On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 06:42:50 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 05:59:05 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Xfce does have a couple things that bug me (e.g. moving a
>>> vertically-maximized window unmaximizes it).
>>
>> The best thing a desktop can do is leave my damn windows alone.
>
> So no tiling window managers for you. :-)

No ratpoison here...

https://www.nongnu.org/ratpoison/

I forget which distro it was but if the mouse cursor got too close to the
upper left corner it would snap to a desktop view. It took me a while to
figure out

a. what the hell I was doing to cause it
b how to get rid of it.

I just checked. The Fedora/KDE box does it but you have to go to the
extreme corner so I hadn't triggered it unawares. If you scroll in the
taskbar with KDE it cycles through the windows. On Gnome it cycles through
the virtual desktops. I can live with that.

Sigh... While on the Fedora box I saw the updates icon. Another day,
another kernel. I updated yesterday. This one is 6.10.9 so it isn't the
absolute bleeding edge.

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:02:45 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> Explaining things to ChrisA is pretty much a waste of time. All he knows
> how to do is regurgitate CNN and the rest of the MSM. Thinking is not
> required to do this and he finds it hurts his head when he tries to do
> so.
>
> "Toothless" "Buh buh" still has working brain cells and that makes
> ChrisA jealous of him.

They're expanding on Clinton's 'basket of deplorables'. Romney wasn't any
better with his 47% remark. The political class despises their
'constituents' except for the kabuki theater every two or four years when
they have to pretend.

Le 11-09-2024, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> a écrit :
> On 9/7/2024 6:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 09:48:51 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/6/2024 11:42 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> You do not lose control of your docs when your Adobe (or MS 365)
>>> subscription ends or you stop paying.
>>
>> You can only open them read-only. You can no longer work with them. You
>> cannot even export them to a nonproprietary format.
>>
>> If that’s not “losing control”, tell me what your idea of “control over
>> your own work” is.
>>
>>>> So I rephrase my claim slightly: “Adobe is an irrelevance to 98% of
>>>> Windows users”.
>>>
>>> So?
>>
>> So Adobe users are a minority of a minority. In the whole wide (Linux-
>> dominated) world of computing, they add up to a rounding error.
>
> Desktop computing is the largest, most important segment of computing,
> and Windows has completely dominated it since 1990 or so.

Nope. The smartphone is larger. And it's dominated by android first. By
Apple second. And Windows is nowhere to be seen.

I don't speak about Linux because Android is based on Linux but it's
Windows in spirit. But nevertheless, the largest segment of computing is
not dominated by Windows.

> Desktops are the ONLY reason any of us, including you, are here.

Nope. The servers allow the Desktop computers to see themselves. So the
Desktop computers are the reason we are using computers at home. But the
servers are the only reason we can use our desktops to speak together.
And the servers are dominated by Linux.

> So why do you Linux lusers always babble about the paltry number of
> supercomputers in the world?

I don't, but the interesting part about the supercomputers in the world
is real. Because where there is supercomputers, there is real money. So
if they chose Linux, Windows, Apple, BSD, solaris, AIX or whatever, it's
for technical reasons, not to avoid some licence cost. Because when they
spend billions on computer it's to use them, not to brag about them.

So, if every supercomputer is using Linux, it's not because it's fancy,
it's because they all consider it's technically superior. It's because
they know what they do. So you can give any phoronix article about how
ubuntu with gnome is far from superior to Windows as you want: they are
not installing ubuntu with gnome and with every useless shiny crap for
beginners. They are installing Linux with only what's required to run
their computers. With a good management of ressources. Which Windows
doesn't allow them to: if Windows was as good as Linux for that, some
would know it and use Windows on some supercomputers.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 2024-09-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:02:45 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> Explaining things to ChrisA is pretty much a waste of time. All he knows
>> how to do is regurgitate CNN and the rest of the MSM. Thinking is not
>> required to do this and he finds it hurts his head when he tries to do
>> so.
>>
>> "Toothless" "Buh buh" still has working brain cells and that makes
>> ChrisA jealous of him.
>
> They're expanding on Clinton's 'basket of deplorables'. Romney wasn't any
> better with his 47% remark. The political class despises their
> 'constituents' except for the kabuki theater every two or four years when
> they have to pretend.

Yep. I put Romney in the same category as Cheney and Clinton. Neo-CONS who
want to make money for the "Deep State" with endless wars.

Romney, coming from a leverage buyout past, makes him particularly slimy.
Almost as slimy as Clinton and Cheney (and Biden and Kamala Harris).

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-09-13, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 05:59:05 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Xfce does have a couple things that bug me (e.g. moving a
>>> vertically-maximized window unmaximizes it).
>>
>> The best thing a desktop can do is leave my damn windows alone.
>
> So no tiling window managers for you. :-)

Definitely not. It's one of the first things I turn off in a new Linux Mint
Cinnamon install.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-09-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:16:02 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> My desktop computers are Dell Micro desktops (using laptop components
>> and laptop power supplies). Very quiet and small. For what I do, I see
>> no reason to ever go to a tower computer again. (I don't play Microsoft
>> video games or compile programs and these do everything I need to do and
>> they do it well.)
>
> It isn't a Micro but the last batch of Dells at work are quite a bit
> smaller than the previous generation from 6 or 8 years ago. They have no
> problem compiling complex apps.
>
> The improvements were incremental but there was a watershed a few years
> back between when compiling the source tree was time to get a cup of
> coffee and browse the web and when it became fast enough it wasn't
> worthwhile to do something else. That's the real measure of productivity
> rather than sitting there with a stopwatch.
>
> Judging from the buildapc subreddit it's the gamers that are driving the
> high end components. As a bonus you apparently get a space heater too.
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/1ff66ib/
> my_pc_turns_my_room_into_a_furnac

Yeah, two of my kids share a room with gaming computers. It's always "too
hot" in that room for them. And these are not the "super, whiz, bang"
game computers that some people seem to "need."

Dell makes much more powerful micros than the ones I use, but they're all
packed in a 7" x 7" x 1.5" container. I would imagine the fans would run
more on the high-end ones. I also note that these newer ones require "heat
tape" on added to their SSDs. I like cool, low power consumption, computers.
But, again, I have no "high end" needs.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 12:32:23 -0700, % wrote:

> never happened

You were at University of Rochester in 1982 for the conference? Take
another oxy.

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:02:45 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> Explaining things to ChrisA is pretty much a waste of time. All he knows
>> how to do is regurgitate CNN and the rest of the MSM. Thinking is not
>> required to do this and he finds it hurts his head when he tries to do
>> so.
>>
>> "Toothless" "Buh buh" still has working brain cells and that makes
>> ChrisA jealous of him.

:-D 1.5/10 on the troll-o-meter, RonB.

> They're expanding on Clinton's 'basket of deplorables'. Romney wasn't any
> better with his 47% remark. The political class despises their
> 'constituents' except for the kabuki theater every two or four years when
> they have to pretend.

Clinton was right.

Otherwise no way this demented, mean-spirited orange clown would be the leading
Republican candidate in *three* election cycles.

(Apologies to vallor :-)

--
One of my most productive days was throwing away 1,000 lines of code.
-- Ken Thompson (Attributed)
-- Ken Thompson Quote ( )

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 06:42:50 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 05:59:05 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> Xfce does have a couple things that bug me (e.g. moving a
>>>> vertically-maximized window unmaximizes it).
>>>
>>> The best thing a desktop can do is leave my damn windows alone.
>>
>> So no tiling window managers for you. :-)
>
> No ratpoison here...
>
> https://www.nongnu.org/ratpoison/
>
> I forget which distro it was but if the mouse cursor got too close to the
> upper left corner it would snap to a desktop view. It took me a while to
> figure out
>
> a. what the hell I was doing to cause it
> b how to get rid of it.
>
> I just checked. The Fedora/KDE box does it but you have to go to the
> extreme corner so I hadn't triggered it unawares. If you scroll in the
> taskbar with KDE it cycles through the windows. On Gnome it cycles through
> the virtual desktops. I can live with that.
>
> Sigh... While on the Fedora box I saw the updates icon. Another day,
> another kernel. I updated yesterday. This one is 6.10.9 so it isn't the
> absolute bleeding edge.

I've downloaded Manjaro (based on Arch) and I purchased a no-name 512Gb SSD for
about $28 bucks. Why Manjaro? Don't feel like trudging through the console
setup process for Arch for this old ASUS laptop.

Plus unfa uses/used it. Thought about some audio/midi-production-oriented
distros like Ubuntu Studio and AV Linux.

--
Logic is the chastity belt of the mind!

Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Le 11-09-2024, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> a écrit :
>> On 9/7/2024 6:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 09:48:51 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/6/2024 11:42 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You do not lose control of your docs when your Adobe (or MS 365)
>>>> subscription ends or you stop paying.
>>>
>>> You can only open them read-only. You can no longer work with them. You
>>> cannot even export them to a nonproprietary format.
>>>
>>> If that’s not “losing control”, tell me what your idea of “control over
>>> your own work” is.
>>>
>>>>> So I rephrase my claim slightly: “Adobe is an irrelevance to 98% of
>>>>> Windows users”.
>>>>
>>>> So?
>>>
>>> So Adobe users are a minority of a minority. In the whole wide (Linux-
>>> dominated) world of computing, they add up to a rounding error.
>>
>> Desktop computing is the largest, most important segment of computing,
>> and Windows has completely dominated it since 1990 or so.
>
> Nope. The smartphone is larger. And it's dominated by android first. By
> Apple second. And Windows is nowhere to be seen.
>
> I don't speak about Linux because Android is based on Linux but it's
> Windows in spirit. But nevertheless, the largest segment of computing is
> not dominated by Windows.
>
>> Desktops are the ONLY reason any of us, including you, are here.
>
> Nope. The servers allow the Desktop computers to see themselves. So the
> Desktop computers are the reason we are using computers at home. But the
> servers are the only reason we can use our desktops to speak together.
> And the servers are dominated by Linux.
>
>> So why do you Linux lusers always babble about the paltry number of
>> supercomputers in the world?

Because supercomputers (mainframes, servers) handle large numbers of connected
systems.

We're not lusers, by the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luser

Before the popularization of the Internet in the 1990s, Internet slang
defined a luser (sometimes expanded to local user; also luzer or luzzer) as
a painfully annoying, stupid, or irritating computer user. The word is a
blend of "loser" and "user". Among hackers, the word luser takes on a
broad meaning, referring to any normal user (in other words, not a "guru"),
with the implication the person is also a loser. The term is partially
interchangeable with the hacker term lamer.

The term can also signify a layman with only user account privileges, as
opposed to a power user or administrator, who has knowledge of, and access
to, superuser accounts; for example, an end luser who cannot be trusted
with a root account for system administration. It is popular with technical
support staff who have to deal with lusers as part of their job, often
metaphorically employing a LART (Luser Attitude Readjustment Tool, also
known as a clue-by-four, cluestick, or cluebat), meaning turning off the
user's access to computer resources and the like.

> <brevsnip>

--
Swipple's Rule of Order:
He who shouts the loudest has the floor.

On 13 Sep 2024 06:49:27 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 03:30:05 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 12 Sep 2024 22:57:03 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> Government doesn't equal freedom either.
>>
>> “Democracy is the worst system in the world ... apart from all the
>> others.”
>> -- Winston Churchill
>
> Winston Churchill, Destroyer of Empires.

At least he was never a slave-owner.

Another quote: “We can trust our friends the Americans to do the right
thing ... after they have tried everything else.”

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 21:24:36 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> Definitely not. It's one of the first things I turn off in a new Linux
> Mint Cinnamon install.

https://betanews.com/2024/09/12/linux-desktop-environment-cinnamon-6-4-
aims-to-fix-its-outdated-look-with-a-fresh-default-theme/

"Linux Mint has long been praised for its user-friendly design, with the
Cinnamon desktop being a core feature. However, Cinnamon's look outside
the Mint distro often leaves users unimpressed. In many distributions,
Cinnamon’s default visual style feels outdated and unrefined, giving the
impression that its aesthetics have been neglected."

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 21:23:28 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> Yep. I put Romney in the same category as Cheney and Clinton. Neo-CONS
> who want to make money for the "Deep State" with endless wars.
>
> Romney, coming from a leverage buyout past, makes him particularly
> slimy. Almost as slimy as Clinton and Cheney (and Biden and Kamala
> Harris).

I've been down on Romneys since my father bought a '62 Rambler Classic.
Part of the appeal was it still had 15" wheels when most were going to
14". He didn't like little wheels. He'd had enough by '65 and bought a
Dodge, which was a personal record in turning over a car.

George HW Bush, both Clintons, Gore, McCain, Romney, Obama, both Cheneys,
Biden, Harris, and so forth exude more slime than a semi full of garden
slugs. W was just a dumb placeholder for Cheney.

In short, copious slime is a bipartisan feature.

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 18:17:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Otherwise no way this demented, mean-spirited orange clown would be the
> leading Republican candidate in *three* election cycles.

I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got. The
GOP as defined by the #nevertrump crowd has nothing for me. He is too good
a man to be a president but the last Democrat I might have voted for was
Carter. I've mislaid part of the '70s so I doubt I did vote.

On 2024-09-13, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:02:45 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>
>>> Explaining things to ChrisA is pretty much a waste of time. All he knows
>>> how to do is regurgitate CNN and the rest of the MSM. Thinking is not
>>> required to do this and he finds it hurts his head when he tries to do
>>> so.
>>>
>>> "Toothless" "Buh buh" still has working brain cells and that makes
>>> ChrisA jealous of him.
>
>:-D 1.5/10 on the troll-o-meter, RonB.
>
>> They're expanding on Clinton's 'basket of deplorables'. Romney wasn't any
>> better with his 47% remark. The political class despises their
>> 'constituents' except for the kabuki theater every two or four years when
>> they have to pretend.
>
> Clinton was right.
>
> Otherwise no way this demented, mean-spirited orange clown would be the leading
> Republican candidate in *three* election cycles.

Really. Trump is the "mean spirited" one when Hillary Clinton shamed women
who had been raped by her pervert husband and cackled when she heard that
Qaddafi had been brutally murdered. She's a vicious and worthless hag. And
you have the gall to project Hillary Clinton's vicious evil on Trump? What a
gullible, Woke moron you are when it comes to politics. You're just a useful
idiot, part of the braindead Left.

> (Apologies to vallor :-)

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-09-14, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 18:17:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Otherwise no way this demented, mean-spirited orange clown would be the
>> leading Republican candidate in *three* election cycles.
>
> I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got. The
> GOP as defined by the #nevertrump crowd has nothing for me. He is too good
> a man to be a president but the last Democrat I might have voted for was
> Carter. I've mislaid part of the '70s so I doubt I did vote.

I remember when Reagan first ran for president. They said his divorce should
keep him from being elected president. Now we have a woman who slept her way
into politics with a married man, and a man who's been with, I don't know
how many women. In the past we had Bill Clinton, a sleaze, as president and
his vicious wife who attacked the women Clinton assaulted, who ran for
president. None of them are worth a tinker's damn — and none of them would
get my vote.

About the only person I would vote for today would be Tulsi Gabbard and,
unfortunately, she's not running. Of course the sleazy Democrats threw her
under the bridge. She had too much integrity for them.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-09-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 21:23:28 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> Yep. I put Romney in the same category as Cheney and Clinton. Neo-CONS
>> who want to make money for the "Deep State" with endless wars.
>>
>> Romney, coming from a leverage buyout past, makes him particularly
>> slimy. Almost as slimy as Clinton and Cheney (and Biden and Kamala
>> Harris).
>
> I've been down on Romneys since my father bought a '62 Rambler Classic.
> Part of the appeal was it still had 15" wheels when most were going to
> 14". He didn't like little wheels. He'd had enough by '65 and bought a
> Dodge, which was a personal record in turning over a car.
>
> George HW Bush, both Clintons, Gore, McCain, Romney, Obama, both Cheneys,
> Biden, Harris, and so forth exude more slime than a semi full of garden
> slugs. W was just a dumb placeholder for Cheney.
>
> In short, copious slime is a bipartisan feature.

Completely agree.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-09-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 21:24:36 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>
>> Definitely not. It's one of the first things I turn off in a new Linux
>> Mint Cinnamon install.
>
> https://betanews.com/2024/09/12/linux-desktop-environment-cinnamon-6-4-
> aims-to-fix-its-outdated-look-with-a-fresh-default-theme/
>
> "Linux Mint has long been praised for its user-friendly design, with the
> Cinnamon desktop being a core feature. However, Cinnamon's look outside
> the Mint distro often leaves users unimpressed. In many distributions,
> Cinnamon’s default visual style feels outdated and unrefined, giving the
> impression that its aesthetics have been neglected."
>
> Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Ugh.

Also from the article...

Distributions are generally expected to improve and customize desktop
environments to fit their style. Yet, many opt to stick with default
settings, focus on other desktop environments, or fail to invest in
making Cinnamon look more attractive. This leads to Cinnamon being
overlooked in favor of more visually refined options like GNOME or KDE
Plasma.

With all due respect, Gnome (to me) is a convoluted mess and KDE is
gimmicky. And, since Linux Mint's default desktop is Cinnamon and Linux Mint
is one of the most popular distributions out there, I don't think Cinnamon
is being *that* "overlooked."

What article writers like this man really mean, when they write this kind of
stuff, is they're projecting their own preferences on to the general public.
And we're supposed to be "shamed" because we don't want to "change Cinnamon
to make it more attractive" — in their myopic opinion? As if the writer's
taste in desktops is the end all, beat all.

Hopefully I'll still be able to use the Cinnamon Legacy theme, which is what
I prefer.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 08:33:55 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I remember when Reagan first ran for president. They said his divorce
> should keep him from being elected president. Now we have a woman who
> slept her way into politics with a married man, and a man who's been
> with, I don't know how many women. In the past we had Bill Clinton, a
> sleaze, as president and his vicious wife who attacked the women Clinton
> assaulted, who ran for president. None of them are worth a tinker's damn
> — and none of them would get my vote.

In '63 Nelson Rockefeller dumped his wife and married Happy. Most people
in NYS shrugged and figured he had traded up. The liberal branch had been
labeled 'Rockefeller Republicans' and Prescott Bush was on the bandwagon
-- until the divorce. Rockefeller was supposed to be the shoe-in in '64
until Bush torpedoed him. Goldwater got the nomination and lost
spectacularly. Montana has went blue twice and that was one of them. The
other time wasn't for love of Clinton but the Republicans lost too many
voters to Perot.

Rockefeller went on to serve 4 terms as governor and was very popular
although the Attica fiasco was counted against him. In '74 he became
Ford's vice president. Rumsfeld and the equally odious GHW Bush were on
the short list but Ford prevailed.

>
> About the only person I would vote for today would be Tulsi Gabbard and,
> unfortunately, she's not running. Of course the sleazy Democrats threw
> her under the bridge. She had too much integrity for them.

Lèse-majesté against Queen Hillary is an capital offense.

On 13 Sep 2024 19:03:47 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Dropping the NUCs may be another of their less than stellar decisions
> although the marketing wasn't great.

Overpriced attempt to compete with the Raspberry Pi. Intel probably lost
money on every one they sold.

On 14 Sep 2024 02:09:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got.

All the good democracies offer a realistic choice of more than two parties
to vote for.

And those running for election are not the ones running the election.

On 9/15/2024 7:27 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On 14 Sep 2024 02:09:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got.
>
> All the good democracies offer a realistic choice of more than two parties
> to vote for.

We have independent candidates.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/us/politics/presidential-candidates-2024.html

> And those running for election are not the ones running the election.

That's not the case in the US either. Quit your ignorant babbling.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:59:12 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 9/15/2024 7:27 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 14 Sep 2024 02:09:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got.
>>
>> All the good democracies offer a realistic choice of more than two
>> parties to vote for.
>
> We have independent candidates.

But nobody gives them a serious chance of making a dent against your
Tweedledum/Tweedledee duopoly.

>> And those running for election are not the ones running the election.
>
> That's not the case in the US either.

Look up “gerrymandering”.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 23:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 13 Sep 2024 19:03:47 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> Dropping the NUCs may be another of their less than stellar decisions
>> although the marketing wasn't great.
>
> Overpriced attempt to compete with the Raspberry Pi. Intel probably lost
> money on every one they sold.

I might go along with overpriced but most variations weren't in the same
league as the Pi. That's not taking anything away from the Pi but it's a
whole different game. From the reviews the Pi 5 is almost acceptable as a
general purpose desktop but that still isn't what its principle purpose
is.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 23:27:58 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 14 Sep 2024 02:09:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> I would wish for a more articulate candidate but it's what we've got.
>
> All the good democracies offer a realistic choice of more than two
> parties to vote for.
>
> And those running for election are not the ones running the election.

Oh, we have the Greens and Libertarians... Wait a minute -- you did say
realistic didn't you?

Democracy: periodically selecting figureheads that aren't going to do what
they promised by counting noses of people I wouldn't trust to reliably
feed the cat. Note I said 'feed' not 'eat' but you never can tell.