«

On 2010-07-05, John Navas wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2010 04:17:31 GMT, in <>, "Chris
> F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
>
>>On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote:
>>> In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
>>><> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either
>>>> company.
>>>
>>> your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely
>>> useful software, some of which has no replacement.
>>
>> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
>> system.
>
> Then your needs must be modest indeed.

Quite the contrary. There is more choice for most software on *nix
systems than there is for any other system, and it's higher quality
and usually much cheaper.

The exception, perhaps, is games, but that doesn't interest me.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfajohnson.com>
Author: =======================
Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
<> wrote:

> On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote:
> > In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
> ><> wrote:
> >
> >> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either
> >> company.
> >
> > your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely
> > useful software, some of which has no replacement.
>
> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
> system.

that's wonderful.

no garmin gps software that until recently was windows only, and now is
both mac and windows only.

no firmware updaters for a wide variety of devices, including cameras
and bluetooth headsets, since they're generally windows only.

no photoshop (gimp is not equivalent), no final cut, no aperture or
lightroom, and the list goes on.

but if you have what you need, that's all that matters.

In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
<> wrote:

> >> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
> >> system.
> >
> > Then your needs must be modest indeed.
>
> Quite the contrary. There is more choice for most software on *nix
> systems than there is for any other system, and it's higher quality
> and usually much cheaper.

complete utter bullshit.

macs have the widest selection of software because they can run all
mac, windows *and* unix software natively, simultaneously. no other
platform can do that. a user is able to pick the best app for any given
task from multiple operating systems.

> The exception, perhaps, is games, but that doesn't interest me.

so there's more software only if you eliminate one area in which
there's more. got it.

On 5 Jul 2010 04:17:31 GMT, "Chris F.A. Johnson"
<> wrote:
>On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote:
>> In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
>><> wrote:
>>
>>> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either
>>> company.
>>
>> your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely
>> useful software, some of which has no replacement.
>
> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
> system.


You mean there's a mobile version that runs on cell phones?

Bruce <> wrote:
>On 5 Jul 2010 04:17:31 GMT, "Chris F.A. Johnson"
><> wrote:
>>On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote:
>>> In article <>, Chris F.A. Johnson
>>><> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either
>>>> company.
>>>
>>> your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely
>>> useful software, some of which has no replacement.
>>
>> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
>> system.
>
>You mean there's a mobile version that runs on cell phones?

Now there's an interesting idea. Certainly many cell phones today
have the capability to run Linux. Personally I would find it a total
crackup to fire up a C shell on a cell phone.

--
Ray Fischer

In article <4c318fd1$0$1590$>, Ray Fischer
<> wrote:

> Now there's an interesting idea. Certainly many cell phones today
> have the capability to run Linux. Personally I would find it a total
> crackup to fire up a C shell on a cell phone.

the iphone runs os x and you can invoke a shell as well as ssh into it
if you jailbreak it. some users have installed vim, gcc, gdb and even
apache on the phone itself.

android is based on linux but the apps are java.

On 05/07/2010 09:54, Ray Fischer wrote:
> Bruce<> wrote:
>> On 5 Jul 2010 04:17:31 GMT, "Chris F.A. Johnson"
>> <> wrote:
>>> On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote:
>>>> In article<>, Chris F.A. Johnson
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either
>>>>> company.
>>>>
>>>> your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely
>>>> useful software, some of which has no replacement.
>>>
>>> There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux
>>> system.
>>
>> You mean there's a mobile version that runs on cell phones?
>
> Now there's an interesting idea. Certainly many cell phones today
> have the capability to run Linux. Personally I would find it a total
> crackup to fire up a C shell on a cell phone.
>

Androïd is based on a Linux core:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)

--
Bertrand

In article <4c319ee0$>, Atheist Chaplain
<> wrote:

> I just love to see the fanbois turn themselves inside out

i just love to see the bashers make up bullshit just to bash.

everything i said is factual, nothing inside out about it.

not to mention that when other companies do exactly the same thing,
they turn a blind eye, i.e., microsoft.

> And maybe when your rose coloured glasses fade a bit you might want to read
> the restrictions placed on app developers, but then I think you might have
> some comprehension issues to work out first.

since i *am* an app developer, i'm well aware of the restrictions and
what can and cannot be done.

have you written any apps for the iphone, or android for that matter?

go see what it's like to develop for nintendo if you want to see what
restrictions really means, or verizon's brew platform.

In article <>, Atheist Chaplain
<> wrote:

> Completely wrong, Microsoft fart and they get blamed for hurricanes, Apple
> tighten the reigns on what constitutes a breach of the EULA in just about
> every product they sell, or blame their shitty design on the way the end
> user holds a device and no one bats an eye.

then why don't you hear anyone complaining about windows phone 7? it
has many of the same restrictions as the iphone, including a single
apps store with app approvals. or how current windows mobile users are
orphaned?

> Apple has been a closed shop for so long and have done it so well that there
> are British Union organisers queuing up to take lessons from them.

that must be why large parts of os x and the kernel itself are open
source. or why webkit is open source and used by competitors, including
google, hp/palm and nokia. because apple is closed.

> > have you written any apps for the iphone, or android for that matter?
>
> No, but is that somehow important ??

yes it is important. if you aren't developing for the iphone or even
for one of its competitors, it's not likely you know much about what is
involved in writing and deploying apps for any of the various
platforms, other than the usual soundbites which are not always
completely accurate.

> > go see what it's like to develop for nintendo if you want to see what
> > restrictions really means, or verizon's brew platform.
>
> why the diversion ??
> we are talking about the restrictive practices and EULA that Apple impose on
> the end user.

it's not a diversion. other companies are *much* more restrictive.

In article <>, Atheist Chaplain
<> wrote:

> > then why don't you hear anyone complaining about windows phone 7?
>
> so where can I get a Windows 7 phone right now ??

what difference does that make? microsoft has already announced that
there will be app approval and a single apps store, just like apple.
why isn't that an issue? because it's not apple. when other companies
do the same thing, it's fine.

> >> Apple has been a closed shop for so long and have done it so well that
> >> there
> >> are British Union organisers queuing up to take lessons from them.
> >
> > that must be why large parts of os x and the kernel itself are open
> > source. or why webkit is open source and used by competitors, including
> > google, hp/palm and nokia. because apple is closed.
>
> So where are the other system manufacturers, Oh that's right, as soon as
> Jobs got his old job back he killed them stone cold dead without so much as
> a "Thanks, but no thanks"

nice diversion. you are completely ignoring that os x has a lot of open
source components, some of which apple wrote themselves and released
into the community, while microsoft windows tries to lock users in with
proprietary formats and technology, such as windows media and c#.

> Again, your having a problem comprehending, I don't need to write apps to be
> able to read an EULA.

you need to write apps to know what is possible.

as i explained there are ways to legitimately install apps that do
*not* go through the store, which you keep ignoring and deny that
exist. someone who writes apps would know about them, as well as the
restrictions of other platforms such as windows phone 7 and android.

> so, you snipped the question, what apps have you developed.

they're not relevant. a couple are still in development. the point is
that i have and you have not.

> >> > go see what it's like to develop for nintendo if you want to see what
> >> > restrictions really means, or verizon's brew platform.
> >>
> >> why the diversion ??
> >> we are talking about the restrictive practices and EULA that Apple impose
> >> on the end user.
> >
> > it's not a diversion. other companies are *much* more restrictive.
>
> again for the comprehension challenged, we are not talking about other
> companies.

of course we're not. that's exactly my point. only when it's apple do
people bitch. when other companies do exactly the same thing (or
worse), nobody cares. they aren't even interested.