On 2015-06-13 10:15 AM, A wrote:
Slimer wrote:
On 2015-06-13 7:05 AM, A wrote:
Slimer wrote:
On 2015-06-12 4:28 PM, T wrote:

3) M$ has a long history of ripping others off

Absolutely, it's not like Linux ripped Microsoft off or anything...

GNOME until 3 - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
KDE - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
XFCE - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
Cinnamon - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
MATE - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
LXDE - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95
LXQT - Looks and behaves exactly like Windows 95

Clearly, Linux is the hotbed of original ideas.


So many lies, so much bull****. NONE of them look like Windows 95.

LOL, let's have the newsgroup decide. I'll provide links to images of
each one of them:

https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-...2-32.png.en_GB

(Gnome 2, notice the taskbar at the bottom and the "start button" at the
top left)

https://www.kde.org/announcements/4....ts/desktop.png (KDE,
notice the "start button" at the bottom left, the taskbar and the system
tray)

http://www.unixmen.com/wp-content/up...13/11/XFCE.png (XFCE, notice
the "start button" Applications menu at the top left and the dock,
stolen from OS X)

http://helpsite.org/wp-content/uploa...on-Desktop.jpg

(Cinnamon, notice the "start button" at the bottom left, the taskbar,
the system bar and the application shortcuts bar)

https://ubuntu-mate.org/gallery/Scre...screenshot.png

(MATE, notice the "start button" at the top left, the application
shortcut tray, the taskbar and the system tray at the top right)

http://www.linuxinsider.com/images/a...74_990x557.jpg
(LXDE, notice the "Start button" at the bottom left, the system tray and
the taskbar)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...f_LXQt_0.7.png

(LXQT, notice the "start button" at the bottom left, the applications
shortcuts tray, the taskbar and the system tray)

Need I go on? The Linux kernel is in itself a ripoff of UNIX and most of
the desktop environments are clearly a ripoff of Windows 95. You can
continue to call me a liar and embarrass yourself complete, losing every
ounce of credibility you have in the process or you can do something
Linux advocates seem incapable of and apologize to the person who has
just schooled you. As long as imbeciles like you are around to propagate
false propaganda about Linux in the hope of gaining converts, I'll be
around to dismiss whatever bull**** you've spewed and bring you back to
reality.



iOS, Windows, Next, Linux, etc. have similar looks. Linux is more
configurable. None of these screen shots look exactly like Win95.

So it's forgivable for Linux to have a start button, have the same
elements in the same parts of the screen and even operate like Windows
95 as long as it doesn't look *exactly* like Windows 95. What a crock of
****.

Linux
doesn't do much malware. Windows loves malware.

Windows 7 and 8 have built-in defenses against malware. It, in addition
to setting your UAC to the highest level or even using a Guest account
as you would in Linux ensures that malware stays off. This argument is
an old one and doesn't excuse how awful Linux is.

Linux is more stable.
Windows is not.

This was only true when Microsoft was delivering the 9x of Windows.
Since 2000, it has been the absolute opposite. Windows 7, 8 and 8.1 work
wonderfully and do not crash unless you use faulty hardware. Linux, on
the other hand, has applications which just quit for no reason and don't
even provide you with an explanation as well as bugs which freeze the
system entirely and require you to power off. Your continued bull**** is
noted.

Linux is free. Windows is not.

Ebola is free, the vaccine against it is not.

--
Slimer
Proud "wintroll"
Encrypt.