Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

What's a tech term you hate?

GNU/Linux just being called "Linux". Like boi, Linux is just a kernel. The full OS that most people use uses the GNU core utils on top of Linux.

Quote me if you want me to get a notification. (if it's not my own thread)

Always assume I'm not using Windows unless I say I am. I'm usually using GNU/Linux.

I'm the proud owner of a Thinkpad T440p and an Optiplex 9020, and I use Debian BTW. I also have lots of other project computers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm buying a 2K screen (from newegg, they're scalpers for making a profit) because i think 1440p is more futureproof than 1080p, to play digital games on my gaming rig because i'm a gamer

though i had to RMA my UPS because the APP for it on my computer doesn't say how long the battery lasts

it's a beast rig with an i3 4100, i paired it with a GT 1030, so i hope there's no bottlenecks

i also used a 10ft USB A male to female extension so i can have a usb port on my desk

-runs before i get murdered-

My PCs: Desky | Beddie | Miney | Benchie

Things I need help with: (nothing at the moment)

Spoiler

none atm

I hate Intel's pricing, Ryzen's weird quirks, Nvidia's pricing, and Radeon GPUs in general

Spoiler

Products I like:

Spoiler

Sony Xperia Z1 / Z2 / 10 ii, Asus Strix 970 / 1070, Samsung SSD, WD HDD, Corsair PSUs (AX, RM, CX(grey)), GeForce GPU, NZXT N450/S340, be quiet! Coolers, G.Skill Trident RAM, Logitech M525, Logitech G440, Razer Deathadder Elite

Products I hate:

Spoiler

Xperia Z3, XiaoMi 5c, Radeon GPUs, Razer Audio Products, any bloatwares

Companies I absolutely adore: (and hope it stays that way)

Spoiler

be quiet! - sent me AM4 mounting for my DRP3 even though it's way past the timeframe stated, no questions asked

Corsair - very good RMA experience, absolutely recommend

Companies I hate:

Spoiler

Nvidia, Intel, Apple, TMT (Thundermatch, a retailer)

Personal Blacklisted Companies:

Spoiler

Acer: shit tier quality products, shit tier customer service thus far, they "tried" to solve my issue but they arent really doing anything but delaying and delaying. (on-going case since July)

Gigabyte: horrible customer service (gigabyte had literally 0 customer service, asked me to go to retailer with NO WAY to email them about a question) but at least they fixed my shit in ONE MONTH (would probably take me 1 hour to fix if they let me email them)

XiaoMi Phones: built like a tank but the software is buggy as all hell

Seagate HDD: had too many dead seagate drives

Kingston SSD: 300V controller swap thingy

Razer (except their mouse)

Remember, just because I had good/bad experiences with these companies/product, doesn't mean you will have similar experiences too. I would still recommend these products if they made sense for your needs, but I'll add a disclaimer of my experience if it's relevant. Feel free to DM me asking why they are where they are.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moonzy said:

-runs before i get murdered-

Run fast and far, so that you may reach the land west of the sun and east of the moon before the wedding between the prince and the troll's daughter takes place.

REFRESH BEFORE RESPOND, I EDITED MY POST

  • Forums
  • Community Standards
  • All Activity
  • My Activity Streams 
  • More 
  •  All Activity
  •  
  •  Mark site read
  •  
  •  Create 
  • Home 
  •  
  • Settings

Signature Restrictions

Please ensure your signature complies with the following restrictions:

 

  •  Images are not allowed
  •  
  •  Maximum of 10 URLs
  •  
  •  Maximum of 30 lines

 

  • View signatures?


    Show other people's signatures alongside their content

  • SignatureSizeFont

     

     

    • Drag files here to attach, or choose files...

    • Other Media 
    • Max total size: 20 MB
  • Save

  •  All Activity Mark site read Home Settings Theme Privacy Policy Terms of Use Forum Support
  • Forums Community Standards All Activity My Activity Streams More All Activity
  • Mark site read Create Home Settings

Settings

Manage your account settings, and set up social network integration.

  • Overview Email Address Password Security and Privacy Recently Used Devices Display Name Content View Behavior Signature Twitter Microsoft Google Steam Discord

Signature Restrictions

Please ensure your signature complies with the following restrictions:

  • Images are not allowed Maximum of 10 URLs Maximum of 30 lines
  • View signatures? Show other people's signatures alongside their content Signature                   SizeFont
    • Drag files here to attach, or choose files... Other Media Max total size: 20 MB

  • Save

  • All Activity Mark site read Home Settings
  •  
  • Theme Privacy Policy Terms of Use Forum Support
  • Linus Media GroupPowered by Invision Community

aHR0cHM6Ly9kcml2ZS5nb29nbGUuY29tL2ZpbGUvZC8xOWZWOVNidFp1d2FLUVUxaUY5bjg3MjVHelcxd2x2SWkvdmlldz91c3A9c2hhcmluZw==

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottleneck....because it's the most misused term i see on this forum because people hear the word and a very basic description of it and then immediately feel like they need to make a post here freaking out that their PC is somehow not performing right despite them not having any issues prior to them hearing the word

🌲🌲🌲

Judge the product by its own merits, not by the Company that created it.

 

Don't dilute <good thing> by always trying to focus on, and drag conversation back to, <bad thing>.

🌲🌲🌲

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, LloydLynx said:

GNU/Linux just being called "Linux". Like boi, Linux is just a kernel. The full OS that most people use uses the GNU core utils on top of Linux.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realising it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G / Sapphire R9 290X / 16gb (2x8) Kingston ValueRam @ 2666Mhz / Gigabyte A320M-S2H / Kingston A400 120GB M.2 SSD (Windows 10) / WD Blue 2.5" 1TB HDD (Windows 10 Games) / Seagate 250GB 7200RPM HDD (Pop!_OS 21.04) / Cooler Master MWE450 / Deep Cool Ice Edge Mini FS V2 /iCute Thing / LG 22MK400H-B 1920x1080 @ 75Hz / Dell P2210 1680 x 1050 @ 60Hz / Logitech G402 Hyperion Fury / Cooler Master MK730 / Razer Kraken Xthose lights off!

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, LloydLynx said:

GNU/Linux just being called "Linux". Like boi, Linux is just a kernel. The full OS that most people use uses the GNU core utils on top of Linux.

Linux is Linux, yes it’s just the kernel, but it makes as much difference as calling all sugar-based candy “candy”

 

it’s still candy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZgamer said:

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realising it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.

Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.

One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?

(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.

Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?

If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.

Thanks for listening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LloydLynx said:

GNU/Linux just being called "Linux". Like boi, Linux is just a kernel. The full OS that most people use uses the GNU core utils on top of Linux.

 

1 hour ago, NZgamer said:

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realising it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

 

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

Linux is Linux, yes it’s just the kernel, but it makes as much difference as calling all sugar-based candy “candy”

 

it’s still candy.

 

45 minutes ago, Craftyawesome said:

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.

Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.

One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?

(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.

Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?

If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.

Thanks for listening.

Linux....GNU....Linux/GNU....GNU/Linux.....???/GNU.....Linux/???......If it's brown and smell it's s*** so why polish up just say s***

it's fine.....it's nice......i like it

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, caincha said:

I hate when people ask me how long does the battery last. Not a term, but a peeve…?

I usually reply: it depends on usage but here is the battery count and battery health percentage. And usually ignore if they insist…

It’s because they’re not finishing the sentence.  Most of the time they are actually asking “how long does the battery last on average during normal use?”  More or less “how long can I expect to be able to do stuff before I have to tie myself to a wall socket?”

Life is like a bowl of chocolates: there are all these little crinkly paper cups everywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

It’s because they’re not finishing the sentence.  Most of the time they are actually asking “how long does the battery last on average during normal use?”  More or less “how long can I expect to be able to do stuff before I have to tie myself to a wall socket?”

Your 'normal use' is likely to be very different from mine or anyone else for that matter.

A person who uses the laptop for FB or Office will have different 'normal use' than someone who uses it for video editing and rendering. And I had people with high specs laptops that would likely be used for FB and had people with low end laptops asking about video editing so it can vary by a lot and is always best to not assume anything or you might end up with a problem you did not ask for. 🙂 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

FUTURE PROOF -

 

Oh yes I hate this one the most. 

 

IT WAS BLEEPING OUTDATED WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT!!

Um well if i say my build is "future proof" it would mean it will last me a fair amount of years without needing to upgrade anything whatsoever. Am I using the term wrong or?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

FUTURE PROOF -

 

Oh yes I hate this one the most. 

 

IT WAS BLEEPING OUTDATED WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS... I cringe and want to scream and yell every time I see this term. 

PSU Tier List Thread

Please make sure to Quote me or @ me to see your reply!

 

"White Ice"

Ryzen 9 5900x | Asus Crosshair VIII Hero (Wi-Fi) | EVGA RTX 2080ti | Ballistix 32gb 16-18-16-36 3600mhz | Custom Water Cooling Loop | 1tb Samsung 970 Evo

2tb Crucial MX500 SSD | 2x 3tb Seagate Drive | Fractal Design Meshify S2 |  EVGA G2 750w PSU | 3x Corsair LL140 | 3x Corsair LL120

 

Dedicated Streaming Rig

 Ryzen 7 3700x | Asus B450-F Strix | 32gb Gskill Flare X 3200mhz | Corsair RM550x | EVGA GTX 1060 3gb | 250gb 860 Evo m.2

Phanteks Enthoo Evolv |  Elgato HD60 Pro | Avermedia Live Gamer Duo | Avermedia 4k GC573 Capture Card

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

armored beast <-- gaming computer...

For god sakes, its a freaking computer...you are not Conan the barbarian.

 

another one

Q: what kind of computer do you have?

A: i7

Q: OMG, that is so fast~

  • CPU
    9900KS @ 5.0 avx offset 0/ cache 4.7/ @1.33v
  • Motherboard
    asus strix ROG z390-i
  • RAM
    8gb x2 G.skill ddr 4 3600 (OCed to 4000 17-19-19-39 @1.4v)
  • GPU
    Asus Strix OC RTX 3080 10GB  
  • Case
    Corsair 280x Crystal
  • Storage
    1tb Samsung SSD + 2x (512gb Samsung) SSD
  • PSU
    Seasonic GM 650 650Watt Gold (semi-modular)
  • Display(s)
    LG34gk950g
  • Cooling
    H115i platinum/ 2x NF-A14 (GPU intake)/ 2xNFA14 (H115i radiator exhaust fan) 2x Corsair ML PRO 140(front intake) / 1x NF-A8 (exhaust)/ 2 x Corsair LL 120 (GPU deshroud fans)
  • Keyboard
    Corsair K70 LUX MX RED/ Microsoft Designer Keyboard Bluetooth
  • Mouse
    Corsair Harpoon RGB
  • Sound
    Audioengine A2+/ Audioengine d1 dac/ B&O h6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Bottleneck, because people don't still understand what it means.
  • Gaming in any product name (and people who ask about "gaming RAM" or "Gaming CPU" or "Gaming mobo")
  • Positive/negative pressure
  • PCMR
  • TDP, another term that people use without understand what it means
  • lag, when used to describe ALL problems with games
  • "hot air rises" bs

 

PS. Futureproofing and being outdated is imo not same thing. Everything is outdated once you take it out of the box. Futureproofing, or how I understand it, is to leave yourself options when upgrading. Probably the term itself is too overused, or misunderstood, like bottlenecking. Maybe I should too be using "upgradatibility" instead.

^^^^ That's my post ^^^^
<-- This is me --- That's your scrollbar -->
vvvv Who's there? vvvv

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

Futureproofing, or how I understand it, is to leave yourself options when upgrading.

The most common use of "future proofing" i have seen here is:

"What can i buy right now that will be able to get x fps in ALL games for the next n years, so i don't have to upgrade?"

🌲🌲🌲

Judge the product by its own merits, not by the Company that created it.

 

Don't dilute <good thing> by always trying to focus on, and drag conversation back to, <bad thing>.

🌲🌲🌲

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottleneck

i5 8600 - RX580 - Fractal Nano S - 1080p 144Hz

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Arika S said:

The most common use of "future proofing" i have seen here is:

"What can i buy right now that will be able to get x fps in ALL games for the next n years, so i don't have to upgrade?"

Yeah, that means its one of those terms that people don't really understand. Same with all questions about what performance hardware that hasn't been released will give. Or how demanding games will be in next 5 years. Do these people think if anyone on random tech forum would know, they would tell? Thats guaranteed billionaire idea.

^^^^ That's my post ^^^^
<-- This is me --- That's your scrollbar -->
vvvv Who's there? vvvv

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LloydLynx said:

GNU/Linux just being called "Linux". Like boi, Linux is just a kernel. The full OS that most people use uses the GNU core utils on top of Linux.

Oh dear. And here I was planning to put down "GNU/Linux" because the name "Linux" is much easier to use, everyone knows what you mean, the kernel is the single most important piece of an OS, and there are, in fact, versions of Linux that have hardly any GNU utils.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

Oh dear. And here I was planning to put down "GNU/Linux" because the name "Linux" is much easier to use, everyone knows what you mean, the kernel is the single most important piece of an OS, and there are, in fact, versions of Linux that have hardly any GNU utils.

FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT!!!

-Phoenix-

BlackMac Woody Clack Virtuality Lil'Lad Plot-Device

all your proteins are belong to us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Murasaki said:

Um well if i say my build is "future proof" it would mean it will last me a fair amount of years without needing to upgrade anything whatsoever. Am I using the term wrong or?

Ok, so future proof means that it's something that will not become obsolete.

 

AMD released Zen2 but was already in the manufacturing process of Zen 3. 

 

So your chip was essentially obsolete at purchase time. You future proofed nothing.

- If it ain't broken, don't fix it! - - Your post codes and beep codes in the drop down below -

Spoiler

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×