Why Linux Sucks- 2020 Version

Diesel wrote:
Joel
Sat, 04 Jan 2020
19:46:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
roach wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jan 2020 14:23:52 -0500, Joel
wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , William
Poaster wrote:

Linux environment, the basics are still there. ... Android is
a Linux operating system because, at it's base, it uses the
standard Linux kernel and basic operating system.

only the base. the rest of android is not.

Reply after reply after reply, you still don't get it - even
though it's been explained clearly to you. Linux *IS JUST THE*
kernel of "desktop Linux" which is properly called GNU/Linux.
Android and Chrome OS are just as much what is correctly called
"Linux" as Ubuntu/ etc. are. Linux was never imagined to be a
complete implementation of Unix, that's where "GNU" and other
components come in. So, you could say that Android isn't Unix,
but not that it isn't Linux.

What does Linus Torvalds say about Android vs Linux?

I didn't ask him. I'm quite sure he would acknowledge that Linux
is a kernel, though, since that's what he designed it to be.

Que nospam informing us all that Linus would be using the wrong
definition to kernel. G


Yeah, some people love to argue for the sake of arguing - that is the
most charitable way I could put it, in this case, because multiple
people explained these distinctions to nospam.

--
Joel Crump

On 05/01/2020 01.16, AnonLinuxUser wrote:
On 1/4/2020 5:09 AM, Melzzzzz wrote:
On 2020-01-04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 02/01/2020 18.34, nospam wrote:
In article , John Wesley Harding
wrote:
And, with mobile phones, Linux has taken over the world.

no it hasn't.

android is not a full linux distro. it's the linux kernel, with android
built on top of it. all apps are written to android apis, not linux.

It is just Linux with a different desktop :-P

Android is not GNU. Then again it is Linux.


There seems to be a division of opinions on all of this.
So, who would be the authority on this topic?
The creators of Android, which is google.

They are not the authority.



--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 05/01/2020 03.52, nospam wrote:
In article , Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

from google i/o a while back:
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/android-dev/android_not_linux.png


No mater how often you say it don't make it true. Even in the age of
"alternate facts". The Linux kernel is the kernel. My servers don't have
a windows manager but they are still Linux, glibc is not the kernel but
GNU C library, and the utilities are part of the shell not the kernel.
It modular, whatever you wrap around the kernel doesn't nullify that it
is Linux.

i'm not the one saying it.

*google* states that android is not linux.

They're wrong. Not the first time.

because you say so?

the engineers who work on android are in a far better position to know
what it is and is not.

Not really. The rest of the engineers have a say.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:27:28 -0000 (UTC), Diesel
wrote:

Joel
Sat, 04 Jan 2020
19:46:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

roach wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jan 2020 14:23:52 -0500, Joel
wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , William
Poaster wrote:

Linux environment, the basics are still there. ... Android is
a Linux operating system because, at it's base, it uses the
standard Linux kernel and basic operating system.

only the base. the rest of android is not.

Reply after reply after reply, you still don't get it - even
though it's been explained clearly to you. Linux *IS JUST THE*
kernel of "desktop Linux" which is properly called GNU/Linux.
Android and Chrome OS are just as much what is correctly called
"Linux" as Ubuntu/ etc. are. Linux was never imagined to be a
complete implementation of Unix, that's where "GNU" and other
components come in. So, you could say that Android isn't Unix,
but not that it isn't Linux.

What does Linus Torvalds say about Android vs Linux?


I didn't ask him. I'm quite sure he would acknowledge that Linux
is a kernel, though, since that's what he designed it to be.


Que nospam informing us all that Linus would be using the wrong
definition to kernel. G


Linus talking about Chromebooks.
Interesting video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHFdoFKDuQA

On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:03:20 +0000, David
wrote:

On 05/01/2020 07:43, Diesel wrote:
David Fri,
03 Jan 2020 22:36:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/01/2020 21:46, Diesel wrote:
What of the post did you understand?

That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:03:20 +0000, David
wrote:

On 05/01/2020 07:43, Diesel wrote:
David Fri,
03 Jan 2020 22:36:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/01/2020 21:46, Diesel wrote:
What of the post did you understand?

That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.
If Apple didn't have that it would be pointless. Their hardware their
software, what else?

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ni�emu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala

nospam wrote:
In article , Diesel
wrote:

from google i/o a while back:
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/android-dev/android_not_linux.png


No mater how often you say it don't make it true. Even in the age
of "alternate facts". The Linux kernel is the kernel. My servers
don't have a windows manager but they are still Linux, glibc is
not the kernel but GNU C library, and the utilities are part of
the shell not the kernel. It modular, whatever you wrap around
the kernel doesn't nullify that it is Linux.

i'm not the one saying it.

*google* states that android is not linux.

No, you misunderstood them.

there's nothing to misunderstand. it's very clear.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009...ion-to-google-
andro id-for-developers/
Although Android is built on top of the Linux kernel, the
platform has very little in common with the conventional desktop
Linux stack. In fact, during a presentation at the Google IO
conference, Google engineer Patrick Brady stated unambiguously
that Android is not Linux.

They admit it's Linux. First sentence.

first sentence says it's built *on* *top* *of*, not is.

Okay. Linux is the kernel. What you make of it to use for servers,
desktops, routers, toasters, or your phone requires additional
components, shells, tool kits, etc. to provide the "interface" with us,
the humans. In other words *on* *top* *of*, i.e. addition to, not *in
place* of.

The reason Android apps don't run on GNU/Linux distributions is not
because of the kernel but the *stuff* in between the application layer
and the kernel. the stuff *on* *top* *of* the kernel. Not like the
almighty Mac of Independence Day that can instantly interface with an
extra-terrestrial OS to hack it. Only in the movies not in reality.


--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

On 2020-01-05, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Diesel
wrote:

from google i/o a while back:
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/android-dev/android_not_linux.png


No mater how often you say it don't make it true. Even in the age
of "alternate facts". The Linux kernel is the kernel. My servers
don't have a windows manager but they are still Linux, glibc is
not the kernel but GNU C library, and the utilities are part of
the shell not the kernel. It modular, whatever you wrap around
the kernel doesn't nullify that it is Linux.

i'm not the one saying it.

*google* states that android is not linux.

No, you misunderstood them.

there's nothing to misunderstand. it's very clear.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009...ion-to-google-
andro id-for-developers/
Although Android is built on top of the Linux kernel, the
platform has very little in common with the conventional desktop
Linux stack. In fact, during a presentation at the Google IO
conference, Google engineer Patrick Brady stated unambiguously
that Android is not Linux.

They admit it's Linux. First sentence.

first sentence says it's built *on* *top* *of*, not is.

Okay.

It's not ok. Android is Linux, you can get to command line and execute
commands, manage processes. It's Linux.
It is userland that is not GNU.... just different set of commands and
hieararchy, while filesystem processes everything is same...

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ni�emu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala

Melzzzzz wrote:
On 2020-01-05, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Diesel
wrote:

from google i/o a while back:
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/android-dev/android_not_linux.png


No mater how often you say it don't make it true. Even in the age
of "alternate facts". The Linux kernel is the kernel. My servers
don't have a windows manager but they are still Linux, glibc is
not the kernel but GNU C library, and the utilities are part of
the shell not the kernel. It modular, whatever you wrap around
the kernel doesn't nullify that it is Linux.

i'm not the one saying it.

*google* states that android is not linux.

No, you misunderstood them.

there's nothing to misunderstand. it's very clear.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009...ion-to-google-
andro id-for-developers/
Although Android is built on top of the Linux kernel, the
platform has very little in common with the conventional desktop
Linux stack. In fact, during a presentation at the Google IO
conference, Google engineer Patrick Brady stated unambiguously
that Android is not Linux.

They admit it's Linux. First sentence.

first sentence says it's built *on* *top* *of*, not is.

Okay.

It's not ok. Android is Linux, you can get to command line and execute
commands, manage processes. It's Linux.
It is userland that is not GNU.... just different set of commands and
hieararchy, while filesystem processes everything is same...


That was not *okay* as an affirmation of what proceeded but an
*Okay...wait a minute* type of okay.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 15:27:31 GMT, Melzzzzz wrote:

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:03:20 +0000, David
wrote:

On 05/01/2020 07:43, Diesel wrote:
David Fri,
03 Jan 2020 22:36:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/01/2020 21:46, Diesel wrote:
What of the post did you understand?

That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.
If Apple didn't have that it would be pointless. Their hardware their
software, what else?

But they do, which is the point.
That's what differentiates Apple from the others.

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 15:27:31 GMT, Melzzzzz wrote:

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:03:20 +0000, David
wrote:

On 05/01/2020 07:43, Diesel wrote:
David Fri,
03 Jan 2020 22:36:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/01/2020 21:46, Diesel wrote:
What of the post did you understand?

That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.
If Apple didn't have that it would be pointless. Their hardware their
software, what else?

But they do, which is the point.
That's what differentiates Apple from the others.

Yes, and that's main reason to go Apple...


--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ni�emu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala

On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 15:57:19 GMT, Melzzzzz wrote:

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 15:27:31 GMT, Melzzzzz wrote:

On 2020-01-05, flatfish+++ wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:03:20 +0000, David
wrote:

On 05/01/2020 07:43, Diesel wrote:
David Fri,
03 Jan 2020 22:36:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/01/2020 21:46, Diesel wrote:
What of the post did you understand?

That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.
If Apple didn't have that it would be pointless. Their hardware their
software, what else?

But they do, which is the point.
That's what differentiates Apple from the others.

Yes, and that's main reason to go Apple...

Yep.
As long as you are willing to pay the price.

In article , flatfish+++
wrote:

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.
If Apple didn't have that it would be pointless. Their hardware their
software, what else?

But they do, which is the point.
That's what differentiates Apple from the others.

Yes, and that's main reason to go Apple...

Yep.
As long as you are willing to pay the price.

prices are similar for similar specs.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

There seems to be a division of opinions on all of this.
So, who would be the authority on this topic?
The creators of Android, which is google.

They are not the authority.

they are for the products they create.

In article , flatfish+++
wrote:


That I'm FAR better off with Apple macOS :-D

How so?

"The integration between applications on the
desktop, with each other and the OS services, and the integration with my
iOS devices, is a huge plus."

I couldn't phrase things any better than Snit!

Thanks, Snit! :-D

Snit's actually on point about this. Example for me, I use Windows,
however I do have an iPhone and last year purchased an Apple Watch 4
which BTW is an amazing device.

So, getting it working involved charging the watch and placing it near
the iPhone. It picked up and configured networking, applications,
configuration options as they were set on my iPhone and so forth.
I was impressed.

Now would I pay 3x the going rate for a Mac as compared to a PC for
that type of integration? Or even more since I build my own systems.

prices for macs are similar to pcs with similar specs.

the only way it's '3x the going rate' is to compare wildly different
specs.

Probably not, but the Apple watch is not much more expensive than the
other alternatives and it's the only one, currently, with an approved
ECG measuring capability, at least in USA.

ecg is currently approved in 32 countries:

https://www.apple.com/lae/watchos/feature-availability/#branded-ecg

However there is no denying that Apple has the integration between
devices down to a science, as long as the user is willing to fork over
the cash for that option and many do.

there is no need to 'fork over the cash' since again, prices are
competitive for similar specs.