Linux-Advocacy Digest #548, Volume #25 Tue, 7 Mar 00 19:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (Steve Mading)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (David T. Blake)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Steve Mading)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Steve Mading)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Chad Myers")
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Christopher Wong)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Which Linux version is best ? (Steve Mading)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Christopher Wong)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Christopher Wong)
Re: Salary? (Jan Schaumann)
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (Nix)
Re: What's GNU/Linux? (Nix)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Christopher Wong)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Donovan Rebbechi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: 7 Mar 2000 23:03:44 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:59:11 -0500,
: If M$ is claiming that W2K is "the most secure windows ever"
: where is the C2 rating for W2K? What evaluation method are they
: using to make that claim?
Not that I enjoy defending MS, but a C2 rating is a really long
and involved process with government red tape. Whether or not
W2K is actually good enough for C2 compliance or not, it hasn't
been around long enough to get it.
Not that C2 means much about the OS anyway. It spends just
as much time dealing with RF leaks and the ability to open
the PC case, and things like that. MS pulled a fast one by
convincing people that it was relevant in the first place,
and every time we argue back about it we play into their hands.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David T. Blake)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: 7 Mar 2000 22:35:34 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2000 18:47:15 GMT, David T. Blake wrote:
>
> >xfstt is available for all non-RedHat X systems as a drop in
> >replacement for the X font server. There is lots on it on
> >the web, including several web sites.
>
> Are you sure you don't mean xfsft ? xfstt is only truetype AFAIK.
For sure I did.
> >type support for many applications. Of cource, Apple is now
> >preparing to halt all TrueType font use in linux due to
> >the patents they hold on TrueType fonts.
>
> References ?
www.freetype.org
"
We are now in contact with Apple's legal department to discuss
the TrueType patents issues with them. However, we'll be unable
to comment on the current discussion until they take an official
position. This could take some time, so don't expect anything too
soon.
Even though we're unable to tell for now whether FreeType
violates them, this could mean that the free use of the library
could be illegal in the US or other countries like Japan, be it
in commercial or free projects.
For a more detailed description of the issues at stake, have a
look at our TrueType patents pages.
"
> AFAIK, the patents exist, but no threats have been made. I
> don't see why Apple would be out to get Linux, especially given
> that they were actively supporting MkLinux some time back.
There is an enormous difference between making hardware
specs available and supporting linux. Seen quicktime players
for linux lately ??
To add to this Microsoft currently pays a licensing fee
to Apple for use of TrueType fonts in Windows. It is also
highly unlikely that Freetype is legal, and that SOME
licensing would have to be arranged (or else Apple would lose
royalties from others that pay it to use TrueType).
The Freetype developers seem to think they have reverse
engineered the patents by only using the published specs -
but I think they are clearly wrong. Just because something
is a published spec does NOT mean the published spec is not
patented (RSA comes to mind).
Think of all the computer use that depends on TrueType fonts,
and the licensing that must be getting paid to Apple. Adobe uses
them in everything. Microsoft uses them in everything. Virtually
every Windows application that renders fonts uses the algorithm.
This is not chump change for Apple to throw out to the free
software community.
> >Metafonts from TeX are actually better in theory
>
> ... and in practice. Computer Modern blows anything available
> ... in TrueType out of the water.
But they are computationally more complex, and the rendering
takes more CPU cycles and code. There was a nice interview
with Knuth about this - TreuType fonts are at least in part
derivative of metafonts. It'd be interesting to see
metafonts become popular if use of freetype became illegal.
Knuth interview:
http://www.advogato.org/article/28.html
> >It will come around. If Apple were to licence TrueType patents
> >to XFree86 than it would come around a lot faster.
>
> It already has come around. xfsft which is essentially xfs
> patched to use freetype is in the 3.9x releases of XFree.
Which is almost certainly illegal, the fallout of which we
can only just barely currently grasp. What will Apple decide
to do ? Give up the royalties, or give up the patents ? I see
almost no way they are biased to give up the royalties. Patents
have been violated, and patent holders do not benefit from
giving the patents away after someone violates them.
--
Dave Blake
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: 7 Mar 2000 23:12:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jan Wielemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I think you're right that it is not an X-problem. X should remain
: what it is: a remote protocol to handle screen, mouse and keyboard.
IMO it should be abstracted to "user interactive input/output devices"
instead of specifically iterating just the three "screeen, mouse, and
keyboard". Why? Because I'd like to see the ability to add remote X
support for things like sound and whatever other devices might come
our way some day. The fact that X is restricted to only the three
main devices is one of its few drawbacks. It was meant to be a wholly
remotable user interface, but it ignores some interface devices.
And printers too, because of the fact that the fonts where the user
sits (X server) might not be the same as where the program sits.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.app
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: 7 Mar 2000 23:18:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Michael Wand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:> Resolution change requires Xserver restart.
: That's either wrong or a lie.
Some people use "resolution" to also refer to "color resolution",
rather than just x,y resolution. In that case he would be right,
at least for Xfree86. You can't change the bpp without restarting.
: Michael
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:28:45 -0600
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8a41sg$hito$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Not that I enjoy defending MS, but a C2 rating is a really long
> and involved process with government red tape. Whether or not
> W2K is actually good enough for C2 compliance or not, it hasn't
> been around long enough to get it.
>
> Not that C2 means much about the OS anyway. It spends just
> as much time dealing with RF leaks and the ability to open
> the PC case, and things like that. MS pulled a fast one by
> convincing people that it was relevant in the first place,
> and every time we argue back about it we play into their hands.
Actually, Novell was the one that harped on MS for quite a long
time for not having C2 certification. Novell held that one over
their head for years.
C2 is pretty relevant though, seeing as how not every OS can even
be in the running for C2.
It doesn't guarantee your OS is the most secure, but that it
has the framework and infrastructure to be highly secured in an
highly secure environment.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Wong)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:31:02 GMT
On 7 Mar 2000 07:05:05 GMT, Boudewijn Rempt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Your comments were spot on, except for one thing: the TrueType font
>format provides for hints that are especially helpful for rendering
>on small resolution displays. Not all TrueType fonts use those, and
>a lot of those who do are autohinted by the font editing program, but
>the Monotype fonts Microsoft uses are superbly hinted. I wonder, would
>it be acceptable to take the PostScript fonts included with XFree and
>try to improve them? I've got access to some good font design software,
>myself.
I did mention hinting in my post that you responded to. I doubt if
improving the Type 1 fonts in XFree86 will help. As I said earlier, the
Type 1 rasterizer that comes with XFree86 is crap. You can try
contrasting what xpdf or Ghostview can do with what Adobe Acrobat (which
has its own rasterizer) can do. Even with anti-aliasing turned off,
acroread looks far better.
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:39:25 GMT
Don't waste your time with Roger, Bob.
His job is to be a MS shill and ignore reality. That's his fucking job,
and I am glad to have a dog to kick around in here.
> Roger wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> Of course, it's not happening, but what do you care -- you'll still
> > >> make the claim without any proof...
> >
> > >
> Bob
>
> Michael Dell and others have testified in court that this sort of thing
> happened and happens. It's a matter of legal record in a number of
> court cases now.
> --
>
>
> \|/ ____ \|/
> @~/ .. \~@
> /_( \__/ )_\
> \_ U_/
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux version is best ?
Date: 7 Mar 2000 23:32:26 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Actually AS/400 and OS/390 is a far better approach than Linux..
Since when are those mutually exclusive choices? Linux can run on
AS/400, alongside OS/390. (Since the bizarre AS/400 archetecture uses
virtual machines implemented in hardware, you can run both at once.)
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Wong)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:46:18 GMT
On 7 Mar 2000 05:54:29 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:28:06 GMT, Christopher Wong wrote:
>>On 6 Mar 2000 21:30:08 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I don't think it would be easy to make such an assertion without some
>>screen shots. Fortunately, there are some here:
>>
>> http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jec/programs/xfsft/renderers.html
>>
>>TT fonts look great, but Type 1 fonts look awful.
>
>No, one TTfont looks great. ( Monotype Times New Roman ). The page you
>cite says, and I quote:
>
> The rendering of a TrueType font depends crucially on the
> quality of the font. Those samples use Monotype Times New
> Roman, as included by Microsoft in their `core fonts'. Don't
> expect to find many TrueType fonts that display that well!
I was addressing your point which had the phrase "in practice". In
practice, TrueType on X is far superior to Type 1 on X, as that screen
shot amply shows. Microsoft has quite a selection of good fonts in their
free package: Andale Mono, Trebuchet MS, Georgia, Verdana, Comic Sans,
Arial, Arial Black, Impact, Times New Roman and Courier New. These 10 font
families are all well-hinted and professionally designed. It is not like
I need anything more. I don't care much about what is generally out
there, but what is specifically attainable on my Linux machine. Nothing
beats TT at this point.
>It's true that the MS fonts are very good. However, once you start going
>outside the realm of these special fonts designed especially for onscreen
>viewing / web browsing, you will find that the difference is less visible.
>In other words, if you want to load up a gazillion fonts, it doesn't really
>matter whether you go with TT or Type1.
In practice: if I "load up a gazillion fonts", there are two
scenarios. If I go with TT, I get excellent fonts most of the time and
ugly fonts some of the time. With Type 1, I get ugly fonts all of the
time. I think it does matter which one I would go with.
>>If you know how to get great-looking Type1 fonts, please share the
>>info and screen shots.
>
>See my font HOWTO. If you want a decent Type1 collection, get the
>bitstream 500 font CD. Or convert your TrueType to Type1 ( I bet you wont
>notice much difference ).
I would need more than a decent Type 1 font. I need a decent Type 1
rasterizer: the one that comes with XFree86 is crap. Thanks to TrueType,
I know what well-hinted, scalable fonts can look like. While I do not
have a TT to Type 1 converter, I doubt if I can get even one Type 1 font
that looks comparable to my TrueType fonts. I'll try your font RPM,
nevertheless (thanks). It's worth looking at.
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:46:36 GMT
Roger, occasionally you amuse, more often than not you bore.
When MS pressures Intel and Compaq NOT to even pursue software development,
or to put any kind of software on top of windows, what do you call that?
Roger wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 14:52:26 -0800, someone claiming to be Bob Lyday
> wrote:
>
> >Roger wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:17:47 -0500, someone claiming to be mlw wrote:
>
> >> >Actually it is happening, but it is much more subtle. Better breaks,
> >> >better internal MS QA support, incusion of drivers with distribution,
> >> >etc. The term "pressure" is an appropriate term.
>
> >> <looks>
> >>
> >> Still don't see any proof...
>
> >Michael Dell and others have testified in court that this sort of thing
> >happened and happens. It's a matter of legal record in a number of
> >court cases now.
>
> Then you should have no problem at all posting a reference to Dell or
> whomever stating that MS applied such pressure in the realm of not
> supporting non-MS OSes at the hardware level -- which was the original
> claim.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: 7 Mar 2000 23:47:50 GMT
On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:31:02 GMT, Christopher Wong wrote:
>On 7 Mar 2000 07:05:05 GMT, Boudewijn Rempt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I did mention hinting in my post that you responded to. I doubt if
>improving the Type 1 fonts in XFree86 will help. As I said earlier, the
>Type 1 rasterizer that comes with XFree86 is crap. You can try
However, freetype are working on a Type1 rasteriser, which will probably
eventually replace the one currently used.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Wong)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:48:05 GMT
On 7 Mar 2000 05:55:38 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:28:06 GMT, Christopher Wong wrote:
>
>>info and screen shots. That way, we can get a unified display and print
>>font system (Ghostscript does a horrible job with TT fonts). Without
>
>If your printer groks postscript, or some other language that can handle
>embedded fonts, ghostscript does not render the fonts. Your printer does.
If I throw out a bundle of extra cash to get a Postscript-capable
printer, then I get Type 1 fonts that look awful onscreen but great on
paper, and TrueType fonts that look great onscreen but awful on paper
(if at all).
Chris
------------------------------
From: Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 18:52:37 -0500
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On 7 Mar 2000 18:34:44 GMT, Joseph T. Adams wrote:
>
> >Is it reasonably safe?
>
> Jersey City is quite safe. Not sure about Manhattan, but my impression
> is that it's OK ( though it's true that a lot of people get robbed there )
I find Manhattan to be *really* safe. But this depends of course also on
the neighborhood inside Manhattan.
The only criminal thing I've encountered so far are the rents...
-Jan
--
Jan Schaumann
http://jschauma-0.dsl.speakeasy.net/
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Date: 07 Mar 2000 20:54:46 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wolfgang Weisselberg) writes:
> Also the 2038-problem differs because it is Not There on 64bit
> machines
Filesystems use time_t too.
Oops.
--
`> KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
You must have some, but I don't see any evidence of it.'
--- Craig Hardie flames a luser recruitment consultant
advertising `Microsoft based solutions' on uk.comp.os.linux
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: What's GNU/Linux?
Date: 07 Mar 2000 22:24:15 +0000
David Wragg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Early GNU documents by RMS (they can probably be found on www.gnu.org)
> proposing GNU explicitly include X and TeX in the system. Remember,
> being part of GNU, being developed by the FSF, and being GPLed are
> completely independent properties.
<pedant>
No they aren't. Stuff developed by the FSF is always GPLed (or LGPLed).
</pedant>
--
`> KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
You must have some, but I don't see any evidence of it.'
--- Craig Hardie flames a luser recruitment consultant
advertising `Microsoft based solutions' on uk.comp.os.linux
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Wong)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:56:03 GMT
On 7 Mar 2000 16:31:59 GMT, Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Half the problem is that there are several groups of people wanting to
>use fonts. There are the "we want perfect WYSIWYG" types[*] and there
>are the "if it's close enough, I'm happy" types.
>
>Donal.
>[* These are pretty much the same people who claim that a graphics
> program is completely useless to all mankind if it can't match the
> colour on the screen perfectly to the colour on the printer. IOW
> total control freaks. They like fixed-width web-pages too. Grr! ]
Come now, we have the right to be that demanding. It is not unreasonable
to want to see readable fonts onscreen that reflect the correct spacing
and line breaks as they would on paper. It's a basic issue with word
processing and desktop publishing. Never mind the color. Adobe Type
Manager appeared in 1990, bringing scalable Type 1 fonts and thus true
WYSIWYG to the Mac. ATM made it to Win3.1 the next year, and even to
OS/2. It is kind of sad that Linux cannot attain the kind of WYSIWYG
that was available on far lesser platforms a decade ago.
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: 8 Mar 2000 00:00:46 GMT
On 7 Mar 2000 22:35:34 GMT, David T. Blake wrote:
>> References ?
>
>www.freetype.org
>"
>We are now in contact with Apple's legal department to discuss
>the TrueType patents issues with them. However, we'll be unable
>to comment on the current discussion until they take an official
>position. This could take some time, so don't expect anything too
>soon.
In other words, nothing. Apple have not threatened to do anything.
>Even though we're unable to tell for now whether FreeType
>violates them, this could mean that the free use of the library
>could be illegal in the US or other countries like Japan, be it
>in commercial or free projects.
Wrong. It would mean that freetype would have to license the patent.
>To add to this Microsoft currently pays a licensing fee
>to Apple for use of TrueType fonts in Windows.
Sure. The whole point of their patent is to give them one up in negotiations
with Microsoft. Anyone else licensing their patents ?
> It is also
>highly unlikely that Freetype is legal, and that SOME
>licensing would have to be arranged (or else Apple would lose
>royalties from others that pay it to use TrueType).
The licensing wouldn't necessarily require a fee, especially if the
software in question is free. Patents are usually licensed on
a royalties basis as you've indicated. What's 10% of nothing ?
>The Freetype developers seem to think they have reverse
>engineered the patents by only using the published specs -
I'm not clear on what you mean by "reverse engineer" a patent.
If you mean that they've reinvented the same thing, it certainly
sounds plausible, but doesn't help them much.
>and the licensing that must be getting paid to Apple. Adobe uses
>them in everything.
Adobe ? They use Type1 where possible. They only started paying lip
service to TrueType because Apple and MS pushed TrueType so hard.
>This is not chump change for Apple to throw out to the free
>software community.
Well your entire post and your assumption that Apple are going to
enforce their patent is at this stage entirely speculative at best.
>Which is almost certainly illegal, the fallout of which we
>can only just barely currently grasp. What will Apple decide
>to do ? Give up the royalties, or give up the patents ? I see
>almost no way they are biased to give up the royalties. Patents
>have been violated, and patent holders do not benefit from
>giving the patents away after someone violates them.
Patent holders do not benefit from bad publicity. And they don't stand
to gain financially from setting their lawyers onto the little guys.
And there's no evidence they plan to do that.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
