Re: [!NEWS] The GNUtards Must Be Crazy

[Rjack]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
>
> > Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > David Kastrup wrote:
> > >
> > > [... about me ...]
> > >
> > > > He is serious about being an idiot.
> > > Said GNUtian "Huh? You can't be held to a contract you did 
> > > not sign" dak.
> >
> > Seldom have truer words been spoken:
> >
> > "When have you EVER seen a truly innovative piece of GPL 
> > software? Everything in GPL is a bad copy of some other 
> > software that was developed under a commercial license or a 
> > true open source license like BSD."
> >
> > http://kuoi.com/~kamikaze/read.php?id=157
>
> Our local trolls get debile.

Yeah... GNUtians all have balls the size of grapefruit and the
brains the size of friggin' peanuts.

> They jump to premature confusions, not staying with one
> non-sequitur until having milked the bull for what it's worth.
>
> So what are the non-GPL superior equivalents and precursors in 
> innovation to:
>
> <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs> 
> <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex.html> 
> <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc>

The above mentioned programs are all knock-offs of stolen ideas
and projects of other folks:


"Emacs development began at the MIT AI Lab during the 1970s..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacs

"LaTeX is based on Donald E. Knuth's TeX typesetting language or
certain extensions. LaTeX was first developed in 1985 by Leslie
Lamport..."
http://www.latex-project.org/intro.html

"gcc is just another C compiler, and not a very good one. The Intel
compilers compile significantly faster and produce faster and more
memory-efficient code from the same source. I'm sure Borland's
compilers are still faster and more efficient than gcc, too. There
used to be many others, but the widespread availability of a shitty
but "free" gcc has poisoned the market."
http://kuoi.com/~kamikaze/read.php?id=157

Sincerely,
Rjack :)