Linux desktop lacks innovation

[Joel Bryan Juliano]

On Nov 29, 2007 12:26 AM, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28/11/2007, Joel Bryan Juliano <joelbryan.juliano at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Microsoft itself is not innocent regarding it's claims that Linux is
>
> That should be "its claims".
>
> > illegal.
> > Just recently Microsoft allowed illegitimized
>
> What does "illegitimized" mean?
>
> > copies of their "Banditware
> > Windows"
>
> What is "Banditware Windows"?
>
> > to bypass WPA activation in WIndows XP.
> >
> > I remember a commercial about endangered animals, that when "the buying
> > stops, the killing too."
> > Microsoft itself allows it's clients
>
> That's "its clients".
>
> > to be bandits, illigitimate users of
>
> "Illegitimate".
>
> > it's banditware,
>
> "Its".
>
> > for Microsoft, making their clients as bandits
>
> Pardon?
>
> > is important in their
> > business, because "When Piracy stops, so thus Microsoft too"..
>
> One full stop or three, not two. There are too many grammatical errors
> in there to try.
>
> > This only means that Linux is really catching up!
>
> It does?
>
> > As the old rule says, 20% of the entire Ubuntu users
> >  make up the entire 80% of the Ubuntu popularity.
>
> What? This is a bizarre new application of the Pareto Principle, as
> far as I can see.
>
> >  Hence, 80% of Canonical's earnings comes from the
> >  20% of it's users,
>
> "Its users". But anyway, what earnings? Canonical makes money from
> support contracts. A damned sight fewer than 20% of Ubuntu users take
> out those.
>
> > and 20% of Ubuntu developer's
> >  efforts
>
> "Developers' efforts".
>
> > results to 80% of the OS's innovation and features.
>
> After rereading that three times... Where do you get that estimate
> from? Seems pretty wild to me.
>
> >  The 20% (or the vital few) is what's really counts
>
> "What really counts".
>
> >  and small vital efforts really results to big changes!
>
> Which efforts are those, then?
>
> > The more 20% there is, the faster the Linux market share grows!
>
> Er. What? You want lots of 20% groups, or a bigger-than-twenty percent
> group? Do you actually know?
>
>
> > I say, Hooray!
>
> Er, yes, good for you.
>
> I wouldn't normally bother carping on about bad grammar, but hey,
> given the number of people that gave me grief for their being unable
> to understand a perfectly grammatical, correct piece, why not?
>
> Joel, if English is not your native language, I'm sorry, I do not mean
> to mock. If it /is/ your native language, however, you should have
> paid more attention in school.

English is not my native language, and I regret my bad grammar
and my bad e-mail habits in disdain.

I apologize..

The moral story?
There's no moral story because probably everyone knows it already, but
I think it's still worth mentioning.
It's just the common-sense use of e-mail that I should (and maybe
everyone too) review everything for
wrong grammar, punctuations before I hit send. Its a common mistake
for most people.

And lastly, don't use e-mail when your upset.

As for the past messages, well I guess it will haunt me, like,
forever... (Thanks to Al Gore for inventing the Internet. :-) )