Subj : Re: Windows vs Linux To : boraxman From : tenser Date : Wed Apr 27 2022 01:19:21 On 26 Apr 2022 at 12:12a, boraxman pondered and said... bo> te> I think I've been very civil and polite with you. bo> bo> As have I. And I say this with all due respect, but your style of bo> debate is somewhat difficult to digest. One brings up general ideas bo> which impact a majority of people, and you debunk it with a corner case bo> which may affect a few, if any. Perhaps you find my style difficult to digest, and perhaps it is. However, the issue I have with your argument is that you make general assertions that are poorly supported, mostly through anecdotal evidence and appeals to authority, that are logically inconsistent, and then use those to make inferences that do not follow. You also have a tendency to go from one topic to something tangentially related. Recall that the genesis of this discussion was your assertion that you don't want to see Linux become easier to use because you fear losing something in return. My response has always been that I don't see how there's anything specific to Linux in particular that cannot be replicated elsewhere (really, if Linux becomes what you fear, simply move to FreeBSD, etc). It is unclear to me what the Unix pipelines and the composibility of tools has to do with it, and that seems like a non sequitur. Any really, the Linux people have no desire to take away your ability to do the sorts of things you appear to want to do. It's not going to happen. And if it did, you could fork your own distro: that's how it works. bo> I don't particularly like a debating style which gets bogged in bo> technicalities. They are, to me, disingenuous and a waste of time. It bo> seems a common debating style, and one I'm not interested in, as it bo> doesn't resolve any problems, other than to make one person claim to be bo> correct over the other. bo> bo> I'm not suggesting you're doing this deliberately, but I can't see value bo> in it and whether "technically" Windows is POSIX or not doesn't interest bo> me, nor matter, nor does it matter if "technically" there is a chip on bo> my computer which might be closed off and has at the moment, little bo> practical different on the choices I can make. Meanwhile, you simply ignore those parts of the counter argument that you don't want to address. You speak of using Linux because it gives you some kind of "freedom" to make the computer yours via customizations, but ignore how firmware fits into that puzzle (or, more precisely, doesn't). Similarly, you counter the very real issue of "free" Linux not supporting useful domain tools with a general poo-poo'ing of Windows. The more general point is that you -- yes, you, specifically -- don't actually _know_ what's running on your computer. That's kind of fine, most users don't and frankly, and most people don't care. Which is the point: most users running Windows don't care, either. Do you not see the fundamental similarity between yourself, who doesn't know or care what the firmware does, or what runs in SMM mode, or what's on the ME in your CPU (or how power sequencing, DRAM timing training, or any of the myriad random things that happen in a modern computer _outside of the view, let alone control, of the host operating system_, and the user who chooses to run Windows because they just want to get some work done? That's not dumbing anything down, as you have suggested, but rather simply using the machine for its intended purpose: as a tool. Put another way, those who make other choices than you aren't fools, so don't treat them with foolish contempt. Do not fear the unwashed masses desiring to make Linux more _useful for themselves_. The point is that Linux is not some maximally open system that should be reserved for the anointed few; it's just a Unix-like kernel, and that sort of elitist gatekeeping is obnoxious, particularly if you can't see the obvious holes in the argument. bo> It wasn't my intent to be rude, it just seems like you are arguing bo> tangental points, and thinking that any argument that can be made, is bo> one with veracity. What I think is going on here is that you have strongly held opinions about this stuff, but they're not terribly well supported and, I'm sorry to say it, somewhat naive. You don't seem to be particularly open to looking at different points of view on the matter, either. And that's fine: everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, it is unreasonable to expect to make general statements about systems that are unsupportable (or supported by logical fallacies, cf, anecdotal evidence or appeals to authority) without challenge. .... I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed. --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64) * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101) .