Did anybody bother to look at the numbers?

I checked the stats for the last 4 years here and it looks really strange. Statistics isn’t my thing… But it looks like it’s wise to be cautious and not to fully trust the numbers.

Around the beginning of last year there was a huge dip in the Windows market share that seemed to be correlating with a peek in “unknown”. Windows then catched up in a somewhat erratic way.

Mac OS also shows a weird behavior. Starts at 16%, up to 21% and the down to 14% between October and November…

It’s not likely that a huge number of people decided to buy a Mac and then trash it one month later. Same but opposite goes for the windows stats.

I think it looks like there is an uncertainty of more than the total market share Linux is shown to have…

Not saying that Linux isn’t increasing on desktop market share. Just saying that numbers seen to have quite a bit error margin and to be cautious if referring to these numbers.

In its email, Google states that it is closing down the program because of the “overall increase in the Android OS security posture and feature hardening efforts.” This has led to researchers submitting fewer vulnerabilities than before.

1. Vulnerabilities are found, which shows that the program is successful and needed.
2. No vulnerabilities are found, no money will have to leave Google.

Keeping the program will reap the benefits from both no. 1 and no.2 while closing down the program only enables no.2.

Not hard to see the priorities here…

Both are CL 19 do you should be fine.

I recommend you shrink the windows partition on the internal drive and install Linux in the then empty space. The extra disk you have can be used as and extra disk or you can create mount points for /home and other directories.

Microsoft does not recognize other operating systems as “equals” (WSL is not Linux being week. It’s making Linux a puppet controlled by Windows) and therefore they design everything Windows as it was the only OS in the world. Therefore keeping Windows will often require some extra acrobatics from you.

What’s is the main topic of your blog?

Yup. /r/Datahoarder guided me right. Got two of the recommended model of MyBook and shucked them. This was 2-3 years ago. Disks are still going strong in my NAS.

You seeing me as aggressive just because I’m right about Firefox being a web browser is nothing I can do anything about and something you have to work with.

Me and Mozilla will keep trucking and call Mozilla Firefox a Web Browser… Or as Wikipedia says:

Mozilla Firefox, or simply Firefox, is a free and open-source web browser developed by the Mozilla Foundation and its subsidiary, the Mozilla Corporation.

And you keep calling Firefox your banana or whatever. It’s ok. I promise to continue to not being aggressive about it.

Banana or not, a document viewer / editor that handle a subset of two standards is not a very versatile document viewer / editor.

So back to my original point: Since Mozilla doesn’t have a very stable business model it seems dangerous to focus on other things than making their web browser the best at browsing the web.

Ps. It took us over 20 years to get rid of the cluster f***s Internet Explorer and Flash was and it seems we should have learned the lesson by now. Going down the same route as before, starting to support standards that rely on patents owned by a third party (Adobe in this case) is definitively not a death sentence in any way, but history has shown us that it’s a slippery slope that has many different paths and endings.

You obviously know very little about PDF since you’re trying to put it on the same level as HTML.

The PDF files that we see in our daily life today is not even halfway as open as HTML is and dealing with them is not as easy as you think.

Furthermore, you’re free to call Firefox a “document viewer”.

I personally prefer a state of the art web browser and a state of the art PDF viewer more than one document viewer that only handles subsets of 2 document types.

That was 20 years ago. Numerous PDF readers has surfaced since then.

PDF is not like HTML.PDF is a messy standard where you need Adobe products to support all the shit that a PDF could contain. There is no open source product that for example fully support PDF forms and therefore Mozilla won’t either.

All in saying is that Firefox is a web browser and not a document viewer. Since Mozilla would go bankrupt in two hours if Google stopped showing them with a shitload of money, Mozilla would be wise to focus on the core.

So if Google were to stop paying Mozilla for us to be able to use Firefox for free, we’re all running Chrome.

Let’s hope that if they support the shit show XFA is, they manage to support it fully.

The only one that seem to support it fully today is Adobe and I still haven’t been able to find any open source product that was able to close forms in PDFs.

I just wish Mozilla got back to focus on making the best browser.

PDF stuff is cool but not why I use a web browser.

History is full of companies who went under because they didn’t analyze and predict what would hurt their bottom line…

You ok?

Let’s call it for what it is:

Planned obsolescence.

Yup. That’s right.

It’s concerning that you insinuate that 20 year old hardware just works in Linux.

Just because a 20 year old sound card happens to work in your favorite Linux distro doesn’t in any way mean that it will work forever or that there are drivers for all 20 year old soundcards.

Where does it say that it’s not allowed to create a Windows driver for a 20 year old soundcard?

So going to work on the commuter train will be A LOT of buzzing on your phone?

Sounds like there’s more to it than that.

So if phones essentially are BLE beacons I fail how Apple/Google plan to detect unwanted trackers.

All I have to do is register a new playstore account and use that to track a specific tag/phone.

Someone care to explain what I’m missing here?

To be honest, it was ages ago I started up wine so I’m the wrong person to ask.

I’m a dual booter, best of two worlds, full support from vendors and no compatibility problems is my preferred way

Normally it’s not lack of Windows compatibility breaking the use of an application with wine, it’s the frameworks and libraries the application was built with/need to have access to.

So check what additional libraries and stuff your application have as a prerequisite. Visual C 2005? 2010? DotNet framework? Which version? And so on.

When you know what the application needs, then you can Google for “wine DotNet 4.5” (just an example) to get a feeling what problems people had and how they solved it.

Essentially wine needs to know where to find them when you start your application with/in wine.

Also, if your application uses MSSQL Express or similar, you might be out of luck. So if that’s the case you should start googling on how to get that running (if even possible) before installing.

Good luck, be stubborn and make sure to have fun. There’s a lot you’ll learn in this adventure of yours that will come in handy again and again in the future.