On 8/9/2024 5:59 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:

> Rather that invest 3,000 USD on new hardware for a GNU/Linux
> machine, I have decided to just update my hardware with a new
> processor:
>
> Xeon W 2245
>
> The prices are dropping. This processor has 6 (12) cores and
> has more cache that my current Xeon 4 core.

8 cores, 16 threads

> Since most professional FOSS software, like PovRay, exploits
> cores this will be a definite improvement at far less cost.
>
> The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.

For a little less money the newer AMD 7800X3D will smoke that Xeon, same
8/16 cores/threads, less electricity, less heat, DDR5 and ECC memory,
huge L3 cache, integrated graphics, supports AVX/2/512 instructions.

You'll need an AM5 socket mobo and a CPU cooler.

> The Linux kernel needs to be compiled to accomodate the 6(12)
> cores, and I also have an NVidia Turing-based card.
>
> It will be a good machine at a very good price.
>
> Only possible with GNU/Linux.

Of course not, hobo.

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>On 8/9/2024 5:59 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:
>
>> Rather that invest 3,000 USD on new hardware for a GNU/Linux
>> machine, I have decided to just update my hardware with a new
>> processor:
>>
>> Xeon W 2245
>>
>> The prices are dropping. This processor has 6 (12) cores and
>> has more cache that my current Xeon 4 core.
>
>8 cores, 16 threads
>
>> Since most professional FOSS software, like PovRay, exploits
>> cores this will be a definite improvement at far less cost.
>>
>> The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.
>
>For a little less money the newer AMD 7800X3D will smoke that Xeon, same
>8/16 cores/threads, less electricity, less heat, DDR5 and ECC memory,
>huge L3 cache, integrated graphics, supports AVX/2/512 instructions.
>
>You'll need an AM5 socket mobo and a CPU cooler.

So he doesn't know crap about hardware, and runs crippled barebones
Linux on what he jumbles together. Just an unbelievable moron. It's
hilarious that the advocates reject him, even though he's the noisiest
of us. What a retard.

>> The Linux kernel needs to be compiled to accomodate the 6(12)
>> cores, and I also have an NVidia Turing-based card.
>>
>> It will be a good machine at a very good price.
>>
>> Only possible with GNU/Linux.
>
>Of course not, hobo.

Yeah, because running a stock distro would not be something he'd
notice the difference on, it's all in his demented little mind. M$
doesn't release different compiles of their OS, nor do most distros,
why because it's pointless. What's 1/10 of half a second, or
whatever, who the fuck could care less about all this compiling,
painstaking configuration, lack of real GUI interface, lack of modern
Web browsing, just retarded, idiotic. Larry needs to face reality.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 8/9/2024 7:30 PM, Joel wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 8/9/2024 5:59 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:
>>
>>> Rather that invest 3,000 USD on new hardware for a GNU/Linux
>>> machine, I have decided to just update my hardware with a new
>>> processor:
>>>
>>> Xeon W 2245
>>>
>>> The prices are dropping. This processor has 6 (12) cores and
>>> has more cache that my current Xeon 4 core.
>>
>> 8 cores, 16 threads
>>
>>> Since most professional FOSS software, like PovRay, exploits
>>> cores this will be a definite improvement at far less cost.
>>>
>>> The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.
>>
>> For a little less money the newer AMD 7800X3D will smoke that Xeon, same
>> 8/16 cores/threads, less electricity, less heat, DDR5 and ECC memory,
>> huge L3 cache, integrated graphics, supports AVX/2/512 instructions.
>>
>> You'll need an AM5 socket mobo and a CPU cooler.
>
>
> So he doesn't know crap about hardware, and runs crippled barebones
> Linux on what he jumbles together. Just an unbelievable moron. It's
> hilarious that the advocates reject him, even though he's the noisiest
> of us. What a retard.

Some of the old Xeons are great chips for the money.

Have you seen what's going on with Intel lately? A high % of their 13th
and 14th gen chips are exhibiting serious instabilities due to voltage
and/or oxidation issues caused by Intel. And their response has been
less than forthcoming. They also recently laid off 15,000 employees,
are being sued by shareholders, and the CEO was caught on tape referring
to employees as "wood to be chopped".

I always had good experiences with Intel chips, but I'm sticking with
AMD for my current and next 1 or 2 processors.

>>> The Linux kernel needs to be compiled to accomodate the 6(12)
>>> cores, and I also have an NVidia Turing-based card.
>>>
>>> It will be a good machine at a very good price.
>>>
>>> Only possible with GNU/Linux.
>>
>> Of course not, hobo.
>
>
> Yeah, because running a stock distro would not be something he'd
> notice the difference on, it's all in his demented little mind. M$
> doesn't release different compiles of their OS, nor do most distros,
> why because it's pointless. What's 1/10 of half a second, or
> whatever, who the fuck could care less about all this compiling,
> painstaking configuration, lack of real GUI interface, lack of modern
> Web browsing, just retarded, idiotic. Larry needs to face reality.

His goal is minimal layers of code between him and the machine. I
personally think it's insane to spend so much time compiling and
wrestling with Linux, but it's his life and time.

No different than any serious hobby, I guess. I used to play and
practice golf 4 hrs a day 5 days a week. It got me nowhere, except for
one round of 80 (and confidence with every club in the bag save the sand
wedge). But I LOVED it for a while.

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:03:47 -0400, DFS wrote:

> I always had good experiences with Intel chips, but I'm sticking with
> AMD for my current and next 1 or 2 processors.

I've always had a preference for AMD but with Intel's Polluted Lake
problems and AMD's Ryzen successes Intel may be the underdog. My
preference may go back to Intel versus Zilog in sort of a #neverintel way
although I can't complain about the i5 in the Fedora box.

Le 09-08-2024, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> a écrit :
> On 8/9/2024 5:59 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:
>
>> Only possible with GNU/Linux.
>
> Of course not, hobo.

Depend what he means by this and how Microsoft manages the licences now.
If he means only Linux can run some intel/AMD processors, of course it's
wrong. If he means only on Linux you can improve your computer, I don't
know. Some time ago, When you had a Microsoft licence, it was for a
computer and you couldn't change more than five components. So in this
meaning, he's not totally wrong.

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

rbowman wrote:

> some dumb fsck wrote:
>>
>> I always had good experiences with Intel chips, but I'm sticking with
>> AMD for my current and next 1 or 2 processors.
>
>I've always had a preference for AMD but with Intel's Polluted Lake
>problems and AMD's Ryzen successes Intel may be the underdog. My
>preference may go back to Intel versus Zilog in sort of a #neverintel way
>although I can't complain about the i5 in the Fedora box.

Being a lifelong Intel guy, I don't know what I'd do, if I wanted to
build a PC today. I probably just wouldn't, and wait to see how
Intel's microcode update for Raptor Lake works out, and also Arrow
Lake coming soon.

My daughter has been running her i7-13700k for a year and a half and
has had no problems.

--
"The middle 32 characters look very random - but it looks like you
stop at the letter 'f'. * why stop at letter f?" - DumFSck, putting
his ignorance on display

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 8/9/2024 5:59 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:
>>
>>> Rather that invest 3,000 USD on new hardware for a GNU/Linux
>>> machine, I have decided to just update my hardware with a new
>>> processor:
>>>
>>> Xeon W 2245
>>>
>>> The prices are dropping. This processor has 6 (12) cores and
>>> has more cache that my current Xeon 4 core.
>>
>> 8 cores, 16 threads
>>
>>> Since most professional FOSS software, like PovRay, exploits
>>> cores this will be a definite improvement at far less cost.
>>>
>>> The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.
>>
>> For a little less money the newer AMD 7800X3D will smoke that Xeon, same
>> 8/16 cores/threads, less electricity, less heat, DDR5 and ECC memory,
>> huge L3 cache, integrated graphics, supports AVX/2/512 instructions.
>>
>> You'll need an AM5 socket mobo and a CPU cooler.
>
>
> So he doesn't know crap about hardware, and runs crippled barebones
> Linux on what he jumbles together. Just an unbelievable moron. It's
> hilarious that the advocates reject him, even though he's the noisiest
> of us. What a retard.

I saw this thread’s subject line and thought “what, again?”: seems that
Feeb throws away his Pennie’s with incremental changes which he hopes
improve performance every few months instead of going slower & making
system changes which would be a step up…and he’d probably save money in the
longer run (eg, $3K every 3 years is ~20% less than $400 every 4 months).

>>> The Linux kernel needs to be compiled to accomodate the 6(12)
>>> cores, and I also have an NVidia Turing-based card.
>>>
>>> It will be a good machine at a very good price.
>>>
>>> Only possible with GNU/Linux.
>>
>> Of course not, hobo.
>
>
> Yeah, because running a stock distro would not be something he'd
> notice the difference on, it's all in his demented little mind. M$
> doesn't release different compiles of their OS, nor do most distros,
> why because it's pointless. What's 1/10 of half a second, or
> whatever, who the fuck could care less about all this compiling,
> painstaking configuration, lack of real GUI interface, lack of modern
> Web browsing, just retarded, idiotic. Larry needs to face reality.

Indeed. It’s been easily a decade that most contemporary hardware has
become “good enough” for mainstream applications such that one doesn’t need
to scratch for the last 5% in performance. It’s why useful lifespans have
extended so much…

…and we have Feeb here salivating over a cpu originally released nearly 5
years ago (4Q2019).

-hh

-hh wrote:

> Joel wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, because running a stock distro would not be something he'd
>> notice the difference on, it's all in his demented little mind. M$
>> doesn't release different compiles of their OS, nor do most distros,
>> why because it's pointless. What's 1/10 of half a second, or
>> whatever, who the fuck could care less about all this compiling,
>> painstaking configuration, lack of real GUI interface, lack of modern
>> Web browsing, just retarded, idiotic. Larry needs to face reality.
>
>Indeed. It’s been easily a decade that most contemporary hardware has
>become “good enough” for mainstream applications such that one doesn’t need
>to scratch for the last 5% in performance. It’s why useful lifespans have
>extended so much…
>
>…and we have Feeb here salivating over a cpu originally released nearly 5
>years ago (4Q2019).

You guys are too hard on Fabian. He's doing it his way, and there's
nothing wrong with that.

Of course, he's also trolling the group...

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>
>> Joel wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, because running a stock distro would not be something he'd
>>> notice the difference on, it's all in his demented little mind. M$
>>> doesn't release different compiles of their OS, nor do most distros,
>>> why because it's pointless. What's 1/10 of half a second, or
>>> whatever, who the fuck could care less about all this compiling,
>>> painstaking configuration, lack of real GUI interface, lack of modern
>>> Web browsing, just retarded, idiotic. Larry needs to face reality.
>>
>> Indeed. It’s been easily a decade that most contemporary hardware has
>> become “good enough” for mainstream applications such that one doesn’t need
>> to scratch for the last 5% in performance. It’s why useful lifespans have
>> extended so much…
>>
>> …and we have Feeb here salivating over a cpu originally released nearly 5
>> years ago (4Q2019).
>
> You guys are too hard on Fabian. He's doing it his way, and there's
> nothing wrong with that.

He’s more than welcome to do whatever he wants, but when he includes
clearly wrong claims, he can be called out on those errors.

> Of course, he's also trolling the group...

But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!

-hh

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
>of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
>that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!

I would assert that it's *piracy* that says one's a cheapskate, not
the use of an open-source platform.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>>But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
>>of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
>>that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>
>I would assert that it's *piracy* that says one's a cheapskate, not
>the use of an open-source platform.

Note that I don't care about piracy of Windows, of course, they allow
it to be run without being activated anyway, but M$ certainly deserves
to deal with unactivated and pirated copies, I might've thought of my
Windows license as being expensive, but really I just didn't care, it
was about purchasing it in that manner.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

-hh wrote:

>the Linux fanboys who insist
>that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!

Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down
as yet another of his lies.

I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
someone decent please let me know.

--
'So apparently, marketshare is now a metric of product "goodness", now
that it isn't held by Microsoft or Apple? Interesting turn of the
worm.' - lying asshole "-hh", lying shamelessly

Joel wrote:

> -highhorse wrote:
>>
>>But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
>>of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
>>that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>
>I would assert that it's *piracy* that says one's a cheapskate, not
>the use of an open-source platform.

If it's not illegal or immoral, there's nothing wrong with it.

There's obviously nothing wrong with considering value in every
product that we choose. I suppose that most people are like myself,
"cheap" in some regards, but willing to spend more than most people in
other regards. Only stupid, inferior beings, like -highhorse, attack
others' choices in allocating their resources.

chrisv wrote:

>Only stupid, inferior beings, like -highhorse, attack
>others' choices in allocating their resources.

Outside of pathological scenarios, of course. Allocating all of one's
resources to lottery tickets, or crack cocaine, would be worthy of
criticism.

chrisv wrote:

>> Joel wrote:
>>
>> -highhorse wrote:
>>>
>>>But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
>>>of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
>>>that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>>
>>I would assert that it's *piracy* that says one's a cheapskate, not
>>the use of an open-source platform.
>
>If it's not illegal or immoral, there's nothing wrong with it.
>
>There's obviously nothing wrong with considering value in every
>product that we choose. I suppose that most people are like myself,
>"cheap" in some regards, but willing to spend more than most people in
>other regards. Only stupid, inferior beings, like -highhorse, attack
>others' choices in allocating their resources.

I should have added that the vast majority of Linux advocacy has got
nothing to do with saving money. It's about freedom, choice, privacy,
security, flexibility and performance.

On 2024-08-11 5:45 p.m., chrisv wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>
>> the Linux fanboys who insist
>> that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>
> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down
> as yet another of his lies.
>
> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
> someone decent please let me know.

As far as I know, everyone here except for Joel Crump and Larry
Pietraskiewicz have good salaries and can afford to buy software if they
need it. Linux is clearly a preference, not a necessity.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>
>> the Linux fanboys who insist
>> that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>
> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down
> as yet another of his lies.

From the OP’s very first post in this thread:

“The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.”

> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
> someone decent please let me know.

Expect chrisv’s face-saving spin attempt to be that it doesn’t count
because Feeb is “trolling.” /s

-hh

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>> -hh wrote:
>>
>>> But of course, since with his nickel & dime’ing his system with upgrades
>>> of half-decade old CPUs, he’s also trolling the Linux fanboys who insist
>>> that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about being a cheapskate!
>>
>> I would assert that it's *piracy* that says one's a cheapskate, not
>> the use of an open-source platform.

Piracy is an interesting topic on this, because it illustrates that its
practitioners clearly believe the genuine MS product to be so much better
than Linux that they’re willing to commit a criminal act (vs zero risk of
FOSS) to get & use it.

Likewise, I can recall an old thread where it had been reported that a ton
of white box PCs in India were being sold with Linux installed … but what
the fanboys didn’t want to acknowledge was that their Linux marketshare
wasn’t increasing. It seems that that Linux factory install was
specifically to circumvent anti-piracy efforts at this source - - once the
hardware was locally delivered, the pre-installed Linux was deleted to get
pirated installs of MS Windows put on.

> Note that I don't care about piracy of Windows, of course, they allow
> it to be run without being activated anyway, but M$ certainly deserves
> to deal with unactivated and pirated copies, I might've thought of my
> Windows license as being expensive, but really I just didn't care, it
> was about purchasing it in that manner.

Have a friend who used to work in MS Legal on international piracy stuff -
my recollections are that the detected fraud rates were extremely high in
some countries (Asia, India, etc), but I can no longer recall if it was
over or under 50%. In any event, that freeloading has a cost that gets
carried by the honest customers (just like US tax dodgers), often in
indirect ways that aren’t particularly obvious.

-hh

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:47:31 +0100, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote in
<662941826.745137670.516857.recscuba_google-huntzinger.com@news.eternal-
september.org>:

> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> -hh wrote:
>>
>>> the Linux fanboys who insist that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about
>>> being a cheapskate!
>>
>> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down as
>> yet another of his lies.
>
> From the OP’s very first post in this thread:
>
> “The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.”
>
>
>> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
>> someone decent please let me know.
>
> Expect chrisv’s face-saving spin attempt to be that it doesn’t count
> because Feeb is “trolling.” /s
>
> -hh

Very disingenuous. You haven't met the challenge.

Some people are cost-conscious about their systems -- including
their OS -- and some want a better OS than Windows.

Linux is arguably better for millions of desktops,
and mine is one of them.

But nobody here has ever said using Linux is _never_
about cost, because that would be stupid. Again,
the challenge is not met.

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.11.0-rc2 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"Oxymoron: Soviet Life." (how old are these taglines? hmm)

vallor wrote:

> -highhorse wrote:
>> chrisv wrote:
>>> -hh wrote:
>>>
>>>> the Linux fanboys who insist that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about
>>>> being a cheapskate!
>>>
>>> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down as
>>> yet another of his lies.
>>
>> From the OP’s very first post in this thread:
>>
>> “The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.”

That doesn't support your attack, liar.

>>> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
>>> someone decent please let me know.
>>
>> Expect chrisv’s face-saving spin attempt to be that it doesn’t count
>> because Feeb is “trolling.” /s

The only face that needs saving is yours, -highhorse. Unfortunately
for you, you failed to save it.

>Very disingenuous. You haven't met the challenge.
>
>Some people are cost-conscious about their systems -- including
>their OS -- and some want a better OS than Windows.
>
>Linux is arguably better for millions of desktops,
>and mine is one of them.
>
>But nobody here has ever said using Linux is _never_
>about cost, because that would be stupid. Again,
>the challenge is not met.

-highhorse *lied* to attack, as he so wont to do.

--
"the Linux fanboys who insist that Linux advocacy is never, ever,
about being a cheapskate!" - lying asshole "-hh", lying shamelessly

CrudeSausage wrote:

>As far as I know, everyone here except for Joel Crump and Larry
>Pietraskiewicz have good salaries and can afford to buy software if they
>need it. Linux is clearly a preference, not a necessity.

Almost no one uses Linux because it costs less than Windows.

OTOH, Linux and Windows users will often choose FOSS applications over
payware mostly because they are free. Quite sensible.

Windows users are far more likely to pirate payware, of course.

On 2024-08-12 3:00 a.m., vallor wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:47:31 +0100, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
> wrote in
> <662941826.745137670.516857.recscuba_google-huntzinger.com@news.eternal-
> september.org>:
>
>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> -hh wrote:
>>>
>>>> the Linux fanboys who insist that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about
>>>> being a cheapskate!
>>>
>>> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down as
>>> yet another of his lies.
>>
>> From the OP’s very first post in this thread:
>>
>> “The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.”
>>
>>
>>> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
>>> someone decent please let me know.
>>
>> Expect chrisv’s face-saving spin attempt to be that it doesn’t count
>> because Feeb is “trolling.” /s
>>
>> -hh
>
> Very disingenuous. You haven't met the challenge.
>
> Some people are cost-conscious about their systems -- including
> their OS -- and some want a better OS than Windows.
>
> Linux is arguably better for millions of desktops,
> and mine is one of them.
>
> But nobody here has ever said using Linux is _never_
> about cost, because that would be stupid. Again,
> the challenge is not met.

On the topic of cost, I should mention that while I _could_ buy software
to do the same thing as Betterbird, Handbrake or MakeMKV, all three do
such a good job that there is no need to spend money on an annual
license. That's another problem with proprietary software nowadays: the
fact that you can't buy a version anymore; you can only buy a year's
worth of updates.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On 2024-08-12 8:11 a.m., chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> As far as I know, everyone here except for Joel Crump and Larry
>> Pietraskiewicz have good salaries and can afford to buy software if they
>> need it. Linux is clearly a preference, not a necessity.
>
> Almost no one uses Linux because it costs less than Windows.

Well, I'm sure that some do, especially if they're building their own
machines and don't want to spend $200 on a license. If you bought a
machine pre-built, you don't notice the cost of Windows but you would if
you're buying each piece separately. For what it's worth, back when the
first Ubuntu came out, I opted not to buy a Windows license specifically
because simply using the distribution would cut costs. It did an
admirable job, but in the end I felt I needed Windows.

> OTOH, Linux and Windows users will often choose FOSS applications over
> payware mostly because they are free. Quite sensible.
>
> Windows users are far more likely to pirate payware, of course.

I try to avoid pirating anything because I feel that those companies and
its employees deserve to eat. In my case, open-source is simply more
familiar and more than good enough for what I need. To give you an
example, I have a license for Outlook 2021, but I'm using Betterbird
because:

a) GnuPG is implemented in the software without the need for an extension.
b) Usenet is implemented without the need for a second program.
c) Message filtering is intuitive and works as it should.
d) CardDAV and CalDAV are implemented directly and supports both being
encrypted through its support for GnuPG.

Other than the proprietary eM Client which requires an annual
subscription, I can't think of a program that does all of the above _well_.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:47:31 +0100, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
> wrote in
> <662941826.745137670.516857.recscuba_google-huntzinger.com@news.eternal-
> september.org>:
>
>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> -hh wrote:
>>>
>>>> the Linux fanboys who insist that Linux advocacy is never, ever, about
>>>> being a cheapskate!
>>>
>>> Unless -highhorse can quote someone saying that, the above goes down as
>>> yet another of his lies.
>>
>> From the OP’s very first post in this thread:
>>
>> “The 2245 is about $400 and that's CHEAP.”
>>
>>
>>> I will delete his response, unread. If he produces a quote (he won't)
>>> someone decent please let me know.
>>
>> Expect chrisv’s face-saving spin attempt to be that it doesn’t count
>> because Feeb is “trolling.” /s
>>
>> -hh
>
> Very disingenuous. You haven't met the challenge.

It was sufficient AFAIC for chrisv, because if I would have cited RonB or
others saying “expensive”/etc, then chrisv would pedantically gone after it
for not literally using the word “cheap”.

>
> Some people are cost-conscious about their systems -- including
> their OS -- and some want a better OS than Windows.

But of course. And for everyone, the value paradigm has their own
personality unique weightings of the many different contributing factors.
Nevertheless, based on what the COLA boys themselves say, it is evident
that the magnitude of weightings for fiscal cost does trend substantially
higher than the others … and the whole “freedom from corporate
surveillance” bit is quite lacking in substantive discussions here on
implementing solutions for that, such as Tor or VPNs.

> Linux is arguably better for millions of desktops,
> and mine is one of them.

Sure, but your job is to manage a boatload of Linux servers. That’s not a
particularly common use case.

>
> But nobody here has ever said using Linux is _never_
> about cost, because that would be stupid. Again,
> the challenge is not met.

Nor have I said it is _exclusively_ about only costs either: “The lady, she
doth protest too much.”

-hh

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2024-08-12 8:11 a.m., chrisv wrote:
>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> As far as I know, everyone here except for Joel Crump and Larry
>>> Pietraskiewicz have good salaries and can afford to buy software if they
>>> need it. Linux is clearly a preference, not a necessity.
>>
>> Almost no one uses Linux because it costs less than Windows.
>
> Well, I'm sure that some do, especially if they're building their own
> machines and don't want to spend $200 on a license.

I used to be that way.

But I did finally break down and bought a new Windows license ~2 years ago.

> If you bought a
> machine pre-built, you don't notice the cost of Windows but you would if
> you're buying each piece separately. For what it's worth, back when the
> first Ubuntu came out, I opted not to buy a Windows license specifically
> because simply using the distribution would cut costs. It did an
> admirable job, but in the end I felt I needed Windows.

Pretty much my conclusion too: there’s a few tasks that just don’t
functionally work well enough under Linux or Mac, such that forking up to
have a Winbox is a path of less resistance (eg, fewer headaches).

>> OTOH, Linux and Windows users will often choose FOSS applications over
>> payware mostly because they are free. Quite sensible.
>>
>> Windows users are far more likely to pirate payware, of course.
>
> I try to avoid pirating anything because I feel that those companies and
> its employees deserve to eat. In my case, open-source is simply more
> familiar and more than good enough for what I need.

It’s the value paradigm: being good (or even ‘better’) while at a lower
functional lifecycle cost results in a winning combination…and there’s
ample FOSS examples of this. Of course, there’s also “crappy but free” as
well as “crappy but expensive” too - it inevitably should shake out with
the non-FOSS stuff losing out in the competitive marketplace.

> To give you an
> example, I have a license for Outlook 2021, but I'm using Betterbird
> because:
>
> a) GnuPG is implemented in the software without the need for an extension.
> b) Usenet is implemented without the need for a second program.
> c) Message filtering is intuitive and works as it should.
> d) CardDAV and CalDAV are implemented directly and supports both being
> encrypted through its support for GnuPG.
>
> Other than the proprietary eM Client which requires an annual
> subscription, I can't think of a program that does all of the above _well_.
>

I’ve been debating setting up an Outlook client again, as there’s still
some things it does quite well that are lacking in other email apps - for
example, Apple’s Mail app is downright bad at alphabetical based search
jumps, and text searches overall.

-hh