Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R.I.P. Steve Jobs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    .... additionally Steve Jobs took a completely "freely avillabe OS",as we know it, BSD/Unix (specifically FreeBSD, bastardized it inti Darwin) and took it to great heights of stability and quality, why ?, becuase this is what happens when you "properly" mold hardware and drivers, together with the OS, - MacOSX.
    That was a tribute to all things Linux, as well as obviously BSD.
    Hang on, yes, he had the money and "suckered" Investors into seeing this to fruition, yes he did it for "profit", yes he did proprieterrorize/close it, ....and yes he, the greedy SoB, charged way tooo Much money for it

    Ok, and please don't bother mentioning the fact that the only reason Apple picked BSD/Unix was becuase of the "Free" BSD-Licsence. yep, We all already, generally, know that' and yes, that was the primary reason. Otherwise Linux would have been equally good, in all respects.

    But I see the glass as half-full, Steve Jobs' NeXT experiment, ultimately proved just how good Hardware built for a Linux, and a BSD can really be. ?! That is a huge "feather" in all out hats. That's a tribute.
    Steve Jobs proved that the "free" Unix's really is a better Model OS to build upon especially in this InterNETworking World.
    Most of us, linux/bsd advocates already knew this years ago.
    The point is, HE DID IT !!!
    Stallman, on the other hand, has NOT done that yet, -yet another reason we(linux/bsd/...) needs an OpenHardware model to build upon.

    So ya, R.I.P. Steve.
    Last edited by scjet; 10-11-2011, 12:53 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by scjet View Post
      Ok, and please don't bother mentioning the fact that the only reason Apple picked BSD/Unix was becuase of the "Free" BSD-Licsence. yep, We all already, generally, know that' and yes, that was the primary reason. Otherwise Linux would have been equally good, in all respects.
      ... except for the little time-travel problem -- MacOS built on Nextstep, and development work on Nextstep started ~4 years before the first version of Linux existed.
      Last edited by bridgman; 10-11-2011, 01:07 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by urfe View Post
        We, thank you for having the decency to edit it out. But I will not address your or any of your points.
        That's fine. I thought I should be polite but you confirmed it, you're a waste of time. Maybe you have Apple stock. I guess when people don't care about greed, they become apathetic and stupid.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
          No he's not. He's just a sad little man attacking a dead guy that he demonized for daring to make money from his software.
          I also emphatically said Stallman was "cold-hearted",..., regarding Job's death, if you would have read the rest of my post, since u were likely searching all posts' in here with "Stallman" in the words.
          so I do agree with you on that point. Stallman, enotionally is a fanatical retard. But the underlying philosopdy of GPL is another different fact.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            ... except for the little time-travel problem -- MacOS built on Nextstep, and development work on Nextstep started ~4 years before the first version of Linux existed.
            point taken, thankyou for correcting that. the end result became the same,... nonetheless. -Lol

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by scjet View Post
              I also emphatically said Stallman was "cold-hearted",..., regarding Job's death, if you would have read the rest of my post, since u were likely searching all posts' in here with "Stallman" in the words.
              so I do agree with you on that point. Stallman, enotionally is a fanatical retard. But the underlying philosopdy of GPL is another different fact.
              I don't see why Stallman has to be described as 'cold-hearted', or emotionally a fanatical retard. In that post he was very correct (not necessarily politically though, but that just means he didn't lie and mask his opinion with some politically sounding bullocks) and to the point. He said it VERY clearly, with every bit of compression as you'd expect from a human being. Do I need to quote it to all of you? Here:

              Steve Jobs, the pioneer of the computer as a jail made cool, designed to sever fools from their freedom, has died.

              As Chicago Mayor Harold Washington said of the corrupt former Mayor Daley, "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." Nobody deserves to have to die - not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing.
              Yes. He's practically saying he doesn't care if jobs went off to live on a remote island. He's happy he's gone, he's happy his malign influence is not there anymore to disrupt the minds and enslave so many.

              I mean, what the hell is wrong with this world? A power obsessive, self indulgent, tyrannical 'businessman' as some of you would have it here gets recognised for making the world is a much worse place, and a person who works all his life, very diligently and with an unfaltering and truthful attitude, being vocal and true about his beliefs everywhere, in order to make a better world for everyone, gets the gall and hate of everyone? What is wrong with people? Is money a religion so strong that it would completely twist your sense of what's wrong and right? It doesn't matter whether your grandmas can compiler her software or even cares the least bit about anything related to computers. It is a total logical flaw to think that the level, amount or specific possibility of application or real physical application of some right should be decisive in whether the right itself should exist or not. So should anyone out there who doesn't exercise their right to free speech (if it exists where they live) be devoid of the right to use it? Because I'd be really happy to see all the apple fanboys shut the **** up.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by scjet View Post
                But the underlying philosopdy of GPL is another different fact.
                And what philosophy is that? To have a license that is so confusing even one of its authors can't seem to follow it correctly?

                The philosophy of sharing code existed before that man and it will exist long after he's gone.

                Comment


                • #68
                  How exactly is Steve Jobs 'greedy and evil', when the man drove a 2008 car and owned a 1960 motorcycle, his wife has several charitable organisations, he donated moeney to fight AIDS in Africa and tore down his house to build a smaller one with only 5 bedrooms and a three-car garage? And stop comparing him to Bill Gates or his actions, he's not even in the Top 100 wealthiest men. But, hey, if he keeps shares in the industries he helped create or shaped (Pixar-Disney, Apple) he's a demon! And if I highlight this, then decency goes out the window - because Free Software and GPL... well, something.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                    No he's not. He's just a sad little man attacking a dead guy that he demonized for daring to make money from his software.
                    Bullshit much? Stallman's problem with Jobs is that of limited end-user freedom, not exactly surprising given that the rights of end-users is everything Stallman is about. Whether or not Jobs made money from his software obviously has nothing to do with it (companies ARE making lots of money from GPL-licenced code). It's ok not to agree with Stallman, but why resort to lies rather than voice REAL arguments (assuming you have any) ? And I'm someone who DOES NOT subscribe to Stallman's vilification of proprietary code and will argue against that when such discussion arise.

                    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                    The philosophy of sharing code existed before that man and it will exist long after he's gone.
                    Certainly, but the licence he created is and will most likely remain the most popular open source licence by far.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Del_ View Post
                      Please refrain from such statements. Neither of us should rejoice over anybody's death.

                      I have my grievances with Apple and Steve Jobs, but they did a lot of good stuff too. I am grateful for their contributions to CUPS and xserver. Moreover, they help to promote OpenGL and even initiated OpenCL.
                      Ok so If I come to your house and beat you senseless and toture you then your family and people who care about you are not allowed to rejoice over my death. You said it first. Or was that statement just hipocracy?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X