Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Wednesday 26 September 2007 15:52 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Wednesday 26 September 2007 13:52 : \____
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Wednesday 26 September 2007 10:23 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> Kier wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:38:06 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kier wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 05:50:59 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it's a bit different from Linspire because Linspire had a
>>>>>>>>>> wealthy founder and an actual company behind it. By the way,
>>>>>>>>>> Freespire 2.0.4 (IIRC) was released a few days ago, but I no
>>>>>>>>>> longer post much Linspire and Xandros news here. They are
>>>>>>>>>> traitors (the software equiv. of treason) and they will gradually
>>>>>>>>>> run out of business. Microsoft paid them many millions to choose
>>>>>>>>>> this route.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, all the hard working developers and satisfied users of
>>>>>>>>> Linspire and XandrOS are traitors, are they? Nice language. I'm
>>>>>>>>> sure they'll be overjoyed to hear that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, they don't listen to the GPL3 god.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They don't seem to be going out of business, either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I shure hope so. Diversity is an asset for linux, not a liability
>>>>>> As much as the GPL3 cultists want to make believe that only their god
>>>>>> is the right one, and any other thinking is the direct way to MS-hell
>>>>>
>>>>> What does GPLv3 have to do with this? You've transformed this debate
>>>>> into something which it is not.
>>>>
>>>> /quote
>>>> They are traitors (the software equiv. of treason) and they will
>>>> gradually run out of business. Microsoft paid them many millions to
>>>> choose this route.
>>>> /unquote
>>>>
>>>> Do you recognize your own words?
>>>>
>>>> You are one of those GPL3 cultists who thinks that Novell, Linspire and
>>>> Xandros are evil for the sole reason that they are actually talking and
>>>> doing business with MS
>>>>
>>>> Excuse me for thinking that you guys are simply quite silly
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "software equiv. of treason"
>>>>
>>>> If you attempted to sound as idiotic as DFS, billwg or Hadron, you
>>>> succeeded quite well
>>>>
>>>> < snip >
>>>
>>> Strongg word, but to use a better analogy, they spat in the well we all
>>> drink from.
>>>
>>
>> So you say
>> And I say that diversity is better. Different approaches to linux, for
>> different kinds of users. You know, that "choice" thingy
>>
>> You are arguing the Hadron Quark way, only *your* "approved" choices are
>> OK. The choices of other people don't count. Naturally not, as they are
>> not yours
>
> Fair enough, Peter, but be aware that the contracts signed are bad news to
> Linux /as a whole/.
That is *your* claim. I think it is utterly, completely balderdash
I actually think that they are *good* for linux as a whole
> It's a divide-and-conquer strategy, as in "we'll give
> you lots of money to screw everybody else." And it has been effectively,
> sadly enough.
>
Still unsupported claims. You *think* it is that way. And I think you are
totally nuts. Somewhere between that might be the truth, but nowehere near
your interpretation of events
--
Tact, n.:
The unsaid part of what you're thinking.
|
|
