Re: Just Upgraded from Ubuntu 9.04 to 9.10...Won't even boot....

[RonB]

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:29:25 -0500, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

> Just a neutral observation here. I'm used to the typical lot on the
> Ubuntu newsgroup, so watching the unfamiliar personalities clash on this
> crossposted thread is quite an eyeful. Obviously all you non-Ubuntu ng
> folks have a storied history together.

Normally I have Hadron killfiled. I gave him a day and a half "holiday,"
but he's back in there now.

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.4 or Vector Linux Deluxe 6.0

 

[Hadron]

JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:

> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>> The "problem" is that pulseaudio support on ubuntu is full of bugs,
>>>>>>> hence disappearance of sound, and another problem is that in this
>>>>>>> situation, old firefox does not actually die, though the window goes
>>>>>>> away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Applications also do this sort of thing in Windows. The advantage of
>>>>>> Linux is that you have a kill command. (Look it up.)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure whny you insist on comparing to Windows, but, if so,
>>>>> Windows does have a kill command, it is called task manager.
>>>>
>>>> ...so does Ubuntu.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Figuring all of that out requires some googling skills, knowledge of
>>>>>>> "ps", "grep" and other general Unix troubleshooting skills. If the
>>>>>>> user could do it, open terminal, and type something like "killall
>>>>>>> firefox", he or she would be able to continue, but a less skillful
>>>>>>> person would just give up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>
>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>
>>>> [deletia]
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>> your
>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>
> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>
> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>
> [deletia]

Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use
and who is also on record as saying games like Bioshock take a couple of
programmers a week or two. When it comes to outdated cluelessnes Jed,
you lead the way.

 

[Dabbler]

"Ignoramus12856" <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> wrote in message
news:KvmdnV7ObMcL_8HWnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com...
> For me, Linux takes less time to manage than Windows. I manage Linux
> at home and at work with scripts instead of GUI, and it takes no
> time. For example, if I find a package that I like and want to add it,
> I append it to a certain list of packages and it is installed at night
> automatically on all boxes that I manage that have a proper
> "role". Works out great, especially if a computer needs a complete
> reinstall, for example.

But you just admitted that you were not a typical desktop user. You know
scripting, package management, and are a sys admin at work. This is not
what a typical windows desktop user is. You are an expert, they are not.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>> The "problem" is that pulseaudio support on ubuntu is full of bugs,
>>>>>>>> hence disappearance of sound, and another problem is that in this
>>>>>>>> situation, old firefox does not actually die, though the window goes
>>>>>>>> away.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Applications also do this sort of thing in Windows. The advantage of
>>>>>>> Linux is that you have a kill command. (Look it up.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure whny you insist on comparing to Windows, but, if so,
>>>>>> Windows does have a kill command, it is called task manager.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...so does Ubuntu.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Figuring all of that out requires some googling skills, knowledge of
>>>>>>>> "ps", "grep" and other general Unix troubleshooting skills. If the
>>>>>>>> user could do it, open terminal, and type something like "killall
>>>>>>>> firefox", he or she would be able to continue, but a less skillful
>>>>>>>> person would just give up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>> your
>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>
>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>
>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>
>> [deletia]
>
> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use

My OS is not so lame that I need more than one monitor to make up
for it's failings. I also don't have a sad need to engage in conspicous
consumption to try and impress strangers.

> and who is also on record as saying games like Bioshock take a couple of
> programmers a week or two. When it comes to outdated cluelessnes Jed,
> you lead the way.

This is just another one of those fantasies that you trolls like fabricate.

Repeating a lie won't make it any more true.

It doesn't matter how often you try to repeat it.


--
Nothing quite gives you an understanding of mysql's |||
popularity as does an attempt to do some simple date / | \
manipulations in postgres.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:

[deletia]

>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>> your
>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>
>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>
>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>
>> [deletia]
>
> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use

....and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order for
me to find out?

[deletia]

How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?

I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
it up so I will ask again...

--
It's not the size of the CPU, it's how you use it. |||
/ | \

 

[Ignoramus12856]

On 2010-01-25, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>
>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact. Perhaps you used
>>>> Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain your rather dated
>>>> view on things.
>>>>
>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>
> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.

You have a preconceived notion as to how a "linux user" should sound
like.

It is that notion of yours that needs to be corrected.

I released my first GPLed program (GNU Stump) in 1996, one more
(Net::eBay perl module) in 2005. My linux based website algebra.com
has been operational since 2000.

> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.

I use those "modern forms" and hate the bugs.

i

 

[Hadron]

JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:

> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>
>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>> The "problem" is that pulseaudio support on ubuntu is full of bugs,
>>>>>>>>> hence disappearance of sound, and another problem is that in this
>>>>>>>>> situation, old firefox does not actually die, though the window goes
>>>>>>>>> away.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Applications also do this sort of thing in Windows. The advantage of
>>>>>>>> Linux is that you have a kill command. (Look it up.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure whny you insist on comparing to Windows, but, if so,
>>>>>>> Windows does have a kill command, it is called task manager.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...so does Ubuntu.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Figuring all of that out requires some googling skills, knowledge of
>>>>>>>>> "ps", "grep" and other general Unix troubleshooting skills. If the
>>>>>>>>> user could do it, open terminal, and type something like "killall
>>>>>>>>> firefox", he or she would be able to continue, but a less skillful
>>>>>>>>> person would just give up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>
>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>>
>>> [deletia]
>>
>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use
>
> My OS is not so lame that I need more than one monitor to make up
> for it's failings. I also don't have a sad need to engage in conspicous
> consumption to try and impress strangers.

Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? Multiple monitors are
staple diet for any half decent developer these days - not least for
debugging windowed systems. never mind home use and TV/Video on one head
and the desktop on the other.

All those xinerama/twinview/WM developers such as the xmonad guys should
be slapped around for thinking it IS useful and good to have these
things. What WERE they thinking?

>
>> and who is also on record as saying games like Bioshock take a couple of
>> programmers a week or two. When it comes to outdated cluelessnes Jed,
>> you lead the way.
>
> This is just another one of those fantasies that you trolls like
> fabricate.

We can provide links you know.

>
> Repeating a lie won't make it any more true.
>
> It doesn't matter how often you try to repeat it.

It is true. You're a green screen fossil who does Linux more bad than
good because you are totally clueless about modern usage.

I believe it was you who also thought Doom II was pretty "cutting edge"
..... in 2009.

 

[Hadron]

JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:

> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>
>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>
> [deletia]
>
>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>
>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>>
>>> [deletia]
>>
>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use
>
> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order for
> me to find out?
>
> [deletia]
>
> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>
> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
> it up so I will ask again...

Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is so
common its not funny on modern video cards.

Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Dabbler <dabbler@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> "Ignoramus12856" <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> wrote in message
> news:KvmdnV7ObMcL_8HWnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> For me, Linux takes less time to manage than Windows. I manage Linux
>> at home and at work with scripts instead of GUI, and it takes no
>> time. For example, if I find a package that I like and want to add it,
>> I append it to a certain list of packages and it is installed at night
>> automatically on all boxes that I manage that have a proper
>> "role". Works out great, especially if a computer needs a complete
>> reinstall, for example.
>
> But you just admitted that you were not a typical desktop user. You know
> scripting, package management, and are a sys admin at work. This is not
> what a typical windows desktop user is. You are an expert, they are not.
>

There are a number of levels to this. Now you could be a power desktop
user and still be into all of the GUI niceties even if you can effectively
create your own little custom apps from scratch with bubblegum and duct
tape (shell scripts). This is a bit different from someone who may not use
the recent GUI niceties in Ubuntu at all.

There used to be MacOS power users at one time whom you could expect to
explore a GUI interface as throughly as you would expect any geek.


--
iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
/ | \

 

[Ignoramus12856]

On 2010-01-25, Dabbler <dabbler@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> "Ignoramus12856" <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> wrote in message
> news:KvmdnV7ObMcL_8HWnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> For me, Linux takes less time to manage than Windows. I manage Linux
>> at home and at work with scripts instead of GUI, and it takes no
>> time. For example, if I find a package that I like and want to add it,
>> I append it to a certain list of packages and it is installed at night
>> automatically on all boxes that I manage that have a proper
>> "role". Works out great, especially if a computer needs a complete
>> reinstall, for example.
>
> But you just admitted that you were not a typical desktop user. You know
> scripting, package management, and are a sys admin at work. This is not
> what a typical windows desktop user is. You are an expert, they are not.
>

Sys admin is not my job description (though I do administer Linux
servers).

That said, yes, I am not a typical desktop user and the less
experienced people have more problems.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> On 2010-01-25, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact. Perhaps you used
>>>>> Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain your rather dated
>>>>> view on things.
>>>>>
>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>
>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>
> You have a preconceived notion as to how a "linux user" should sound
> like.
>
> It is that notion of yours that needs to be corrected.

My notion is fine. You're the idiot that should not be giving any
advice or any comments that are relevant to desktop users. You simply
don't understand the tools well enough and can't be bothered to find
out. Nevermind how long you say you've used Linux or what you say you
use.

>
> I released my first GPLed program (GNU Stump) in 1996, one more
> (Net::eBay perl module) in 2005. My linux based website algebra.com
> has been operational since 2000.
>
>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>
> I use those "modern forms" and hate the bugs.

Yes, those "bugs" that don't even include accurate nomenclature in the
description and involve "mental blocks" that are so obvious to navigate
around that it boggles the mind.

--
iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
/ | \

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>>> The "problem" is that pulseaudio support on ubuntu is full of bugs,
>>>>>>>>>> hence disappearance of sound, and another problem is that in this
>>>>>>>>>> situation, old firefox does not actually die, though the window goes
>>>>>>>>>> away.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Applications also do this sort of thing in Windows. The advantage of
>>>>>>>>> Linux is that you have a kill command. (Look it up.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not sure whny you insist on comparing to Windows, but, if so,
>>>>>>>> Windows does have a kill command, it is called task manager.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...so does Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Figuring all of that out requires some googling skills, knowledge of
>>>>>>>>>> "ps", "grep" and other general Unix troubleshooting skills. If the
>>>>>>>>>> user could do it, open terminal, and type something like "killall
>>>>>>>>>> firefox", he or she would be able to continue, but a less skillful
>>>>>>>>>> person would just give up.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>
>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>>>
>>>> [deletia]
>>>
>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use
>>
>> My OS is not so lame that I need more than one monitor to make up
>> for it's failings. I also don't have a sad need to engage in conspicous
>> consumption to try and impress strangers.
>
> Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? Multiple monitors are
> staple diet for any half decent developer these days - not least for

"any half decent developer"

[deletia]

--
iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
/ | \

 

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there
>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain
>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>
>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more modern
>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for them.
>>>>
>>>> [deletia]
>>>
>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a use
>>
>> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
>> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order for
>> me to find out?
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
>> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>>
>> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
>> it up so I will ask again...
>
> Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is so
> common its not funny on modern video cards.
>
> Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.

No. You are just totally full of it.

You won't even acknowledge the cost of an extra monitor. Nevermind your
obvious lack of touch with reality when it comes to typical PC hardware. No,
dual headed cards are not typical.

Really. With PC margins like they are, what kind of moron do you have to
be to buy into an argument like that anyways?

--
iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
/ | \

 

[Chris Ahlstrom]

RonB pulled this Usenet boner:

> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:29:25 -0500, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>
>> Just a neutral observation here. I'm used to the typical lot on the
>> Ubuntu newsgroup, so watching the unfamiliar personalities clash on this
>> crossposted thread is quite an eyeful. Obviously all you non-Ubuntu ng
>> folks have a storied history together.
>
> Normally I have Hadron killfiled. I gave him a day and a half "holiday,"
> but he's back in there now.

Be sure to disinfect.

--
You will contract a rare disease.

 

[Ezekiel]

"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
news:slrnhlq7ci.nes.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>
>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>
>>> [deletia]
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that
>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly
>>>>>>>> explain
>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>>
>>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more
>>>>> modern
>>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for
>>>>> them.
>>>>>
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>
>>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a
>>>> use
>>>
>>> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
>>> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order for
>>> me to find out?
>>>
>>> [deletia]
>>>
>>> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
>>> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>>>
>>> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
>>> it up so I will ask again...
>>
>> Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is so
>> common its not funny on modern video cards.
>>
>> Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.
>
> No. You are just totally full of it.

Pot. Kettle. Black.


> You won't even acknowledge the cost of an extra monitor.

That cost of the extra monitor is less than buying a very large monitor. Or
to make this "simple math" for lemmings like you - one can get more
resolution and screen real estate for less by using two cheaper monitors
than one very expensive monitor.


> Nevermind your obvious lack of touch with reality when it comes to typical
> PC hardware.

If anyone is out of touch it's the lemmings like you.


> No, dual headed cards are not typical.

Easily proven to be false. Got to NewEgg.com where they have a total of 455
video cards in stock.

302 have single DVI.
148 have dual DVI.
5 have quad DVI.

Roughly 1 out of every 3 video cards is dual headed. Yet idiots like you
claim that these are not common.

 

[Ezekiel]

"Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote in message
news:hjk4bk$2ee$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
> news:slrnhlq7ci.nes.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856
>>>>>>>>> <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [deletia]
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that
>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly
>>>>>>>>> explain
>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more
>>>>>> modern
>>>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a
>>>>> use
>>>>
>>>> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
>>>> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order
>>>> for
>>>> me to find out?
>>>>
>>>> [deletia]
>>>>
>>>> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
>>>> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>>>>
>>>> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
>>>> it up so I will ask again...
>>>
>>> Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is so
>>> common its not funny on modern video cards.
>>>
>>> Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.
>>
>> No. You are just totally full of it.
>
> Pot. Kettle. Black.
>
>
>> You won't even acknowledge the cost of an extra monitor.
>
> That cost of the extra monitor is less than buying a very large monitor.
> Or to make this "simple math" for lemmings like you - one can get more
> resolution and screen real estate for less by using two cheaper monitors
> than one very expensive monitor.
>
>
>> Nevermind your obvious lack of touch with reality when it comes to
>> typical PC hardware.
>
> If anyone is out of touch it's the lemmings like you.
>
>
>> No, dual headed cards are not typical.
>
> Easily proven to be false. Got to NewEgg.com where they have a total of
> 455 video cards in stock.
>
> 302 have single DVI.
> 148 have dual DVI.
> 5 have quad DVI.
>
> Roughly 1 out of every 3 video cards is dual headed. Yet idiots like you
> claim that these are not common.

And if you eliminate the older video cards (PCI, AGP, etc) and just look at
modern video cards - the number of dual-headed cards is closer to 50%.

Just because you're still stuck using an 80-column green screen CRT doesn't
mean that the rest of us haven't moved forward.

 

[chrisv]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> RonB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>> Normally I have Hadron killfiled. I gave him a day and a half "holiday,"
>> but he's back in there now.
>
>Be sure to disinfect.

Letting "Hadron" Quack out of the killfile is like turning-on a
blender full of snot with the top removed.

 

[Hadron]

"Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> writes:

> "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote in message
> news:hjk4bk$2ee$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>> news:slrnhlq7ci.nes.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856
>>>>>>>>>> <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that
>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly
>>>>>>>>>> explain
>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since 1998.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more
>>>>>>> modern
>>>>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for
>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a
>>>>>> use
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware typical
>>>>> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order
>>>>> for
>>>>> me to find out?
>>>>>
>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>
>>>>> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in order
>>>>> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>>>>>
>>>>> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I brought
>>>>> it up so I will ask again...
>>>>
>>>> Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is so
>>>> common its not funny on modern video cards.
>>>>
>>>> Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.
>>>
>>> No. You are just totally full of it.
>>
>> Pot. Kettle. Black.
>>
>>
>>> You won't even acknowledge the cost of an extra monitor.
>>
>> That cost of the extra monitor is less than buying a very large monitor.
>> Or to make this "simple math" for lemmings like you - one can get more
>> resolution and screen real estate for less by using two cheaper monitors
>> than one very expensive monitor.
>>
>>
>>> Nevermind your obvious lack of touch with reality when it comes to
>>> typical PC hardware.
>>
>> If anyone is out of touch it's the lemmings like you.
>>
>>
>>> No, dual headed cards are not typical.
>>
>> Easily proven to be false. Got to NewEgg.com where they have a total of
>> 455 video cards in stock.
>>
>> 302 have single DVI.
>> 148 have dual DVI.
>> 5 have quad DVI.
>>
>> Roughly 1 out of every 3 video cards is dual headed. Yet idiots like you
>> claim that these are not common.
>
> And if you eliminate the older video cards (PCI, AGP, etc) and just look at
> modern video cards - the number of dual-headed cards is closer to 50%.
>
> Just because you're still stuck using an 80-column green screen CRT doesn't
> mean that the rest of us haven't moved forward.

Jed is clueless. Once more he makes amazing statements with ZERO clue as
to the real world. One can only hope he is nothing to do with SW design
or implementation.

 

[chrisv]

*Hemidactylus* wrote:

> Hadron quacked:
>>
>> *Hemidactylus*<ecphoric@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> Whatever issues I've had with Linux have been good learning experiences
>>> and pale in comparison to the nightmare scenarios I've witnessed
>>> viacaroiusly in just the past month where people using Windows have had
>>> varying levels of infection with scareware and viruses. I took a
>>> friend's laptop that had severely infected XP and a crashing hardrive,
>>> replaced the hard drive after successfully running Puppy, and
>>> installed
>>
>> And the faulty HD was Windows fault was it?
>
>Did I imply it was! Jeez!

"Hadron" is a Micro$oft fanboi, and attacks you because you say good
things about Linux or bad things about his beloved Micro$oft. I'd
advise filtering the asshole.

--
"Linux routers are currently owned." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron
Quark (only mipsel-based routers with weak or default passwords were
"owned")

 

[Ezekiel]

"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hjk8t5$3s6$2@hadron.eternal-september.org...
> "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> writes:
>
>> "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote in message
>> news:hjk4bk$2ee$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnhlq7ci.nes.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-01-25, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Terry Porter <linux-2@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:127 -0600, Ignoramus12856 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856
>>>>>>>>>>> <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 009:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are certainly good at hiding this fact.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly
>>>>>>>>>>> explain
>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>> rather dated view on things.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used it as my main OS since 1995 when I bought my first PC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You still sound like someone that hasn't used Linux since
>>>>>>>> 1998.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps you should specifically avoid commenting about more
>>>>>>>> modern
>>>>>>>> forms of Linux and make sure you don't cross post in the fora for
>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Says the man who doesnt thing multiple monitors and x screens have a
>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...and assuming this, and also assuming that I have PC hardware
>>>>>> typical
>>>>>> for your typical Windows user: How much money would it take in order
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> me to find out?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [deletia]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How much money would an average Windows user need to waste in
>>>>>> order
>>>>>> to dabble in this sort of thing in order to have a clue about it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just realized that you didn't answer this the last time I
>>>>>> brought
>>>>>> it up so I will ask again...
>>>>>
>>>>> Pretty much nothing. Why do you ask? Another monitor and dual head is
>>>>> so
>>>>> common its not funny on modern video cards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jed, you're a clueless fossil. Wake up.
>>>>
>>>> No. You are just totally full of it.
>>>
>>> Pot. Kettle. Black.
>>>
>>>
>>>> You won't even acknowledge the cost of an extra monitor.
>>>
>>> That cost of the extra monitor is less than buying a very large monitor.
>>> Or to make this "simple math" for lemmings like you - one can get more
>>> resolution and screen real estate for less by using two cheaper monitors
>>> than one very expensive monitor.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nevermind your obvious lack of touch with reality when it comes to
>>>> typical PC hardware.
>>>
>>> If anyone is out of touch it's the lemmings like you.
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, dual headed cards are not typical.
>>>
>>> Easily proven to be false. Got to NewEgg.com where they have a total of
>>> 455 video cards in stock.
>>>
>>> 302 have single DVI.
>>> 148 have dual DVI.
>>> 5 have quad DVI.
>>>
>>> Roughly 1 out of every 3 video cards is dual headed. Yet idiots like you
>>> claim that these are not common.
>>
>> And if you eliminate the older video cards (PCI, AGP, etc) and just look
>> at
>> modern video cards - the number of dual-headed cards is closer to 50%.
>>
>> Just because you're still stuck using an 80-column green screen CRT
>> doesn't
>> mean that the rest of us haven't moved forward.
>
> Jed is clueless. Once more he makes amazing statements with ZERO clue as
> to the real world. One can only hope he is nothing to do with SW design
> or implementation.

I can't help but wonder how many times JED is going to make these idiotic
claims about dual-head video only to be proven wrong each and every time.
Even the dumbest of the dumb will eventually learn their mistake and STFU.
But this guy seems to have memory retention of only a few days before he
comes back and repeats his same stupid claims all over again.