Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alan Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Racist Apple is targeting blacks only and abusing white women to do it. Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 17:23:46 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 90 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 02:23:47 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="50e8cbd539d98daf6758af8fdd487a78"; logging-data="1907550"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+e8OnE9Mp4RyLL7J3gqywaznbw4D/NPsc=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:eOWCL2OFsSsOc23JTe7FL4tQLAM= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-CA Bytes: 3909 On 2024-12-11 17:21, Joel wrote: > Alan wrote: > >>>> You still can't find a single specific way in which Linux software is >>>> superior. >>>> >>>> Got it. >>> >>> It's the overall experience. Linux easily passes the bar. >> >> Another non-answer... > > > Play an MP3 on Audacious and it's just as good as Winamp. Write a > letter with LibreOffice, although admittedly it's just as great on > Winblows too. You give up nothing of real value by using Linux. And how are those comparisons with macOS; the subject under discussion? > > >>>>>> You think "Forte Agent" is something special do you? >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you do with it that I cannot do with Thunderbird? >>>>> >>>>> It's the most comprehensive GUI interface I've seen for Usenet. >>>> >>>> And you can't run it on Linux... >>> >>> You can, with Wine. >> >> Then you're admitting that Linux needs the help of Windows software to >> be "superior". > > > Not very much of it. Still, it's an admission that Linux can't cut it without Windows. What else do you run under WiNE? > > >>>>> [Microsoft Windows] File Explorer has features embedded in right-clicks. >>>> So does the [Apple Mac] Finder. >>> >>> "The" Finder. You talk about it like it's not just some second-rate >>> crapp by Apple. Really hilarious. >> >> That's just how it has always been referred to. > > > Yeah, they tricked you into mimicking the phrasing. Who cares? > > >> But I guess it was a great way to avoid admitting you were wrong. >> >> :-) > > > I never saw Finder to have the robust features of M$'s file browser. Name ONE feature you used that you didn't see in the Finder? > > >>>> Contextual menus were introduce to Mac OS in version 8... >>>> >>>> ...in 1997. >>>> >>>> At just the same time as they added support for a second mouse button. >>>> >>>> Imagine that! >>>> >>>> Try again, but maybe check your work before you speak. >>> >>> My memory of such with Snow Leopard was that it was very basic. >> So your entire claim that macOS is "inferior" and "simple" is more than >> 15 years out of date. >> >> Got it. > > > I had the MacBook in 2010. It was an experiment. I ended up not > liking macOS. Nevertheless, you pontificate 14 years later as if you know all about how macOS works today.