Newest Skype For Linux Enables SMS Text Messages From The Desktop (betanews.com) 177
BrianFagioli writes: Microsoft has delivered an incredible feature to Linux-based desktop operating systems by way of the latest Alpha version of its Skype client... The newly-released Skype for Linux 1.13 allows users to send SMS test messages from the operating system! True, web-based solutions such as Google Voice have long allowed the sending of text messages, but needing to use a web browser can be a chore. There is convenience and elegance in using the Skype for Linux client.
Why, does it work properly now? (Score:5, Informative)
There is convenience and elegance in using the Skype for Linux client.
The Skype for Linux client has never been convenient or elegant. Have they made massive improvements of late?
Re:Why, does it work properly now? (Score:5, Funny)
F'ing amazing - integrating 1996 internet communication tech into a Linux app in 2016... how long do you think it will take them to make their own OS shut down and start up reliably?
Re: (Score:2)
how long do you think it will take them to make their own OS shut down and start up reliably?
They solved this recently. The OS now reliably shuts down even when you don't want it to, and it's incredibly robust in its timing too.
Re: (Score:2)
IOS has let me do this for years now. But nice work on getting up to 2012 or so, M$
Ah but does it offer the same features of scanning your messages to sort you into various advertising bins?
Ah who am I kidding? Of course it does!
Re: (Score:2)
I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
Re: (Score:2)
I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
I think you mean every email client in existence, which has had the ability to send SMS messages through the carrier's email to SMS gateways for as long as those gateways have been in existence.
What's this crap about claiming the OS has this functionality when all the hype is about a Skype CLIENT being able to do it?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
I think you mean every email client in existence, which has had the ability to send SMS messages through the carrier's email to SMS gateways for as long as those gateways have been in existence.
I've used Forte Agent 1.93 (windows) to do this all the time. A few years back they blocked this ability (at least the the IP's I was using).
SMS Gateways: http://www.email-unlimited.com... [email-unlimited.com]
Re:Why, does it work properly now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pretty much my thoughts.
but needing to use a web browser can be a chore.
Oh, yeah. Because needing to use a closed-source proprietary skype client can totally not be a chore. It's literally one of the few things I consider even worse than web browsers.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. At least if the web client is written properly, a simple REST API command could send your message and open this thing up to a whole new class of functionality - automated notifications from 3rd party applications.
Just use the browser for everything (Score:3)
With webrtc now well supported in Firefox, Chromium, Chrome, Opera, I have completely ditched Skype, and I just send my relatives a simple web link to click on when I want to chat with them.
I think it is more reliable than Skype too.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much my thoughts.
but needing to use a web browser can be a chore.
Oh, yeah. Because needing to use a closed-source proprietary skype client can totally not be a chore. It's literally one of the few things I consider even worse than web browsers.
No doubt. The quality or convenience of the skype client aside, how is using a web browser a chore? A web browser is the one app that is always running on any computer that I'm using. Having to start another app rather than another browser tab is almost always less convenient. There are a few things that just can't be done well in a browser (so far), and I don't mind running a separate app for them. But sending text message is not in that category. Neither is video conferencing, frankly.
Re: (Score:2)
how is using a web browser a chore?
Dunno. Slow? Huge? Invasive? Broken (by design, because it has to cope with broken websites)? Then, apart from the browser proper, the chore that is using most websites in the first place? Whoops, you can no longer set xpinstall.signatures.required to false in order to install an unsigned addon? The tunable is still there, mind you, it's just that it has become a no-op? Crash reporter, telemetry, 50MB distfile, share location? Unstable addon interface, rounded tabs, out of swapspace? Rapid release, de
Re: (Score:2)
Meh. My SMS communication client (Google Hangouts) is always loaded in my email tab, which is always open in my always-running browser. My workflow is: Alt-1 (to jump to the first tab, which is my pinned email tab), click on "fisted" in the list, type a message, hit enter. There's a big flaw with your workflow, too... supposing I reply, how do you see it? On your phone, I suppose... but then since you sent the message from your command-line SMS client, the conversation log on the phone is one-sided, which i
Re: (Score:2)
supposing I reply, how do you see it? On your phone, I suppose... but then since you sent the message from your command-line SMS client, the conversation log on the phone is one-sided, which is unfortunate if you want to look at it later.
That's actually not a problem for me because i regularly pull the data on my phone to my computer, making the log two-sided again. (alternatively i could just use my phone as the sms gateway when there's no free to use on on the interweb around at a time). That said, I don't see how this (non-)problem wouldn't equally apply to your workflow.
And then there's the big advantage of my conversation logs being on my hard disks, while yours are being data-mined at google's...
with 40 Xeon cores [...] a browser? That's no load.
Okay, I certainly see how having 40 xe
Re: (Score:2)
That said, I don't see how this (non-)problem wouldn't equally apply to your workflow.
Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.
And then there's the big advantage of my conversation logs being on my hard disks, while yours are being data-mined at google's...
And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history. As for data mining... meh. If it means the ads I see are more useful to me, that's a benefit, not a disadvantage.
Okay, I certainly see how having 40 xeon cores helps with browser performance... I somewhat doubt it's very representative for browser users, though.
The browser puts no appreciable load on any other computer I use, either. If your PC can't run a browser and still be silent, there's something wrong with the PC.
Re: (Score:2)
Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.
How convenient. What about deletions, are they also synced to all devices?
And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history
Ah, here's the problem. I had the false impression that I was talking to someone vaguely computer-literate. My bad, I'll adjust my expectations.
. As for data mining... meh. If it means the ads I see are more useful to me, that's a benefit, not a disadvantage.
Meh indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.
How convenient. What about deletions, are they also synced to all devices?
I don't delete.
And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history
Ah, here's the problem. I had the false impression that I was talking to someone vaguely computer-literate. My bad, I'll adjust my expectations.
Ah, and I thought I was talking to someone who wasn't an asshole. I'll adjust mine as well.
I no longer bother with any sort of manual backups. Everything of importance is synced to the cloud and from there to multiple devices. Any solution that requires me to go back to managing backups is a non-starter. I don't have time for that crap.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't delete.
Except when you do, which might well be accidental. But i guess, you don't do accidental. Sure.
Ah, and I thought I was talking to someone who wasn't calling me out for the obvious flaws in what i'm saying
FTFY. Nice direct insult, btw. I at least had a good reason to say what i said, and given what comes next, I still mean it.
I no longer bother with any sort of manual backups.
Yeah, me neither. Your point being? Why do you add a "manual" there? Oh wait, rhetorical question. Your argument is a failure and I suspect you realize it yourself, otherwise you wouldn't have to resort to straw men. Worrying that you still do.
Re: (Score:2)
Web browsers are actually the best platform for a lot of software. They need no installation, they update with no user effort, and they have limited security vulnerabilities.
Web browsers have two inherent weaknesses. 1) They require internet connection - but this is irrelevant for apps like Skype whose purpose is entirely network-based. 2) They are slower - but this factor becomes less significant by the year.
As for the interface, there is no barrier these days to making a webpage as functional as a native
Re: (Score:2)
Web browsers are actually the best platform for a lot of users
FTFY.
(See also sibling comment)
They are slower - but this factor becomes less significant by the year.
To me it feels that it becomes more significant by the year. I guess I'm the problem here, should more frequently buy new hardware to be able to enjoy the full web 4.0 experience.
a webpage as functional as a native application.
I keep hearing that, but I've never seen it. Care to provide an example?
Re: (Score:2)
I keep hearing that, but I've never seen it. Care to provide an example?
Gmail is as good as any native mail program I've used (better actually).
In general: Most applications consist of menus, buttons, windows, display of text/pictures/video, and playing sound. (These are what come to mind for me, maybe you can think of a few more.) Web pages can do all these things pretty well these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Gmail is as good as any native mail program
Gmail is as good as any crappy native MUA mainly because crappy MUAs are bloated and webbrowserized themselves.
What if I don't want to run a crappy one, web-based or not?
E.g. Gmail comes nowhere near mutt (not even close) with respect to responsiveness, flexibility, speed, usability, power(fulness?), resource usage, ....
On top of that, it has the subtle advantage that it can actually be used for mailhosters other than Gmail.
Re: (Score:2)
Gmail's responsiveness, flexibility, speed, and usability are perfectly good by my standards. If Mutt does an operation in 0.01 seconds and Gmail in 0.1 seconds, that's not actually a significant advantage for mutt, since the end user does not notice the difference.
Meanwhile, Gmail handles attachments, threaded conversations, and search much better than Mutt. All key features.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, Gmail handles attachments, threaded conversations, and search much better than Mutt. All key features.
Search, maybe, google is good at that. You're paying for it with your privacy, but ok.
Attachments and threading? You mean the kind of "threads" that are effectively flat lists in gmail?
Are you sure you know mutt well enough to make such claims?
Re: (Score:2)
The Skype for Linux client has never been convenient or elegant. Have they made massive improvements of late?
It's M$ they'd put broken glass on a Bouncy Castle and bill it as an improvement
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's M$ they'd put broken glass on a Bouncy Castle and bill it as an improvement
The day Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck is the day they make a vacuum.
Re: (Score:2)
Or the day they make windows 7, 10, visual studio, office 2013, and 2016. Seems that Microsoft makes a bunch of products that don't 'suck.' But that is just my option and the business worlds.
Re: (Score:2)
Broken glass in a bouncy castle would be an improvement. Particularly if the glass is covered in nice infectious shit, and the castle is erected over a pit of hungry alligators. Or landmines.
Re: Why, does it work properly now? (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually Skype Inc abandoned Linux. Microsoft is the one updating again oddly.
I realized though on slashdot Microsoft could cure cancer and world hunger and of course someone will still bash them.
This isn't 1998 anymore. I use Freebsd and Windows together. I downloaded SQL server for Linux and will play with it in a vm next week. Windows 10 has Ubuntu and FreeBSD runs great in Hyper-V thanks to MS contributing from Azure.
It's not like they are subverting standards or anything they once did
Re: (Score:3)
That's like putting nerf rounds in a Desert Eagle and taking it to the range. Why use a toy on something built to run the top end stuff when the top end stuff is cheaper?
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by how much Skype for Windows sucks, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
With one hand he giveth; with the other he taketh (Score:5, Insightful)
I would much rather the devs at skype/microsoft take the time to fix the features that used to work, which has since the new "alpha" been broken like video calling, which was one of the MAIN features of skype and on of the few applications that allowed cross platform video calling.
This is much more desirable than sending messages via SMS.
Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm actually trying to think of the use-case for SMS in Skype. As opposed to using the normal instant messaging feature I mean.
You want to SMS someone that doesn't have their phone number linked to Skype, but not using your phone? Am I missing something?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually trying to think of the use-case for SMS in Skype. As opposed to using the normal instant messaging feature I mean. You want to SMS someone that doesn't have their phone number linked to Skype, but not using your phone? Am I missing something?
I think you must be missing something :) Loads of people don't use skype at all, or do use it but aren't currently on a skype-active device. But most of them carry an SMS-capable device at all times. While you're at your desk, you want some way to message these people.
Could you use a different messaging service like Facebook Messenger or Whatsapp or whatever? Maybe, if you already know they have that app installed on their phone and it's set up for notifications. But SMS is guaranteed to always work.
Re: (Score:2)
I found it very useful about 8 years ago, before smartphones with messaging apps became so ubiquitous. I lived in France for a bit, then Ireland a little later and had a long distance relationship with a girl in Turkey. Using Skype to send the SMSes to her phone was considerably cheaper. Once I moved to Ireland, I got a cellphone contract which included "free skype to skype" and I could call her for free, just using my Skype credit. It was just a cheap feature phone, but the phone software somehow instructe
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually trying to think of the use case for SMS.
No that's it, just SMS. Here in the Netherlands SMSes are used by the government for 2 factor authentication and ... yeah that's about it. Wake me when Skype can send a WhatsApp message.
what the hell? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got a paid up Skype account and I've been able to send text messages from the desktop client for years.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message. Although, honestly I'm not sure what the difference is, use-case wise...
If you have someone on Skype, why not just use the normal text message feature?
If you have someone's phone number (but they're not on Skype) why not just text them from your phone?
Re: (Score:2)
but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message
Yes you could. I've texted my wife's phone and others many times over the years using Skype on Linux. I've been using Skype on Windows for the last 18 months, but the last version of Skype I used on Linux (skype-4.3.0.37-suse121.i586 by the RPM name) sent text messages to phones just fine. You needed a account with a balance and you had to setup your Skype account with your phone's number (such that caller ID identifies the caller/sender,) but I know for a fact that it worked.
So yeah, this huge Break T
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message.,
No, I really can/could. I got it because it was way cheaper for international calls than my mobile phone (fucking ripoff merchants), and texts came with it. It's cheap enough and pretty convenient. After a few years of that I went and paid for an attached phone number so that when I make calls and send texts, it appears to come from an actual phone. That way people can call back. My number is in the US becau
Re: (Score:2)
So how do I get all my regular Skype contacts to likewise switch to Ekiga?
Re: (Score:2)
So how can I afford to replace their hardware that has no working Linux drivers with hardware that has working Linux drivers? I remember reading in replies to my comments in another recent discussion [slashdot.org] that Linux users deserve to pay extra for convenience. And how do I get all of their contacts to switch to applications compatible with Linux at least to the extent of not meeting the criteria for a Garbage rating in Wine AppDB?
tl;dr: Far easier said than done. Or perhaps this was your point.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't replace the hardware. Write the drivers and make them work.
Writing drivers needs two things: specs and time. Specs are easier said than done because several manufacturers have proven unwilling to disclose information required to build a driver to free software volunteers. Time is easier said than done because once I've finished the drivers, the user has already replaced one piece of incompatible hardware with another piece of incompatible hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd still need to buy one of each device in order to reverse engineer it. Where should I find the money for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Such as mostly newer laptops. Bay Trail stuff in particular, such as the ASUS T100TA and X205TA, took a while for basic functionality to be supported in Debian and other distressed. Bluetooth and screen brightness are still broken on the T100TA [debian.org].
Always good to remember with Microsoft / Skype (Score:2)
https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
With the new administration getting appointments with folks who support mass surveillance and a CIC who stated he wanted to be able to spy on his political enemies, you have to wonder who will be in his crosshairs over the next 4 years. Things in this area are probably not going to get better. Best to assume any Skype communication will be stored by government forever, for future use and decide if you want to use this produ
Re: (Score:3)
On one hand you're right, and I wouldn't use Skype to discuss my secret plans to rule the world. It would make more sense to go through my backup CDs again and see if I can find my copy of pgpfone than to do that. (Probably it would make a lot more sense to do something else. Like IPSEC. But anyway.) On the other hand, this story is about SMS. One has to assume those are all logged anyway.
Great (Score:1)
So Linux finally arrived at the point where the rest of us was 5 years ago?
Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THIS! (Score:2, Insightful)
Why does this summary read like sophomore year marketing homework?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016.
Some cellular carriers still offer plans that include talk and text without data, particularly for people who use a cell phone in addition to a landline as opposed to a replacement for a landline. In order to converse with someone on such a plan, you need to be sending SMS.
Re: (Score:2)
It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016.
I dunno what you mean, I receive spam/scam messages all the time!
Do not touch this (Score:1)
Don't touch this, Trumpskys backers will have access to it soon.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/newly-published-nsa-documents-show-agency-could-grab-all-skype-traffic/
"A National Security Agency document published this week by the German news magazine Der Spiegel from the trove provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden shows that the agency had full access to voice, video, text messaging, and file sharing from targeted individuals over Microsoft’s Skype service.....The document detai
But a bloated web browser is under the hood (Score:2, Informative)
The Skype client for Linux is built on Electron, so while you do not see a web browser, a slow and bloated browser engine is running under the hood.
How any developer can be satisfied with using Electron is beyond me.
And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? (Score:4, Funny)
rm -fr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure it remakes the french language pack. Try it.
Re: (Score:2)
rm -fr
Re: (Score:2)
something like say: rm -fr /
I tried but it says / /' and aborted the command. Blame the stupid person that suggested you to do this command.
# rm -rf
Patched rm warning: caught an attempt to perform 'rm -rf
What does that mean?
Re: (Score:2)
It means you pointlessly patched your rm to provide that warning when it already does so unpatchedly. That is assuming you're talking about GNU rm, of course. Can't wait for GNU Clippy to appear and offer helpful advice on not trying to remove your /...
Re: (Score:2)
Who runs as root? :P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. That's awful! I am never touching it then!
Meh (Score:2)
Wake me up when they make a JSON API available.
There is convenience and elegance..... (Score:2)
Is it fake news (Score:2)
Skype for linux 1.13? (Score:2)
10 years-old news (Score:2)
Skype for Linux has been able to send SMS messages for 10 years or so. What's new about this?
Weird (Score:2)
How did we go from Skype Version 4.3.0.37, which runs just fine on Linux, to Skype for Linux Alpha 1.13.0.3?
I'm looking at 4.3..... right now, and it has the option of sending SMS messages (probably for a pretty penny) to mobiles. And it does video.
Re: (Score:3)
Well systemd does, and pulseaudio, and avahi, and dbus, and iproute2, and udev, and wayland, and rust, and gnome, and the new kernel versioning scheme (are we at 5.0 yet in the 2.6 series?)
Seems like as a general rule, Linux users have poor taste in software.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
guilt by association
Do you always jump to conclusions this fast? It has little to do with association. What makes it hard to believe that I might actually have individual reasons to dislike the mentioned projects? And how on earth would you omit avahi vom the "guilt by association" claim? Are you out of your depth here, again? :-)
why on earth complain about Wayland?
Because it perfectly matches the pattern?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
56% of the items on your list are part of the systemd project repository.
Funny, huh? I used to dislike the items even when systemd was the only item on that list that's part of the systemd repository. Not my fault systemd keeps absorbing software like that. That'd be ONE of the reasons I dislike systemd, since you were asking. If I want the integrated do-everything approach, I might just as well switch to Windows.
So there goes your guilt by association hypothesis. Now, since you asked so nicely:
pulseaudio: significant CPU usage, overly complex, written by the systemd guy (th
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, huh? I used to dislike the items even when systemd was the only item on that list that's part of the systemd repository. Not my fault systemd keeps absorbing software like that. That'd be ONE of the reasons I dislike systemd, since you were asking. If I want the integrated do-everything approach, I might just as well switch to Windows.
Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository and putting common code into shared libraries is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".
pulseaudio: significant CPU usage, overly complex, written by the systemd guy (that's guilt by precedent (postcedent?), not by association)
I've heard about the high CPU usage before but have not experienced it myself, have never seen it go above 0,x% on any of my systems. Compiz, X.Org or Firefox on the other hand (and that on idle!). Don't know if you remember the old days prior to pulse when every single project had their own inco
Re: (Score:2)
Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository [...] is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".
Then what is?
and putting common code into shared libraries
You won't see me complaining about this.
All those [avahi] issues sounds like the zero conf functionality have been enabled on your system for some reason, since they are handled by a separate deamon (avahi-autoipd) it's probably started by something else like NetworkManager, avahi by itself should not bring this up afaik.
Oh, right! I totally forgot NetworkManager on my list :-).
modern desktops
Don't get me started on "modern desktops"..
(And yes, I too have heard about some former X11 developers being among the wayland crowd. Do you know what's their proportion wrt. to the total amount of X11 developers? (I don't).
rust: [sarcasm]
[missing the sarcasm]
The part about rust was sarcasm.
Well I would say that KDE is a far more complicated beast
Yes, that's why I'm mad at gnome in the first place. If KDE was lightweight and simple, I wouldn't have made them use gnome in the first place
Re: (Score:2)
Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository [...] is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".
Then what is?
That would be if they really absorbed all that software, i.e deprecate each individual project and merge their code with systemd, but that is not what they have done, they have simply put all the different projects into the same git repository so that they (among other things) more easily can make simultaneous releases.
Well we can all think what we want about the modern desktop but there is where the majority of the users will be, tyranny of the majority so to speak. And since that will be the new playing f
Re: (Score:2)
among other things
See, my concern are those "other things", which would boil down to de-facto interweaving the formerly separate projects, adding dependencies from project A to project B, and project B to project A, which means, as you certainly know, that it's really more one project AB. I'll admit I'm not tracking changes to the systemd source repository, so maybe my concern has not become reality yet, but I think it's not very far fetched that this will happen, if it didn't already.
I mean what would you do, if you want to
Re: (Score:2)
See, my concern are those "other things", which would boil down to de-facto interweaving the formerly separate projects, adding dependencies from project A to project B, and project B to project A, which means, as you certainly know, that it's really more one project AB. I'll admit I'm not tracking changes to the systemd source repository, so maybe my concern has not become reality yet, but I think it's not very far fetched that this will happen, if it didn't already.
I mean what would you do, if you want to implement a fancy feature in your $pet_project, but unfortunately it requires $pet_project specific support in $dependent_project, and $dependent_project happens to be inside your own repository. Don't tell me that the reasoning would be "oh yeah, we better hold on and think of a implementation-agnostic approach to this particular issue rather than just committing this little patch". Not for most programmers, and especially not for special expert L.P.
Well that is what they have done so far (i.e going the implementation-agnostic approach), you might not like DBUS but for all the warts it does make for a implementation-agnostic approach so as long as the competition support the same DBUS messages then everything should work. You might not like that the different projects use interprocess communication like this but that would happen regardless of them sharing a code repository or not (just look at how i.e gnome depends on some DBUS messages from systemd-l
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe because it has systemd level hype with the same rabid attack by fanboys on alternatives but without the project maturity.
I wish they would hold off the hype until the thing is ready to use and the "X sux" misinformation stuff was beyond childish.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cut and pasting X code does not suddenly make the X developers who wrote the original copied code Wayland developers.
The only person who comes remotely close to what you are suggesting is Daniel Stone and he's been called out as being less than honest with his examples (eg. he suggested X is slow because gedit based on gtk3 is slow - yet the older version of gedit has not speed problems at all on X). He ported X to the Nokia N900 and did a bit of a code cleanup on a tiny part of X but he's n
Re: (Score:2)
Wayland is not X FFS! (Score:2)
Seriously?
Wayland is not X.
It is very different.
It was never designed to be "the future of X".
It was designed to be something else to use instead of X.
So now you know a tiny bit about the topic. I suggest you learn a little bit more before you go around "correcting" people.
Re: (Score:2)
Something else to use instead of X (Score:2)
How about you take a look at the Wayland mailing list and actually get a clue about the topic to avoid any more ridiculous mistakes.
The guy who fucked up is calling me dense? How about learning about the topic instead of making me laugh at you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You wrote that Wayland is the future of X.
That's as ridiculous as suggesting a bridge in Alaska is the future of Miami.
No. One guy who worked on two X extensions and another guy that did a port to a Debian variant is a tiny drop in the bucket of the developers of X.
You did worse than that, you wrote the following lie:
Why are you trying to start a fight over a topic you know absolutely nothing
Re: (Score:2)
You wrote that Wayland is the future of X. That's as ridiculous as suggesting a bridge in Alaska is the future of Miami.
So you still don't understand that X is the future of Y does not mean that they share anything other than once Y will be deprectated X will take over it's place and function even though I now have written that three times? Very great for some one who claims that others fuck up...
No. One guy who worked on two X extensions and another guy that did a port to a Debian variant is a tiny drop in the bucket of the developers of X.
I just did a quick look at the changelog from X.org at https://www.x.org/releases/X11... [x.org] and cross checked names with people who contributed code to the Wayland project and stopped after finding these 7 names: Jesse Barnes, Kristian
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you still posting shit about a topic you know nothing about? Of course I understand. The only thing not understood here is in your own head.
Now you are doing all out fucking numerology with patch numbers without having a fucking clue about what is an X extension, what is part of the core of X and what is a removal of code (Daniel Stone removing xprint was a very large patch by these numbers despite it actually meaning a lot less code in X).
I suggest learning what a nu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well how open source is your dumbphone?
Re: (Score:2)
How is it a straw man? Did you badly misspell "rhetorical question" there? I'm only pointing out a flaw in your reasoning. And since you're talking about trust, how much do you trust your GSM carrier to "negotiate" (quotes because it's unilateral) encryption with your phone?
Re: (Score:2)