No announcement yet.

Canonical Plans For Usable Ubuntu Phone By Month's End

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by timothyja View Post
    What does that even mean? Your posts make no sense. Your trolling is getting worse by the day.
    Its not for your mind to understand real talk, go troll somewhere else, if you cant even understand simple sentence...


    • #32
      It's funny how Canonical brings out the troll in all of us.


      • #33
        Shut up, you're both idiots.

        Given the sheer number of smileys in use on every web forum, by people of every age, anyone who believes that 'Smileys are for kids' is clearly deluded. If you then start making that assertion on a public forum, insulting those who do use them, and then declaring those people to be 'defensive' when they respond to that, you merely make yourself look like an immature fool or a troll.

        If you're responding to a troll and criticising their reading comprehension, get your grammar right. There's enough awful grammar on this forum anyway.

        And actually getting back on-topic, I don't see the point. How does Ubuntu intend to persuade OEMs to ship their OS and not Android, when the latter has a vast range of applications, addons and accessories while the former has...erm...a different display server and some hastily-written basic apps?
        Last edited by FLHerne; 05-10-2013, 11:45 AM.


        • #34
          fuck windows. Who in the hell cares about what windows users think? I sure don't.. Canonical can snatch as many windows users as the want and it won't effect me one tiny little bit. If Canonical wants Ubuntu to be "little windows" then fuck them too.


          • #35
            Originally posted by FLHerne View Post
            And actually getting back on-topic, I don't see the point. How does Ubuntu intend to persuade OEMs to ship their OS and not Android, when the latter has a vast range of applications, addons and accessories while the former has...erm...a different display server and some hastily-written basic apps?
            Perhaps a vast range of applications is not even important to some smartphone users, if they get a nice-looking intuitive UI and better security instead.

            Furthermore new shiny smarthpone OS's will surely help with the growth of the smartphone market. There are consumerists out there who are not happy with just one smartphone, but want several with different OS's.


            • #36
              Originally posted by intellivision View Post
              All the trolls use them, and they serve no purpose on this forum.
              And why so defensive? I can hardly see why someone could get so jumpy about a little criticism.
              Guess what else "all the trolls" use? The internet. Also, words. And letters! Don't forget letters! All the trolls write words with letters on the internet. Ergo, you must be a troll. QED.

              And yeah, I'm not defensive. I just enjoy poking holes in idiotic arguments.

              I'll explain this briefly: What you were doing is called "tone-trolling". It's when you attack the tone of someone's argument (or the way they speak, the grammar they use, their use of emoticons, etc.) instead of addressing the actual content of the argument. It comes close to ad-hominem territory. Also, you're coming of ass pompous and snobby, when you complain about things like emoticons. The fact is, emoticons are a valid way of expressing subtext or emotion in textual online communications. If you can't deal with it, I suggest you ask the retirement home you're living in to cancel your internet subscription...


              • #37
                Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                Ubuntu is linux and the best way for linux name to survive is to hang with dear life with canonical since, along with Red Hat on enterprise, canonical is the face of linux. The more popular ubuntu becomes the less important the other distros will become. And that is a good thing. Too much choice confuses the users. You may not like it but it's the only way linux will survive. If you ever want to destabilize windows from its throne, help canonical. They are the only ones who have a chance on the desktop.
                It seems like you want Linux to become the new mac, only cheaper. You're hoping that Shuttleworth will become the new Jobs, an icon on a pedestal that you can follow. But see, the thing is, Linux is about freedom. It's about the people, the users, getting to choose what they want to use and how they want to use it. It's about user freedom. People who just want a shepherd to lead them, to tell them what to think and what to like and how to dress, should just stick with their macs.

                Canonical only thinks about Canonical and does not collaborate with the rest of the ecosystem. Mir is not going to benefit any real Linux distro, because every real Linux distro will be using Wayland.


                • #38
                  Originally posted by dee. View Post
                  Statcounter is not accurate. It only measures sites that are affiliated with Statcounter.
                  By all means, point me to a site that has better methodology.

                  Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                  It still uses standard GNU/Linux tools, GNU/Linux isn't bound to use systemd and Xorg. The definition is very broad and as far as most of the community can see, Ubuntu still stays within those bounds.
                  For now they do. But notice the large number of Ubuntu-exclusive programs that they use. And that's not because of technical merits (otherwise they would have been adopted by others). So Ubuntu is just making itself way more distant from what is the norm in the other distributions. It's becoming an outlier, it's not representative of GNU/Linux as a whole. That's what I don't like - it is still true that Ubuntu is the most popular distribution, and thus the first distribution new users are likely to look at, and if they see an outlier instead of something close to the average, they won't know what GNU/Linux actually is.

                  Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                  Also, I got rid of your emoticon, no person who is trying to have a serious discussion or at least put on the fa?ade that they're older than 15 years uses them, in any context.
                  Uh huh. Because text clearly carries all of the non-verbal data. This paragraph totally could not be intoned in more than one way, and in no shape or form do emoticons allow for easy identification of irony or jokes. Not at all.


                  • #39
                    About Emoticons

                    I used to have a career in "business" (retail management, actually, but that's close enough), and in business, I was bombarded on a regular basis by stats and studies estimating that written communication was only about 20% as expressive as in-person communication. Now, if you haven't encountered this claim before, you might regard it as preposterous. But if you stop to think about it, consider just all the different ways we express ourselves that is beyond just the words themselves (the problem is caused by words having multiple definitions and all of those definitions rarely being sufficient to accurately describe your thoughts). So we use additional means of communication to clarify what it is that we are trying to express. And as we get farther removed from in-person communication, the availability of non-verbal (and extra-verbal, if such a term exists?) means of communication diminishes. For example:

                    ?Your tone of voice, very important in communicating humor, anger, etc., is an available communication device in in-person, video, and voice-only communication, but is completely lost in written communication.
                    ?Your facial expression, also important for the above reasons, is available in in-person and video communication but is lost in voice-only and written communication.
                    ?Your body language, like slouching, leaning back, arms akimbo, etc., is fully apparent in in-person communication, is of diminished effectiveness in video communication, and like facial expression is non-existent in the other two.
                    ?And there's even subtler stuff, like, for example, how close you are standing to someone - very important in in-person communication, but completely lost even in video communication.

                    So, if you agree with the above, you'll reach the conclusion that if you want to communicate something, the "best" (by that I mean: most efficient and accurate) way to do so would be face-to-face, and the worst way is with written communication (ok, there's worse ways to communicate than with words, but y'all get my drift).

                    Emoticons came about because enough users of early electronic communication media agreed that the loss of non-verbal emotional expression was causing too much confusion in this kind of communication. This is how the concept first spread. Later, maybe people picked up and made it even more popular because they thought it was cute, or whatever, but that's later. The root cause, the reason why we have emoticons, is because written communication sucks a little less with them than without them.

                    So you might not like emoticons. I personally hate them. I think graphical smilies are goofy, and even the special character combo ones remind of a kid doodling in the margins of his / her notebook. But I can't deny that there are times when a smiley is far more effective at expressing something than an entire paragraph of text might be.

                    Saying that smilies don't belong on this forum is like saying that humor doesn't belong on this forum, and that every conversation must be undertaken in the gravest of tones and using only the driest and most precise language.


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                      By all means, point me to a site that has better methodology.
                      There really aren't any that I know of. The thing is, there really isn't any reliable or accurate data on web usage statistics. All of these so-called statistics websites (netcraft, statcounter et al.) are basically full of shit. Their methodologies are shoddy and biased and the statistics they produce are dubious at best. They take a small, biased sampling, use flawed methods to count visitors (counting page hits instead of unique visitors) and then they put them in pretty little graphs and sell them to people who don't know better.