Ubuntu Unity Existed Before The GNOME Shell?

[entropy]

Indeed. Whether a project actually ships or not surely is the least important thing in software development. They must have gone nuts.

At least you have, it seems...

[RahulSundaram]

Even you shift between two criteria randomly.

This is not true. I have never shifted. One side has presented an objective criteria to evaluate it which is the date of origin of the repository and you have never presented any alternative. Since you are unable or unwilling to present an alternative, you have failed to convince anybody else in this thread.

[alexThunder]

have never presented any alternative

No matter how I put it, you won't get it.

This is getting hilarious

What if I told you, every possible alternative is just as nonsense as the current way?

[Hamish Wilson]

This is not true. I have never shifted. One side has presented an objective criteria to evaluate it which is the date of origin of the repository and you have never presented any alternative. Since you are unable or unwilling to present an alternative, you have failed to convince anybody else in this thread.

Indeed. You think he would have just dropped the damn thing by now.

[GreatEmerald]

This I say when you consider that basically, Unity and GNOME Shell are interfaces for Netbooks (and Tablets)

Netbooks, yes. Tablets, not so much, at least the last time I tried it. Try using scrollbars on Ubuntu Unity with touch, or navigating without a keyboard. Not a pleasant experience.

[RahulSundaram]

What if I told you, every possible alternative is just as nonsense as the current way?

You seem alone in that notion since you have failed to convince anyone else and your unsubstantiated claim that I am wavering questions your credibility as well.

[alexThunder]

You seem alone in that notion since you have failed to convince anyone else and your unsubstantiated claim that I am wavering questions your credibility as well.

For my argumentation being a failure you colleague was pretty quick in agreeing that this concept is at least "slippy". In contrast to you, he didn't deny that, but made this a specific case.

Since pointing at the previous points of the discussion seems to be asked for too much for you and having to make several attempts until you finally got what I'm after, I'm not too surprised you're not convinced yet.

You're now trying to avoid this with questioning my credbility. Sure you have some examples where I came up with false facts, which back this accusation ... do you?

[duby229]

For my argumentation being a failure you colleague was pretty quick in agreeing that this concept is at least "slippy". In contrast to you, he didn't deny that, but made this a specific case.

Since pointing at the previous points of the discussion seems to be asked for too much for you and having to make several attempts until you finally got what I'm after, I'm not too surprised you're not convinced yet.

You're now trying to avoid this with questioning my credbility. Sure you have some examples where I came up with false facts, which back this accusation ... do you?

You haven't come up with -any- facts yet. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nada. You disputed facts that were presented and then didnt provide any of your own.

[alexThunder]

You haven't come up with -any- facts yet.

That's correct, but not what was asked for.

But if it's all about facts, what facts were brought up which actually prove that the concept of dating the start of existence of a software project makes sense at all? And btw. which facts did I question?

[TemplarGR]

Stop feeding the troll people...

It is obvious that Phoronix and other opensource sites/forums are "under attack" from Canonical PR/fanbois. I have seen it all over the web. They won't accept facts because... well they won't! Let us hope a few years from now when Ubuntu will have failed miserably things like this will be a thing of the past...