The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my 
wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so confusing.

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> writes:

> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my 
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
> confusing.

Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.

Why are you so clueless about everything?

RonB stated in post ihfdg9$5jk$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11 1:08
PM:

> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so confusing.

The context is, I am guessing, that it is not standard desktop Linux.

Hope that helps!


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Hadron stated in post ihfech$ah7$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11
1:23 PM:

> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>> confusing.
> 
> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
> 
> Why are you so clueless about everything?
> 
The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.  Where
to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to others.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

"RonB" <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ihfdg9$5jk$1@news.eternal-september.org...

morons like you get confused easily about a lot of things.

> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so 
> confusing.

because the phone is a defective piece of shit.

Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
> 
> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
> confusing.

I must admit that is confusing. It's even more confusing for me, because
I have GNU software running on mine as well, like Bash.

If I didn't know better, I'd swear this was GNU/Linux running a
Java-like virtual machine called Dalvik, a Dalvik based UI, and some
Dalvik applications, but with the ability to run native GNU/Linux
applications like Bash and OpenVPN too.

Sort of like, erm, any other GNU/Linux distribution.

I'm shocked and amazed.

-- 
K.                           | Ancient Chinese Proverb:
http://slated.org            | "The road to Hell is paved with
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky   | ignorant twits who know nothing
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 29 days  | about GNU/Linux."

Homer wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
>> 
>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>> confusing.
>
> I must admit that is confusing. It's even more confusing for me, because
> I have GNU software running on mine as well, like Bash.
>
> If I didn't know better, I'd swear this was GNU/Linux running a
> Java-like virtual machine called Dalvik, a Dalvik based UI, and some
> Dalvik applications, but with the ability to run native GNU/Linux
> applications like Bash and OpenVPN too.
>
> Sort of like, erm, any other GNU/Linux distribution.

Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?

> I'm shocked and amazed.

Actually, according to "Hadron", a Linux kernel engineer disagrees with you:

   Message-ID: <ihfech$ah7$1@news.eternal-september.org>

And here it is:

   http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/How-Much-Linux-Is-in-Android

   Matthew Porter's talk at the Grenoble conference titled "Mythbusters:
   Android" tackled the question of how much Android is actually Linux, how
   functional it is, and what is the nature of the Android community. .  . .

   Porter works as chief software architect at the open source firm Embedded
   Alley, which Mentor Graphics acquired the end of July 2009. He is a
   PowerPC specialist, thus viewing Android from a hardware perspective.

How do we handle this confusion?

   http://lwn.net/Articles/320437/

   Android is the first widely-deployed platform that uses the Linux kernel
   but does not provide a Unixish userland. Finally, after all these years,
   rms's insistence on calling the system GNU/Linux starts to make sense.
   There is GNU/Linux providing the GNU C library, utilities and other
   userland on top of the Linux kernel, and now Android/Linux using the same
   kernel but different userspace.

Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?  :-D

-- 
The most happy marriage I can imagine to myself would be the union
of a deaf man to a blind woman.
		-- Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Homer wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
>>> 
>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>> confusing.
>>
>> I must admit that is confusing. It's even more confusing for me, because
>> I have GNU software running on mine as well, like Bash.
>>
>> If I didn't know better, I'd swear this was GNU/Linux running a
>> Java-like virtual machine called Dalvik, a Dalvik based UI, and some
>> Dalvik applications, but with the ability to run native GNU/Linux
>> applications like Bash and OpenVPN too.
>>
>> Sort of like, erm, any other GNU/Linux distribution.
> 
> Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?

If he keeps adding GNU stuff then both would be the right answer. It is 
possible to compile and install all the usual GNU libs and tools on top of 
Android's Linux kernel. I may even be possible to run Xorg using the Linux 
framebuffer driver. The most difficult part may be to create a GNU cross-
build environment for Android. After that is done, configure and make take 
care of the rest.

Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU libs and 
tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.

Regards.

Snit wrote:
> Hadron wrote:
>> RonB writes:
>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>> confusing.
>> 
>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>> 
>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
> 
> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand. 
> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
> others.

Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel looks 
and behaves the same.

Regards.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> RonB writes:
>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
>>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>> confusing.
>>> 
>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>> 
>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>> 
>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
>> others.
> 
> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
> looks and behaves the same.
> 
> Regards.

If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux -- Snit can't twist his way out of 
that simple fact. The line has already been drawn and the WinTroll and 
MacTroll rants claiming that Android "isn't Linux" is shown to be as 
baseless as most of their other claims. Linux is becoming very popular. 
Live with it.

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

Lusotec stated in post ihg580$p8m$2@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11
7:53 PM:

> Snit wrote:
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> RonB writes:
>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>>>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>> confusing.
>>> 
>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>> 
>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>> 
>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
>> others.
> 
> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel looks
> and behaves the same.
> 
> Regards.
> 
Fair enough... I know very little about the changes.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

RonB stated in post ihg5g7$rnh$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11 7:58
PM:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:
> 
>> Snit wrote:
>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>> RonB writes:
>>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
>>>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>>> confusing.
>>>> 
>>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>>> 
>>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>>> 
>>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
>>> others.
>> 
>> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
>> looks and behaves the same.
>> 
>> Regards.
> 
> If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux -- Snit can't twist his way out of
> that simple fact.

Nor am I trying!  Wow... what a strange concept.

> The line has already been drawn and the WinTroll and MacTroll rants claiming
> that Android "isn't Linux" is shown to be as baseless as most of their other
> claims. Linux is becoming very popular. Live with it.

I hope you feel better soon.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Verily I say unto thee, that Chris Ahlstrom spake thusly:

> Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?

In volumetric terms, I'm running Android/Linux/GNU, in that order.
In quantum terms, I'm running GNU relative to Linux, with Android acting
as a coupling constant.

>    Android is the first widely-deployed platform that uses the Linux
>    kernel but does not provide a Unixish userland. Finally, after all
>    these years, rms's insistence on calling the system GNU/Linux
>    starts to make sense.  There is GNU/Linux providing the GNU C
>    library, utilities and other userland on top of the Linux kernel,
>    and now Android/Linux using the same kernel but different
>    userspace.
>
> Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?  :-D

I have Linux and GNU software on my Android smartphone, so yes, I'm
running GNU/Linux ... and Android.

-- 
K.                           | Ancient Chinese Proverb:
http://slated.org            | "The road to Hell is paved with
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky   | ignorant twits who know nothing
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 29 days  | about GNU/Linux."

Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:

> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU libs
> and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.

First thing I did when I bought my phone.

-- 
K.                           | Ancient Chinese Proverb:
http://slated.org            | "The road to Hell is paved with
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky   | ignorant twits who know nothing
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 29 days  | about GNU/Linux."

Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:

> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
> 
>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU libs
>> and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
> 
> First thing I did when I bought my phone.

A phone is used for calling people.  You are thinking in terms of other
features, not the phone.

LOL!


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:

> RonB stated in post ihg5g7$rnh$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11 7:58
> PM:
>
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>>> RonB writes:
>>>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
>>>>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>>>> confusing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>>>> 
>>>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>>>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
>>>> others.
>>> 
>>> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
>>> looks and behaves the same.
>>> 
>>> Regards.
>> 
>> If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux -- Snit can't twist his way out of
>> that simple fact.
>
> Nor am I trying!  Wow... what a strange concept.
>
>> The line has already been drawn and the WinTroll and MacTroll rants claiming
>> that Android "isn't Linux" is shown to be as baseless as most of their other
>> claims. Linux is becoming very popular. Live with it.
>
> I hope you feel better soon.


The Q is why is WronG telling lies? I dont recall anyone here saying
it's not based on Linux.

Hadron stated in post ihgci6$bvo$2@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11
9:58 PM:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
> 
>> RonB stated in post ihg5g7$rnh$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11 7:58
>> PM:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>>>> RonB writes:
>>>>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
>>>>>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>>>>> confusing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>>>>> 
>>>>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>>>>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
>>>>> others.
>>>> 
>>>> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
>>>> looks and behaves the same.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards.
>>> 
>>> If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux -- Snit can't twist his way out of
>>> that simple fact.
>> 
>> Nor am I trying!  Wow... what a strange concept.
>> 
>>> The line has already been drawn and the WinTroll and MacTroll rants claiming
>>> that Android "isn't Linux" is shown to be as baseless as most of their other
>>> claims. Linux is becoming very popular. Live with it.
>> 
>> I hope you feel better soon.
> 
> 
> The Q is why is WronG telling lies?

Might as well as why fleas bite and clouds drop rain.  It is just what they
do.

> I dont recall anyone here saying it's not based on Linux.

Certainly not me.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

"Snit" <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> schreef in bericht 
news:C96111C3.8B6AC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com...
> Hadron stated in post ihgci6$bvo$2@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11
> 9:58 PM:
>
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
>>
>>> RonB stated in post ihg5g7$rnh$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/22/11 
>>> 7:58
>>> PM:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>>>>> RonB writes:
>>>>>>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
>>>>>>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>>>>>>>> confusing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
>>>>>> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
>>>>> looks and behaves the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>> If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux -- Snit can't twist his way out 
>>>> of
>>>> that simple fact.
>>>
>>> Nor am I trying!  Wow... what a strange concept.
>>>
>>>> The line has already been drawn and the WinTroll and MacTroll rants 
>>>> claiming
>>>> that Android "isn't Linux" is shown to be as baseless as most of their 
>>>> other
>>>> claims. Linux is becoming very popular. Live with it.
>>>
>>> I hope you feel better soon.
>>
>>
>> The Q is why is WronG telling lies?
>
> Might as well as why fleas bite and clouds drop rain.  It is just what 
> they
> do.
>
>> I dont recall anyone here saying it's not based on Linux.
>
> Certainly not me.
>

Software Expert Matthew Porter claimed it.
"Android Is Not Linux"
http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/11/android-is-not-linux-says-software-expert.html
Like iOS is not the same as Mac OS.
"iOS is derived from Mac OS X, with which it shares the Darwin foundation, 
and is therefore a Unix-like operating system by nature."

Derived from Linux, yes, like Chromium OS, but it's not even a Linux distro.
*Other* operating systems:
http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=links#otheros
.. Android
^^^^^^^^^^^^
.. AROS
.. AtheOS (discontinued?)
.. BeOS
.. BlueEyedOS
.. Chromium OS
.. DexOS
.. eyeOS
.. eComStation
.. FreeDOS
.. Haiku OS
.. Mac OS
.. MenuetOS
.. Microsoft Windows
.. NewOS
.. PETROS
.. QNX
.. ReactOS
.. RISC OS
.. SkyOS
.. Syllable
.. THEOS
.. Unununium Operating Engine
.. ZETA-OS 

"RonB" <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> schreef in bericht 
news:ihfdg9$5jk$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so 
> confusing.
>


Yes we all lnow that you are a "confused" individual WRonG.
You don't have to underline this fact so many times.
It makes you look like an idiot!
HTH & GFIA

On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 20:08:41 +0000, RonB wrote:

> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
> confusing.

My phone is running 2.6.32. Must be that damn fragmentation thing hadron
goes on and on about. :-)

"Homer" <usenet@slated.org> wrote in message 
news:onjs08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix...
> Verily I say unto thee, that Chris Ahlstrom spake thusly:
>
>> Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?
>
> In volumetric terms, I'm running Android/Linux/GNU, in that order.
> In quantum terms, I'm running GNU relative to Linux, with Android acting
> as a coupling constant.
>
>>    Android is the first widely-deployed platform that uses the Linux
>>    kernel but does not provide a Unixish userland. Finally, after all
>>    these years, rms's insistence on calling the system GNU/Linux
>>    starts to make sense.  There is GNU/Linux providing the GNU C
>>    library, utilities and other userland on top of the Linux kernel,
>>    and now Android/Linux using the same kernel but different
>>    userspace.
>>
>> Are you running Android/Linux or GNU/Linux?  :-D
>
> I have Linux and GNU software on my Android smartphone, so yes, I'm
> running GNU/Linux ... and Android.
>
I bet that, if you were to shout that out at your next Dweebs Anonymous 
meeting, all the girls would be thrilled!  LOL! 

On 2011-01-23, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
> Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:
>
>> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
>> 
>>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU
>>> libs and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
>> 
>> First thing I did when I bought my phone.
>
> A phone is used for calling people.

A router is used for routing traffic.

> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the phone.

You are thinking in terms of other features, not the router.

> LOL!

LOL!

-- 
I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us.
Pigs treat us as equals.
	~ Winston Churchill

TomB stated in post 20110124002153.953@usenet.drumscum.be on 1/23/11 4:24
PM:

> On 2011-01-23, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:
>> 
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
>>> 
>>>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU
>>>> libs and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
>>> 
>>> First thing I did when I bought my phone.
>> 
>> A phone is used for calling people.
> 
> A router is used for routing traffic.
> 
>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the phone.
> 
> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the router.
> 
>> LOL!
> 
> LOL!


  TomB 1:
    -----
    Jezus, is Snit still maintaining the idea that I don't realize
    that routers often have a lot of additional functionality on top
    of their routing task?
    -----

  TomB 2:
    -----
    Routers route. Nothing else.
    -----

Your get-it/forget-it game is silly.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:

> TomB stated in post 20110124002153.953@usenet.drumscum.be on 1/23/11 4:24
> PM:
>
>> On 2011-01-23, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:
>>> 
>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
>>>> 
>>>>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU
>>>>> libs and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
>>>> 
>>>> First thing I did when I bought my phone.
>>> 
>>> A phone is used for calling people.
>> 
>> A router is used for routing traffic.
>> 
>>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the phone.
>> 
>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the router.
>> 
>>> LOL!
>> 
>> LOL!
>
>   TomB 1:
>     -----
>     Jezus, is Snit still maintaining the idea that I don't realize
>     that routers often have a lot of additional functionality on top
>     of their routing task?
>     -----
>
>   TomB 2:
>     -----
>     Routers route. Nothing else.
>     -----
>
> Your get-it/forget-it game is silly.

It's what he does.

Once more you have rope-a-doped him. His thread memory is nil. He MUST
be related to Chris who suffers from the same ailment.

Hadron stated in post ihighr$q3o$1@news.eternal-september.org on 1/23/11
5:19 PM:

>>   TomB 1:
>>     -----
>>     Jezus, is Snit still maintaining the idea that I don't realize
>>     that routers often have a lot of additional functionality on top
>>     of their routing task?
>>     -----
>> 
>>   TomB 2:
>>     -----
>>     Routers route. Nothing else.
>>     -----
>> 
>> Your get-it/forget-it game is silly.
> 
> It's what he does.
> 
> Once more you have rope-a-doped him. His thread memory is nil. He MUST
> be related to Chris who suffers from the same ailment.

The sad past is how many times he denied his going back and forth on this.
I am sure I could pull up even more quotes showing him doing this, but this
is quite representative.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On 2011-01-24, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
> TomB stated in post 20110124002153.953@usenet.drumscum.be on 1/23/11 4:24
> PM:
>
>> On 2011-01-23, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:
>>> 
>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
>>>> 
>>>>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU
>>>>> libs and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
>>>> 
>>>> First thing I did when I bought my phone.
>>> 
>>> A phone is used for calling people.
>> 
>> A router is used for routing traffic.
>> 
>>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the phone.
>> 
>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the router.
>> 
>>> LOL!
>> 
>> LOL!

<snip>

Jezus dude, it was a /joke/. Please lighten up.

In any case, to say that a modern phone is 'used for calling people'
is bizarre at the least.

-- 
It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man
to laugh at that man. 

TomB stated in post 20110124014155.661@usenet.drumscum.be on 1/23/11 5:45
PM:

> On 2011-01-24, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 20110124002153.953@usenet.drumscum.be on 1/23/11 4:24
>> PM:
>> 
>>> On 2011-01-23, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>> Homer stated in post 5bks08-nrf.ln1@sky.matrix on 1/22/11 8:36 PM:
>>>> 
>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Lusotec spake thusly:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Don't forget that root permissions are required to install GNU
>>>>>> libs and tools, so this may not be possible on some phones.
>>>>> 
>>>>> First thing I did when I bought my phone.
>>>> 
>>>> A phone is used for calling people.
>>> 
>>> A router is used for routing traffic.
>>> 
>>>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the phone.
>>> 
>>> You are thinking in terms of other features, not the router.
>>> 
>>>> LOL!
>>> 
>>> LOL!
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Jezus dude, it was a /joke/. Please lighten up.
> 
> In any case, to say that a modern phone is 'used for calling people'
> is bizarre at the least.

That was my point... it is bizarre to say that a modern end user router only
routes.  You sometimes show you get this... and sometimes show you do not:

  TomB 1:
    -----
    Jezus, is Snit still maintaining the idea that I don't realize
    that routers often have a lot of additional functionality on top
    of their routing task?
    -----

  TomB 2:
    -----
    Routers route. Nothing else.
    -----


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 11:20:57 +0000, Hardon wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 20:08:41 +0000, RonB wrote:
> 
>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does my
>> wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
>> confusing.
> 
> My phone is running 2.6.32. Must be that damn fragmentation thing hadron
> goes on and on about. :-)

Obviously Google could sell a few hundred Android phones in a year or so 
if it wasn't for all that darned "fragmentation." 

2.6.32 huh? Now I'm jealous. :)

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

In article <ihg5g7$rnh$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:53:53 +0000, Lusotec wrote:
> 
> > Snit wrote:
> >> Hadron wrote:
> >>> RonB writes:
> >>>> The WinTrolls have told us that Android is not Linux... so why does
> >>>> my wife's Android phone show it's running on kernel 2.6.29? It's so
> >>>> confusing.
> >>> 
> >>> Actually a Linux Kernel engineer has made that claim.
> >>> 
> >>> Why are you so clueless about everything?
> >> 
> >> The kernel is fairly heavily modified Linux, from what I understand.
> >> Where to draw the line as to what is and is not Linux can be left up to
> >> others.
> > 
> > Actually, the modifications are minor, and from user space the kernel
> > looks and behaves the same.
> > 
> > Regards.
> 
> If it uses the Linux kernel, it's Linux

Android is Linux.

It just isn't meaningfully part of the same platform as desktop Linux 
distros.

COLA advocates want to gloss over this point to make Linux seem more 
competitive in the market share race, but the only reason market share 
matters to end users at all is because of its influence over application 
availability, which is a function of how many users share a common 
application platform, not how many users are running systems based on 
the same kernel.

By the exact standard you guys use to lump Android in with desktop 
Linux, iOS market share should be counted as Mac market share.

[snip]

-- 
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

On Monday 24 January 2011 08:32 ZnU wrote:

> By the exact standard you guys use to lump Android in with desktop 
> Linux, iOS market share should be counted as Mac market share.

Actually, I'd agree with that!

Currently, the cry is that Android is for phones.
The reality is that we have (or are starting to have)...

 - Android on phones, tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.

 - iOS on phones and ipads

 - MS phone 7 on phones, but W7 on tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.

Consequently, the way things are going with the "new devices", a MS system 
is being counted as a Windows desktop, and iOS and Android etc. are being 
dismissed as "only phones"  This is to say nothing of new Linus OSs like 
MeeGo, of course.

To me, and as you suggest, the only way that the figures we get (web 
statistics) make any sense is to talk about Microsoft, Apple, Linux.
This is imo going to become more obvious as time goes on and these "new 
devices" become increasingly prevalent.

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:51:27 +0000, bbgruff wrote:

> On Monday 24 January 2011 08:32 ZnU wrote:
> 
>> By the exact standard you guys use to lump Android in with desktop
>> Linux, iOS market share should be counted as Mac market share.
> 
> Actually, I'd agree with that!
> 
> Currently, the cry is that Android is for phones. The reality is that we
> have (or are starting to have)...
> 
>  - Android on phones, tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.
> 
>  - iOS on phones and ipads
> 
>  - MS phone 7 on phones, but W7 on tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops
>  etc.
> 
> Consequently, the way things are going with the "new devices", a MS
> system is being counted as a Windows desktop, and iOS and Android etc.
> are being dismissed as "only phones"  This is to say nothing of new
> Linus OSs like MeeGo, of course.
> 
> To me, and as you suggest, the only way that the figures we get (web
> statistics) make any sense is to talk about Microsoft, Apple, Linux.
> This is imo going to become more obvious as time goes on and these "new
> devices" become increasingly prevalent.

Sounds fine -- but I (for one) don't categorize Android as "Desktop 
Linux." I just call Android "Linux." Some of the WinTrolls and MacTrolls 
were trying to deny that simple fact... probably because Android is 
successful with a large market share.

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:51:27 +0000, bbgruff wrote:
>> On Monday 24 January 2011 08:32 ZnU wrote:
>> 
>>> By the exact standard you guys use to lump Android in with desktop
>>> Linux, iOS market share should be counted as Mac market share.
>> 
>> Actually, I'd agree with that!
>> 
>> Currently, the cry is that Android is for phones. The reality is that
>> we have (or are starting to have)...
>> 
>>  - Android on phones, tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.
>> 
>>  - iOS on phones and ipads
>> 
>>  - MS phone 7 on phones, but W7 on tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops
>>  etc.
>> 
>> Consequently, the way things are going with the "new devices", a MS
>> system is being counted as a Windows desktop, and iOS and Android
>> etc.  are being dismissed as "only phones"  This is to say nothing of
>> new Linus OSs like MeeGo, of course.
>> 
>> To me, and as you suggest, the only way that the figures we get (web
>> statistics) make any sense is to talk about Microsoft, Apple, Linux.
>> This is imo going to become more obvious as time goes on and these
>> "new devices" become increasingly prevalent.
>
> Sounds fine -- but I (for one) don't categorize Android as "Desktop
> Linux." I just call Android "Linux." Some of the WinTrolls and
> MacTrolls were trying to deny that simple fact... probably because
> Android is successful with a large market share.

I'm more interested in the fact that the proportion of Free Software in
use is growing exponentially, regardless of the hardware's form factor.

Why exactly should desktop systems be the only consideration? ZnU seems
to forget this is comp.os.linux.advocacy, not comp.hw.desktop.advocacy.

Personally I'm happy using any computer hardware, provided it's running
Free Software - at a reasonable speed, and 1GHz seems plenty reasonable
to me. Heck, I used to run games, productivity and development software
on a 3.5MHz PC, called a Sinclair Spectrum. I'm damned sure a dual-core
1GHz PC with Nvidia graphics can provide me with at least that level of
functionality.

-- 
K.                           | Ancient Chinese Proverb:
http://slated.org            | "The road to Hell is paved with
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky   | ignorant twits who know nothing
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 31 days  | about GNU/Linux."

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:01:32 +0000, Homer wrote:

> I'm more interested in the fact that the proportion of Free Software in
> use is growing exponentially, regardless of the hardware's form factor.

Yep.
 
> Why exactly should desktop systems be the only consideration? ZnU seems
> to forget this is comp.os.linux.advocacy, not comp.hw.desktop.advocacy.

The WinTrolls, MacTrolls and other assorted FUDdites like to control the 
debate by attempting to define the parameters. Too bad for them that it 
doesn't work that way. 

> Personally I'm happy using any computer hardware, provided it's running
> Free Software - at a reasonable speed, and 1GHz seems plenty reasonable
> to me. Heck, I used to run games, productivity and development software
> on a 3.5MHz PC, called a Sinclair Spectrum. I'm damned sure a dual-core
> 1GHz PC with Nvidia graphics can provide me with at least that level of
> functionality.

Yep. My computing started on a Timex-Sinclair 1000 (the American 
equivalent of the ZX-81. For about seven years my main computer was a 
Sinclair QL, but during that time I bought a Timex-Sinclair 2048, with a 
Spectrum emulation ROM -- so it was both. This was well after they were 
new. I used to be kind of a collector (long past that stage now).

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:

> Yep. My computing started on a Timex-Sinclair 1000 (the American
> equivalent of the ZX-81. For about seven years my main computer was a
> Sinclair QL, but during that time I bought a Timex-Sinclair 2048, with
> a Spectrum emulation ROM -- so it was both. This was well after they
> were new. I used to be kind of a collector (long past that stage now).

I've still got my MkIV Speccy (blue rubber keys) in mint condition, plus
all the bits ... somewhere. I might take it out for a spin, just to have
a go at running the new Twitter client (yes, really):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ECnN7jdgA4

-- 
K.                           | Ancient Chinese Proverb:
http://slated.org            | "The road to Hell is paved with
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky   | ignorant twits who know nothing
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 32 days  | about GNU/Linux."

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 07:09:31 +0000, Homer wrote:

> Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
> 
>> Yep. My computing started on a Timex-Sinclair 1000 (the American
>> equivalent of the ZX-81. For about seven years my main computer was a
>> Sinclair QL, but during that time I bought a Timex-Sinclair 2048, with
>> a Spectrum emulation ROM -- so it was both. This was well after they
>> were new. I used to be kind of a collector (long past that stage now).
> 
> I've still got my MkIV Speccy (blue rubber keys) in mint condition, plus
> all the bits ... somewhere. I might take it out for a spin, just to have
> a go at running the new Twitter client (yes, really):
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ECnN7jdgA4

Pretty amazing (though I never twit) and he's got some kind of network 
adapter hooked up to it also -- which impressed me even more. I parted 
with my 2068 (not 2048 as I said earlier) a few years ago, but I've still 
got the complete QL setup -- not sure for how much longer -- and a couple 
T-S 1000s. But I'm at the age where I just want to get rid of stuff I 
don't use.

-- 
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581 
CentOS 5.5 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0

In article <8q7rpvF55oU1@mid.individual.net>,
 bbgruff <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Monday 24 January 2011 08:32 ZnU wrote:
> 
> > By the exact standard you guys use to lump Android in with desktop 
> > Linux, iOS market share should be counted as Mac market share.
> 
> Actually, I'd agree with that!
> 
> Currently, the cry is that Android is for phones.
> The reality is that we have (or are starting to have)...
> 
>  - Android on phones, tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.
> 
>  - iOS on phones and ipads
> 
>  - MS phone 7 on phones, but W7 on tablets/slates, netbooks, net-tops etc.
> 
> Consequently, the way things are going with the "new devices", a MS system 
> is being counted as a Windows desktop, and iOS and Android etc. are being 
> dismissed as "only phones"  This is to say nothing of new Linus OSs like 
> MeeGo, of course.
> 
> To me, and as you suggest, the only way that the figures we get (web 
> statistics) make any sense is to talk about Microsoft, Apple, Linux.

The problem with that is that two of those things are companies and the 
third is a kernel. Gains for Apple and Microsoft platforms benefit Apple 
and Microsoft, so at least from a market analysis perspective it might 
make sense to group each company's platforms together. But gains for 
"Linux" aren't all aggregated by any single entity.

IMO the only meaningful way to make like-for-like comparisons is to 
segment the market at the "platform" level, with each "platform" being 
defined as encompassing a set of devices that are both technically 
capable of running a common set of apps _and_ that provide compatibility 
useful enough that's it's actually widely used.

> This is imo going to become more obvious as time goes on and these "new 
> devices" become increasingly prevalent.

-- 
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes