


KDM3 Themes by Sproggy 5 comments
LAME - Apr 16 2008

Wallpapers PCLinuxOS by Sproggy 2 comments
What these people do is look for a 15 or 20 year old windows program that has gone opensource. Spend 30 minutes messing with the code and attach their name to it. Then the rest of us are supposed to hail them as gurus or programming gods. They are nothing but cheap ripoff artists.
Your comment is so typical of a linux user. By your logic, if you don't like something about linux, you must be working for Microsoft. (As if an MS employee wouldn't have better things to do) Are all you people conspiracy theory whack jobs or what?
There is no competition between Linux and Microsoft. Linux has about 1% of the desktop market worldwide. MS doesn't care about you or your crappy knockoff software.
If all you want on here is people to blow smoke up the asses of these so called "programmers" then you'll continue to get weak utilities like this one.
I use linux as a hobby. I run it about 95% of the time. But I use windows and mac also. It's not a team sport. You don't have to pick a side. Grow up.
The quality of most "open source" software is terrible. and I'm not going to pat someone on the back for a crappy job. - Jan 12 2008
Don't listen to mgogoulos. He's just trying to toot his own horn here.
His claim to have only come across inaccurate articles a FEW times is either disingenuous or he is a complete fool.
Anyone with half a brain can see that thousands of the articles on wikipedia are tagged with warnings about "original research", "quality standards", "unverified claims", etc.
For example, take a look at the entry for the restaurant "McDonalds" or the comedian "Dane Cook".
The fact that many articles are now locked is not something to brag about but instead a testiment to the dangers of having "average joe" write the information.
I agree with you. Most all articles have the slant of opinion as though some marijuana-smoking euro teenager wrote them.
Yes, a few high profile entries are now locked but THOUSANDS of others are not.
And who would even know which of these entries contained false information at the time that YOU read it? (Not when someone, if ever, gets around to correcting it!)
Additionally, many articles are simply plagerized from other sources.
There is no control and no accountability except for the few anecdotal examples mentioned by the apologists.
This brings me around to Indywiki. It seems typical of the linux community to steal information from other sources and claim it as your own. Indywiki is nothing more than a buggy reader that 'steals' all of it's information from a source that is both unreliable, and in some instances 'stolen' from somewhere else.
All all Linux users theives? Is there anything original on here?
Why is everything on this site a sad ripoff or port of some 10 year old windows/mac program? - Jan 12 2008
Some people are idiots. What they "think" about wikipedia does NOT make it a reliable source of information.
It has been PROVEN to be an UNRELIABLE source of information.
That is a FACT. Not an OPINION. - Jan 06 2008
Some people think Linux is about stealing and bootlegging ideas from Windows and Apple.
If you are entitled to your opinion, so is everyone else. So you shut the .... up.
PS - Your comment had NOTHING to do with Indywiki. Which still sucks by the way. - Jan 05 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words
With people like you reading and writing at wikipedia, it is clear why it will never be a valid source of information. - Dec 20 2007
Wikipedia pretends to be an encyclopedia but it is ANYTHING BUT ACCURATE. - Dec 20 2007
Then go look at this site that has recorded just a small percentage of the vandalism that takes place daily on wikipedia. http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/vandals.html
Then maybe you should call John Seigenthaler Sr. or a thousand other victims and ask them about Wikipedia accuracy.
Yeah, real educational. We should get this into the the minds of school children right away. - Dec 14 2007
Wikipedia demonstrates a pattern of sloppiness, indifference to basic scholarly standards, and flagrant errors so numerous that it completely invalidates its "supposed" information. - Dec 14 2007
WIkipedia is not a reliable source of anything but merely a posting place for personal opinion. All you need is a link to another unverifiable source in order to get your propaganda included there.
Who is expected to be educated with unverifiable information and disorganized mayhem?
Maybe this should be moved to "Other Software". - Dec 14 2007

Karamba & Superkaramba by daneus 3 comments

Karamba & Superkaramba by daneus 3 comments

Wallpapers Kubuntu by sbrown1038 5 comments

Wallpapers Kubuntu by sbrown1038 5 comments

Wallpapers Kubuntu by sbrown1038 5 comments
Linux desktop users only account for 0.81% of the total OS market. (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2)
Then that group is even more fragmented into different distributions.
How many people can this image actually appeal to?
Then let's add the fact that it's a regional holiday theme. That's narrowing the field of potential users even further.
Now you are dealing with a fraction of a fraction of a percent.
Hmmm, I wonder why the score is so low? - Oct 24 2007

Cliparts by BlackStone 34 comments
Grow up and don't be such nerds! - Oct 20 2007

Wallpaper Other by alexdark 2 comments

Karamba & Superkaramba by pi3kielny 18 comments

Karamba & Superkaramba by ih8windoze 8 comments
These countdown timers are really lame. - Oct 04 2007

Wallpapers Windows by ooz 6 comments
Now from an artistic standpoint, the title should be "This Wallpaper Sucks". It's nothing more than an 8 year old stock WIndows background with some poor quality cartoon images painted on top. Looks like a 10 year old spent 5 minutes putting this together.
But hey, don't take my word for it, just look at the score. - Oct 01 2007

Wallpaper Other by DaronDedeoglu 1 comment