Re: "Less so for organisations running Ubuntu on lots of PCs and moving to 14.04"
>> You basically called me a liar.
>I didn't. I said you don't know as much as you think you do. That you take such exception to this is indicative in itself...
I said I was familiar with both GNU/Linux and Windows, you replied saying I was not, short as that. That's calling me a liar. And no, it's not indicative of anything. Someone who knows a lot about something is perfectly entitled to take exception to being told they aren't familiar with it. Indicative of nothing.
>>> "I also asked for an apology.
>>"Which you're not going to get. You claimed a status you do not deserve, and I told you exactly that"
All I said was that I was familiar with security models under both GNU/Linux and Windows and you said that wasn't true (without ever having met me so far as I'm aware).
Here is my response: Link.
Those are my own words, no cut and paste you wont find any of it dragged from anywhere else. Does that sound like someone unfamiliar with the security models of the two OS's?
You've read my response. You know damn well that you were wrong. An apology and a retraction is in order.
>>Regardless, I backed up what I said
>>"You didn't. You backed up as much as you seem to know about the situation. That you omitted Linux's support for exactly the same set of ACLs as you deem superior "
I explicitly went into ACLs on GNU/Linux and also covered to a sufficient degree why they are NOT "exactly the same". Now we move from you setting yourself up as judge on other people to you betraying flaws in your own understanding. If you say that ACLs on GNU/Linux are "exactly the same" as on Windows, then you don't know what you're talking about.
>>"Of course I'm not going to concede that. Your knowledge is lackiing. I pointed that out, and now you've got the hump. I'm not sufficiently interested to argue with you, but you don't seem to want to let it drop. I would much rather hear no more about it."
If you don't like replies like this then don't write insulting posts that declare what OS's someone you've never met is or is not familiar with. I've got "the hump", have I? Well yes, being insulted does make me angry. That's kind of why you insult someone - to upset them. Silly for you to complain afterwards.
You wrote a very patronizing and ad hominem post. I wrote a very factual reply. Now you're falling back on argument by assertion and doing your best to provide reasons why you'd "rather hear no more about it". Well, of course not. I provided facts, you provide statements such as "your knowledge is lacking".
I don't pretend to know everything, but anyone reading this can click on my reply to you above and see for themselves that your attempts to dismiss what I say by pretending superior knowledge don't really wash.
Now, if you've had enough, then by all means don't reply. But don't be stunned if your doing so perpetuates this conversation that you you're supposedly "not sufficiently interested in".
Biting the hand that feeds IT
