Is Barnes & Noble https site untrusted for you today?

In article , Snit
wrote:

Unless, you're intimating that Linux isn't part of the "real world"?

barely.

desktop market share of linux is in the low single digits and shrinking.

Shrinking? I thought it was going slowly up (though still ALL desktop
distros combined are at less than 2%)... by that I mean the traditional
desktop Linux, not ChromeOS.

shrinking, but even at 2%, that's not worth the effort to support, and
it's not just apple. linux has the least amount of software of any
major os because there's too few users to justify the engineering
effort.

linux is well suited for servers and embedded devices, not the desktop.

There are exceptions to this.

there are exceptions to everything. so what?

On 3/5/17, 9:26 PM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Snit
wrote:

Unless, you're intimating that Linux isn't part of the "real world"?

barely.

desktop market share of linux is in the low single digits and shrinking.

Shrinking? I thought it was going slowly up (though still ALL desktop
distros combined are at less than 2%)... by that I mean the traditional
desktop Linux, not ChromeOS.

shrinking, but even at 2%, that's not worth the effort to support, and
it's not just apple. linux has the least amount of software of any
major os because there's too few users to justify the engineering
effort.

I updated my stats today:

http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendNov2007-Present.png

I am surprised and pleased to see it is now above 2%. Heck, it is pushing
2.5% and likely will be there soon (assuming this is not some anomaly). But
I suspect they are including ChromeOS in their stats -- which is a very
different beast than "GNU/Linux" which is what is meant in general by
"desktop Linux".

Maybe at some point they will split those out.

linux is well suited for servers and embedded devices, not the desktop.

There are exceptions to this.

there are exceptions to everything. so what?

Sure... but I want it to be clear that the exceptions here are very
important. There are MANY people who would have NO access to the web without
a no-cost OS they can run on their older hardware with no OS license. Linux
allows that better than anything else and that is world changing. For that
matter, on the "other side" there are many who largely use the command line
and for them there is nothing better than Linux. Sure, this is a tiny
fraction of users but they are a vocal minority and many are developers.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article , Snit
wrote:

Unless, you're intimating that Linux isn't part of the "real world"?

barely.

desktop market share of linux is in the low single digits and shrinking.

Shrinking? I thought it was going slowly up (though still ALL desktop
distros combined are at less than 2%)... by that I mean the traditional
desktop Linux, not ChromeOS.

shrinking, but even at 2%, that's not worth the effort to support, and
it's not just apple. linux has the least amount of software of any
major os because there's too few users to justify the engineering
effort.

I updated my stats today:

http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendNov2007-Present.png

I am surprised and pleased to see it is now above 2%. Heck, it is pushing
2.5% and likely will be there soon (assuming this is not some anomaly). But
I suspect they are including ChromeOS in their stats -- which is a very
different beast than "GNU/Linux" which is what is meant in general by
"desktop Linux".

they have to include chromeos so as to inflate the numbers, but that
doesn't actually matter. the market itself is growing faster, so its
overall share is getting smaller.

Maybe at some point they will split those out.

doubtful.

linux is well suited for servers and embedded devices, not the desktop.

There are exceptions to this.

there are exceptions to everything. so what?

Sure... but I want it to be clear that the exceptions here are very
important. There are MANY people who would have NO access to the web without
a no-cost OS they can run on their older hardware with no OS license. Linux
allows that better than anything else and that is world changing. For that
matter, on the "other side" there are many who largely use the command line
and for them there is nothing better than Linux. Sure, this is a tiny
fraction of users but they are a vocal minority and many are developers.

those people aren't buying apps and nothing is no-cost. their cost is
time.

there's a reason why nearly all developers don't bother with linux.
it's simply not worth the effort. they'll never recover their costs,
especially since linux users expect everything to be free.

state of the art software is mac/windows and now ios/android.

On 3/6/17, 10:22 AM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Snit
wrote:

Unless, you're intimating that Linux isn't part of the "real world"?

barely.

desktop market share of linux is in the low single digits and shrinking.

Shrinking? I thought it was going slowly up (though still ALL desktop
distros combined are at less than 2%)... by that I mean the traditional
desktop Linux, not ChromeOS.

shrinking, but even at 2%, that's not worth the effort to support, and
it's not just apple. linux has the least amount of software of any
major os because there's too few users to justify the engineering
effort.

I updated my stats today:

http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinuxTrendNov2007-Present.png

I am surprised and pleased to see it is now above 2%. Heck, it is pushing
2.5% and likely will be there soon (assuming this is not some anomaly). But
I suspect they are including ChromeOS in their stats -- which is a very
different beast than "GNU/Linux" which is what is meant in general by
"desktop Linux".

they have to include chromeos so as to inflate the numbers, but that
doesn't actually matter. the market itself is growing faster, so its
overall share is getting smaller.

The share of usage is growing... as far as including ChromeOS to inflate the
numbers I see no reason why NetMarketShare has an interest in doing so. But
ChromeOS is new enough and does run on Linux... so I bet they just put it in
their.

Maybe at some point they will split those out.

doubtful.

As it grows I would not be surprised to see it... but will not go so far as
to predict they will.

linux is well suited for servers and embedded devices, not the desktop.

There are exceptions to this.

there are exceptions to everything. so what?

Sure... but I want it to be clear that the exceptions here are very
important. There are MANY people who would have NO access to the web without
a no-cost OS they can run on their older hardware with no OS license. Linux
allows that better than anything else and that is world changing. For that
matter, on the "other side" there are many who largely use the command line
and for them there is nothing better than Linux. Sure, this is a tiny
fraction of users but they are a vocal minority and many are developers.

those people aren't buying apps and nothing is no-cost. their cost is
time.

Sure... and desktop Linux, for most people, does not serve them as well as
the competition. No argument here.

there's a reason why nearly all developers don't bother with linux.
it's simply not worth the effort. they'll never recover their costs,
especially since linux users expect everything to be free.

state of the art software is mac/windows and now ios/android.

Agreed. And if Apple does not get off their butts and do more with Mac it
will be taken from that list.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article , Snit
wrote:

there's a reason why nearly all developers don't bother with linux.
it's simply not worth the effort. they'll never recover their costs,
especially since linux users expect everything to be free.

state of the art software is mac/windows and now ios/android.

Agreed. And if Apple does not get off their butts and do more with Mac it
will be taken from that list.

they're doing plenty with the mac. the new macbook pro is basically a
complete overhaul.

the problem is with intel and their repeated delays on new chips.

On 3/6/17, 10:35 AM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Snit
wrote:

there's a reason why nearly all developers don't bother with linux.
it's simply not worth the effort. they'll never recover their costs,
especially since linux users expect everything to be free.

state of the art software is mac/windows and now ios/android.

Agreed. And if Apple does not get off their butts and do more with Mac it
will be taken from that list.

they're doing plenty with the mac. the new macbook pro is basically a
complete overhaul.

the problem is with intel and their repeated delays on new chips.

There is that as well as, I think, Apple is holding off major new desktop
hardware until APFS is ready for prime-time. They are also moving to it in
the more controlled iOS ecosystem. I am hoping that it is the default with
10.13 (or macOS 11 or whatever they call it) and with it they ship new pro
hardware and software (well, the software might be a few months later... but
at least announce it).

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article , Snit
wrote:

Agreed. And if Apple does not get off their butts and do more with Mac it
will be taken from that list.

they're doing plenty with the mac. the new macbook pro is basically a
complete overhaul.

the problem is with intel and their repeated delays on new chips.

There is that as well as, I think, Apple is holding off major new desktop
hardware until APFS is ready for prime-time.

that, and an eventual move to arm processors.

They are also moving to it in
the more controlled iOS ecosystem.

yep. 10.3 will convert an ios device to apfs. there aren't external
drives to worry about.

I am hoping that it is the default with
10.13 (or macOS 11 or whatever they call it) and with it they ship new pro
hardware and software (well, the software might be a few months later... but
at least announce it).

10.13 will likely convert the internal drive to apfs, possibly even
before then.

the question is what about external drives and in particular, time
machine, which will greatly benefit from apfs.

On 3/6/17, 10:59 AM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Snit
wrote:

Agreed. And if Apple does not get off their butts and do more with Mac it
will be taken from that list.

they're doing plenty with the mac. the new macbook pro is basically a
complete overhaul.

the problem is with intel and their repeated delays on new chips.

There is that as well as, I think, Apple is holding off major new desktop
hardware until APFS is ready for prime-time.

that, and an eventual move to arm processors.

As long as I can still run Windows and other OSs in a VM I do not care what
chip they use.

They are also moving to it in
the more controlled iOS ecosystem.

yep. 10.3 will convert an ios device to apfs. there aren't external
drives to worry about.

And there are fewer variables with how things are saved in general.

I am hoping that it is the default with 10.13 (or macOS 11 or whatever they
call it) and with it they ship new pro hardware and software (well, the
software might be a few months later... but at least announce it).

10.13 will likely convert the internal drive to apfs, possibly even
before then.

the question is what about external drives and in particular, time
machine, which will greatly benefit from apfs.

I also hope to see speed increases, though I know my iMac with its slow
drive will not magically be turned into a Mac with a fast drive.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 23:11:06 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:

No, I don't go that road either. I'm not going to consider any person
that prefers apple hardware to be an apologist. I'm not going to try
convince him/her of using something else. If they like Apple products,
it is perfect with me. I respect them. And I want the same respectful
treatment back.

Fair enough.
All that matters is the truth.

On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 14:48:35 -0500, nospam wrote:

What's the answer?
obviously, update.

Nobody in his right mind blindly accepts updates that have no value that is
discernible.

Bearing in mind even Apple says they don't test their software in the real
world (e.g., Linux, Windows sans iTunes, no sysadmin privileges, etc.), so
you're the guinea pig.

For example, as you are well aware, the iOS 10 related carrier update has
caused phones to lose connectivity in the past, to the point that the CEO
of T-Mobile told his customers NOT to update to iOS 10 carrier update.

T-Mobile says don?t update, iOS 10 causing ?connectivity issues? for
iPhone customers (September 2016)
https://9to5mac.com/2016/09/15/t-mob...es-ios-10-fix/

So it's not a no brainer to just blindly accept a carrier update when (a)
you don't know what is "in" the carrier update, and (b) bugs occur.

a carrier update is pushed by the carrier, not apple and would have
happened whether or not you updated ios. it was a coincidence that it
happened on the same day. it happens every once in a while and is not
unique to ios either. even my old flip phone had periodic prl updates,
which unlike ios, had to done manually in the menu tree. it's much
easier to tap a button.

There have been many reported issues by customers of my carrier that are
related directly to the iOS 10 and Carrier 27.1 update, so, I question
whether that statement is correct.

Bearing in mind that even Apple says they don't test their software in the
real world, you'd be bricked if you didn't have a computer running iTunes
in the last iOS update.

From that same reference above:
"The cellular connectivity issue reported by T-Mobile customers isn?t the
first problem we?ve seen so far with iOS 10?s launch. During the first hour
or two of the update going live, customers updating over-the-air were
finding their devices bricked which requires connecting to a Mac or PC with
iTunes to resolve."

Without iTunes, your phone would be bricked, so, Linux users would be dead
without emulation.

only old apps that are still 32 bit (versus modern 64 bit apps) will
generate that alert.

I have since found out, as you are well aware, that the "alert" is a
propaganda ploy by Apple to "condition" their customers to an upcoming
switch to all-64-bit apps (most articles say in iOS 11).

There's not a single known case of a non-Apple-crapware app being sped up
on a 64-bit port over the 32-bit port on the same hardware.

Not a single one.
Yet, Apple pops up that message for *every* 32-bit app.

It's all part of their constant barrage of conditioning messages to their
gullible user base.

ios is optimized for 64 bit and any time a 32 bit app is launched, the
32 bit libraries must be loaded which will slow down the device.

I already gave you a link from Macrumors where they tested this "reputed
slowdown", and couldn't measure it.

the solution is to update the app to the latest version. very simple.

The message is a propaganda message.
The solution is for Apple to stop bombarding its user base with propaganda
messages that have zero basis in fact.

Remember, even you can't find a single non-Apple-crapware app that is
actually slower at 32-bits than 64 bits when running on the same 64-bit iOS
hardware.

it's not a yes/no question. it's *informing* you that running 32 bit
apps will slow down the device.

First off, the message is vague in that it doesn't say anything about 32
bits. I found out later that they used to say 32-bits but they got hit so
hard by the developers that they toned down the message to implicate
without saying anything (which is classic propaganda 101).

What the message is really there for, since it's not based on a whit of
fact, is it's a propaganda message to condition it's (admittedly gullible)
user base that 32-bit apps are slower than 64-bit apps when running on a
64-bit hardware.

The fact even you can't find a *single non-Apple-crapware app* that is
slower at 32-bits than 64-bits when running on the same hardware, is
telling.

On 5 Mar 2017 20:01:06 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

You can't make this **** up, folks! He literally has no idea how to COPY
AND PASTE or EDIT a URL! LOL!!! He's completely confused! The above
statement is from the utterly clueless, Apple-hating nym-switching troll
who goes out of his way to post in Apple news groups and constantly
belittles iOS users as "simpletons"! You are so full of ignorant
bull**** hot air it's amazing you can get *anything* done with
technology. : D

On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 23:08:51 -0500, nospam wrote:

That's why it's a defensible fact that iOS isn't tested (nor supported by
Apple) in the real world.

ios is well tested, but like everything, including android, nothing is
perfect.

I'll just correct your note which is that iOS is tested only within the
walled garden. Even Apple says they don't test a single thing with Linux,
and they probably don't test Android either, nor Windows sans iTunes, nor a
computer interfacing with the device where that computer doesn't have an
Apple "login" id.

There are so many things that Apple doesnt' test that it's a defensible
statement that Apple doesn't test their software in the real world.

Unless, you're intimating that Linux isn't part of the "real world"?
barely.

The real world contains Linux and Android devices, and the real world
contains Windows devices that don't have an Apple ID nor iTunes.

desktop market share of linux is in the low single digits and shrinking.
linux is well suited for servers and embedded devices, not the desktop.

While Linux is suited for a lot of things, I'll stay out of the Linux
desktop discussion, other than to say I have a Linux desktop and it does
everything that I've needed it to do.

Besides, that Apple OS change killed thousands of Windows's users too
(e.g., the ones who don't use iTunes).

nonsense. more of your made up rubbish.

You never realize that I never make things up like you always do.
Everything I say is always defensible.

This is the message that Mac, Windows, and Linux users got just going from
a minor update of x.x.0 to x.x.1 (which shows you how dangerous even minor
iOS updates are to connectivity in the real world).
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/wp-conten...62-750x562.jpg

This explains that it happened to many Windows users:
"After updating to iOS 7, many Windows users have reported that they are
constantly getting the ?Trust this computer? message pop up even after
selecting ?Trust? when plugging in their iPhone or iPad."
http://ios-data-recover.com/how-to-s...in-iphoneipad/

Even the Mac users experienced this iOS bug just going from x.x.0 to x.x.1
https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comm...ust_my_laptop/

And it affected almost all Linux users too:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/03/i...e-ubuntu-trust

itunes is not required to use an ios device.

Heh heh ... you're joking right?

Even you know you can't do the simplest of things, such as output the list
of installed apps on an iOS device to a text file without using iTunes on a
separate computer.

And, when I asked you to name a single bit of functionality that iOS
devices have that Android devices don't already have, *everything* you
quoted *required* the computer (and Apple bloatware) to work.

You couldn't find a single Apple iOS functionality that wasn't already on
Android, without needing the computer.

And now you insist that an iOS device doesnt' need a computer just to do
the simplest of things that all other mobile devices just do by themselves?

On 2017-03-06, Stijn De Jong wrote:
On 5 Mar 2017 20:01:06 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

You can't make this **** up, folks! He literally has no idea how to COPY
AND PASTE or EDIT a URL! LOL!!! He's completely confused! The above
statement is from the utterly clueless, Apple-hating nym-switching troll
who goes out of his way to post in Apple news groups and constantly
belittles iOS users as "simpletons"! You are so full of ignorant
bull**** hot air it's amazing you can get *anything* done with
technology. : D



^ A smiling dimwit troll who can't figure out the very basics of iOS,
yet claims all iOS users are "simpletons" and insults them at every
turn. #WINNING

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2017-03-06, Stijn De Jong wrote:
On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 23:08:51 -0500, nospam wrote:

I never make things up
Everything I say is always defensible.

Just saying it doesn't make it magically become true, dimwit. You really
are not very good at this at all.

itunes is not required to use an ios device.

Heh heh ... you're joking right?

It's the truth, troll. And millions of iOS users know it. You aren't
fooling anyone here with your stupid, easily verifiable lies.

And, when I asked you to name a single bit of functionality that iOS
devices have that Android devices don't already have, *everything* you
quoted *required* the computer (and Apple bloatware) to work.

Nope again. Without any computer or added software, iOS users can back
up their entire device (apps, app data, system settings, and so on) to
the cloud, wipe the device clean, and then restore the entire device
from that cloud backup so that the device is in the *exact* state it was
in when it was backed up. Android can't do that because there is no
built-in backup utility, and to back up protected files requires rooting
/ jail breaking the device.

You continue to ignore and try to invalidate this *fact* because it's
the only way you can try to save face after your incredibly weak troll.
The problem is, to anyone at all know knows it's the truth, you only
make yourself out to be the huge loser idiot troll you are. Doubling
down on the dumb isn't going to help you here. You've been shown to be
wrong, and there's no turning back. Your ass has been handed to you.
Trolling harder won't help. Repeating the lie won't help. Your ship is
sunk, foolish troll. : )

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 6 Mar 2017 19:35:31 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Without any computer or added software, iOS users can back
up their entire device (apps, app data, system settings, and so on) to
the cloud, wipe the device clean, and then restore the entire device
from that cloud backup so that the device is in the *exact* state it was
in when it was backed up. Android can't do that because there is no
built-in backup utility, and to back up protected files requires rooting
/ jail breaking the device.

Android devices can do *better* than that, which is that they can backup to
and restore from their own external SD card the *entire* device.

All by their "itty bitty self".

No need for a "computer".
No need for an "apple id".
No need for the "cloud".