop blaming MS and Apple and take a hard look at Linux.

Is everyone here aware that Linus doesn't care about getting on the desktop? You guys are aware that the Linux kernel is just a hobby for him, right?

It isn't designed to beat Windows.

It isn't designed for anything. Linus himself calls it "software evolution".

It's just a hobby for Linus and the other kernel developers. They don't care about your OS war.

It just isn't working.

You guys are just following the motions of people before you. This propaganda war has been going on for over a decade.

It just isn't working.

Anonymous said...

How nice to see F$F brainwashing so shortly after the entry is posted.

Anonymous said...

They have been working overtime since Win 7 was released.

All F$F forum forces have been called into action.

Anonymous said...

Quite good analysis from a Ubuntu developer:

I give up

Few quotes:


I just can't do it, because Ubuntu sucks. Instead of moving forward with every release, they have the uncanny ability to take Linux back in time by piling code that doesn't work on top of more code that doesn't work until they have turned their OS into a garbage salad. 8.10 was GREAT, and for the most part everything worked. Some things were missing concerning support of newer Eees, but then they released Ubuntu Jaunty 9.04. 9.04 could only have been released completely untested, as they missed something as stupid as the Intel tiling kernel bug which caused every Intel card out there to crawl during any OpenGL function. There is no excuse for their release of alpha grade drivers and less than alpha grade kernel code into their release distribution.



Maybe with luck someone at Ubuntu will figure out that they are ruining Linux with their release schedules and constant bleeding edge cruft and will slow down to focus on bugs that are making their OS suck. Maybe the kernel team will actually learn how to write modules that work and don't duplicate code and functions like rfkill, and perhaps the xorg team will focus on real issues like making drivers that actually work rather than changing how you configure it 3 times in 3 releases. Oh wow cool, it goes from terminal to GUI in 1 second, too bad I can't suspend with composite mode on without the driver segfaulting. Who needs suspend anyway, not like its a useful feature and all on an ultraportable.


Nice to see at least some sanity.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, the amateurish and '90s style 7sins website didn't work as the F$F paid $hills expected.

Now they are scrambling in force trying to find every single bug in the new OS, and write long php codes on their blogs to discredit Windows 7. No matter how trivial the bug is (or if it's caused by their own faulty hardware they still keep from the late '90s), everything bad that happens is going to be used against Windows and Microsoft (witch means fighting the man, and everything non-Microsoft is good, even if goes against their own view of "freedom").

Meanwhile openSUSE seems like it's getting better. 11.2 RC1 is out, but still some days before the release. That one could probably stay in one of my VMs a little longer if it turns out to suck much less.

Federico said...

Not as brilliant as it used to be...

Actually, this rant is boring and pointless.

Anonymous said...

Aww... that post wasn't as great as they used to be. I've seen better rantings in the comments tbh. But nevertheless an update on LHB, so I'm happy :).

Anonymous said...

Hello,


For leveraging traffic from the internet, I have manually collected a list of quality blogs and sites with whom I am interested in getting associated.

I liked your Site/blog and i'm interested in having my blog's text link in your blog roll or Friends Section.

To process this link exchange please place my blog on your home page using the
below info

Title: IT Security Consultant

Url: http://www.adamsinfo.com/security-consultant/

And send me your link info with confirmation of my link so that I could place
you link on my blog. We will make link back to you on our home page (PR 5).

I hope I will hear from you as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Webmaster
Adamsinfo.com
seo@apnicsolutions.com

Anonymous said...

What? OhioHomo get schooled and ran off? That, I never saw coming!

Anonymous said...

How can Linux be different from Windows when it comes to environment, you might ask?
It has pretty much fuck all power management and thus burns electricity likes it's going out of fashion.

Anonymous said...


How can Linux be different from Windows when it comes to environment, you might ask?


This is a big dilemma.

For Windows users Linux is a poor second-class Windows.

For UNIX users Linux is a poor second-class UNIX.

For Apple users Linux is nothing.

Anonymous said...

Hilarious Ubuntu Review

Ubuntu live CDs don't even boot on my Compaq machine, so I can sympathize with Mr. Thomas. How can the Loon boys just release whatever shit they have every six months? What about testing and quality assurance? If the idiots actually do some testing, perhaps there will be less need for releasing something every six months? (What *do* the Linux devs keep changing so much anyway?)

Anonymous said...

@October 28, 2009 6:23 AM:

Good find!

I didn't bother to read the comments; it was enough to see the titles. There were a lot of bad words, name calling, and of course the all-time favorite, You M$ shill!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

I love the opening line of that article:

Several years and two houses ago, I tried some flavour of Ubuntu with a silly name. Constipated Chicken, I think it was.

I lol'd at that.

Anonymous said...

A new article from the same TG Daily:

Ubuntu bug subjects TG Daily hack to wrath of fanbois


We were particularly taken with the number of Linux supporters apparently suffering from Tourette's Syndrome and especially the ones who hoped our families got cancer. It's always refreshing to receive good objective criticism.


If someone hasn't noticed yet, those Linux zealots truly are disgusting in any criteria of civil human behavior.

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty certain it will still be what we techies - who started on mainframes in 1972 - refer to as 'shit'.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA. Good loontard pwnage.

Anonymous said...

Luckily, some readers managed to stay calm and pointed out that there is indeed a critical bug in the 64 bit RC version of Ubuntu 9.10 which fails to recognize multiple hard drives, so, sadly, the failure of the OS to install was down to coding errors rather than user incompetence.

Hahahaha. Looks like the loontards flaming from the first article got pwned again pretty hard.

Anonymous said...


The Ubuntu 9.10 RC installer has a rather surprising bug dealing with multiple disk drives; see #459054 at bugs.launchpad.net. It's already fixed in the daily builds, so I expect the final release will probably not have it. In the meantime, if you seriously want to try Ubuntu, either use a 9.04 CD or wait until the 9.10 actual release.



If you are feeling conservative, wait until December and then try it, after the teething problems shake out. I like Ubuntu, but I won't pretend to anyone that it's ready for naive use until 3-5 weeks post-release. Us bleeding edge types start running new versions and/or upgrading around alpha-6, but we also file bug reports and cope with the odd spot of breakage.


Translate: we ship alpha-quality stuff and are willing to admit that, after having threatened your family with cancer.

A good amount of JustAroundtheCorner(tm) in there too.

Anonymous said...

LOL @ this comment from the first one with the usual LinuxIsJustAKernel(TM) and the also famous UseDistroXInstead(TM) comment:

there are no logical drive buttons in Linux. Secondly, Ubuntu is not Linux. Linux is a kernel. :)

Please, next time try reviewing Fedora 12 beta :)

After all, Fedora is a true Linux :) Linux began with RedHat, Fedora is just a community RedHat release.

[Andrew adds: Silly me. I reviewed the wrong version of Linux. How silly of me. Who'd have thought there could be more than one OS with the same name?]


Plus I love his addition to it.

Anonymous said...

I love how in the second article they are flaming about how it was an RC and all this as an excuse for it failing to install and yet millions of people were able to install the Win7 RC just fine and have been running it for something like 10 months now.

We all know that if the Win7 RC acted like Oognooboo did in this guy's review that freetards the world over would be screaming over it and not making excuses of "oh well it's just an RC".

Secondly, an RC shouldn't be full of bugs. It's a fucking release candidate which is the last step before the full release. We are also now 1 fucking day away from the release and they still have installer issues? What. The. Fuck.

Anonymous said...


what I find more entertaining than a review with an extremely slanted opinion? the extremely slanted responses whining about the difference in opinion.

let me reenact how most of these posts go "how dare you rip on Linux, I feel as though it is my g/f and my child so an insult to Linux is an insult to my own blood and love!" followed by the poster masturbating with his tears while looking at their Linux desktop.


Yeah, that captures it.

Anonymous said...

Loonix is all that 99% of these freetards have. There isn't much else that one has when you're still living in your parent's basement when you're in your mid 30s.

Anonymous said...

While you are correct when you say that Linux/Ubuntu needs to move out of the hobbyists realm and into the mainstream, the question of *when* cannot be ignored. Timing is important.

Linux is *almost* ready for prime time. It needs a little more polish before it's ready to compete alongside Micro$ofts and Apple$ systems as something Mom & Pop can " just *use* ". This means almost eliminating the need to EVER go to a console box and enter cryptic Unix-style commands. Whatever you need, there should be a GUI interface to get you there and help you out.

The command-line/text-interface mentality MUST die. This isn't the 1960s anymore and we no longer use teletypes, punch cards and dumb terminals to interact with our PCs.

It is likely to take another two or three years to achieve that slick and creamy GIU look & feel consumers are used to and can no longer live without. The added complexity will create bugs and maintenence headaches too. Even Linus T. is getting freaked out about that issue.

Oh, and a "standard Linux" wouldn't hurt a damned thing either. Merge the best of the dozens of versions into *THE* version so everybody's on the same page. Anything else is a waste of programmer-hours. Scaled up/down editions of *THE* version can be fitted to everything from multifunction wristwatches to desktops and server farms and Mars rovers.


201x is going to be the year of the Loonix desktop! We swear it's JustAroundTheCorner(TM) this time!

Some Fake Ass Name said...

Okay, so yes ext4 finally is the first version to have an online defrag tool. Gee only took 4 revisions and 16 years.

Actually there was a defrag utility for ext2 but no one could figure out how to get the damned thing to stop eating data, it was like using ReiserFS, but without the wife killing developer behind it.

Anonymous said...

Windows 7 RC was a marketing ploy. The RCs for free software are actual, real release candidates that haven't been thoroughly tested ahead of time. I think this is where the misunderstanding comes from.


lolwut? What this freetard describes is a piece of software still in beta. An RC should have been thoroughly tested through a number of cycles before ever being labeled an RC. But yes, this does explain the misunderstanding of where you get an open sores piece of software labeled as RC when it's really still in the beta stage.

Anonymous said...

@October 28, 2009 7:55 AM

That wasn't an online defrag. Ext4 apparently is supposed to havce online defrag. You know, a feature that you've been able to do since at least FAT32 in the Windows world.

Anonymous said...

Imagine if Windows 7 had SHIPPED with a bug like the one Ubuntu has. It would be front page news on Slashdot with 800 comments of +5 Insightful "Switch to Linux" and +5 Funny "Ballmer throws a chair".

Anonymous said...

And you clearly don't understand how this works. 6 colour process doesn't mean there are only six colours.

Tell me about it. The whole time I thought he was just talking about spot color with the constant milk carton examples (I think he even mentioned spot color at one point), but, yeah, the real world has totally moved onto process color. And we've been there for years. And I'm supposed to be listening to someone obviously fixated on yesterday's technology tell me about the future?

Anonymous said...

//Viruses, trojans, adwares, spywares... Windows lets all these enter your computer pretty easily. //

Since when? Install Avira, and that's it. Especially since XP SP2, Vista, and now 7.

1998 called, they want their "reasons Windows suxors" back.

Jackass freetard fucker.

Anonymous said...

I didn't bother to read the comments; it was enough to see the titles. There were a lot of bad words, name calling, and of course the all-time favorite, You M$ shill!!!!!!!

You might want to go back. The comments are chock full o' snarky op eds. Oh, and naturally there's the usual legally enforceable "give me your address so I can come over to your house and bludgeon your entire family to death" death threats.

Anonymous said...

I think I should add, that I do think it is a little absurd to review a non-stable version of anything.

I love this comment. Now an RC (you know the final version before release and if no showstopper bugs are found it becomes the final release) is now an "unstable" version. These fucks clearly know nothing about how to make software with such ridiculous notions.

Anonymous said...

@October 28, 2009 7:35 AM:

It is always funny to see people arguing that the Unix/CLI background is what is holding Linux back.

I'd say it is exactly this background that is holding Linux even where it is today (i.e. on servers). They have this big problem that if you get rid of that, you throw the baby with the bathwater, so they try to make these awful GUI wrappers to old CLI commands. And no one can still administer a Linux system only with these half-assed GUIs.

It just isn't working.

It really seems that Ubuntu has hired a bunch of graphic designers to make it pretty. Because what's the use of a "pretty" OS that doesn't work and has no support? You have a Mac, you go to the Mac "Genius". You have Windows, you browse the internet to see if one of the other billion users ran into the problem. You got Linux---well, then you're at the mercy of the programmers' sense of responsibility.


(Donkeypuss in the above I give up -post).

Putting fancy glitter over pile of shit does not make it any less shit.

Anonymous said...

You are publishing bug in Release Candidate (not final) version of Ubuntu, just 2 days before stable 9.10 version is going to be released?
You never clearly state that what you are testing is not final version of product. Don't you think that you are created confusion on purpose?


Once again another freetard shows his ignorance about developing software. An RC and the final version have at most minor differences (this is done purposefully to keep down regressions). They seem to act as if the RC from 2 days ago that the first article tested is somehow going to be radically different than the release version tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

Secondly, an RC shouldn't be full of bugs. It's a fucking release candidate which is the last step before the full release.

It wasn't just a release candidate, it was the release candidate. What on earth would Canonical do with a few more days? That's not even enough time to update readmes, let alone fix any bugs.

Anonymous said...


That's not even enough time to update readmes, let alone fix any bugs.


WTF? They have readmes? And just yesterday I was told to JustGoogleIt(tm).

Anonymous said...

If the bug was already fixed, why not include the fix in the RC itself?

Anonymous said...

Linux is *almost* ready for prime time. It needs a little more polish before it's ready to compete alongside Micro$ofts and Apple$ systems as something Mom & Pop can " just *use* ".

Christ, I heard this when FVWM95 came out, and, you know what? Linux was closer back then than it is now. That's right: Linux has moved AWAY from parity. Back then the competitor was a buggy, crashy delayed product that also didn't support emerging technologies like USB and AGP. Today Linux can't even get the fucking installer right. On a product that's ONE DAY from release. Fucking embarrassing, and this was supposed to be "The One" that changed everything.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 5124   Newer› Newest»