Linux-Advocacy Digest #499, Volume #25 Sat, 4 Mar 00 00:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! ("Jim Ross")
Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy. ("Jim Ross")
Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy. ("Jim Ross")
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: prepare Income Tax under Linux? (Twenty1stCenturion once removed)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux is a lamer (codifex)
Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!! (pac4854)
Re: Dell picks Linux over Windows 2000 for dellhost.com ("Mike")
Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!! (Edward)
Re: Linux is a lamer (pac4854)
Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!! (codifex)
Re: Linux is a lamer (pac4854)
Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy. (codifex)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.app
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 22:09:47 -0500
Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> if Steve Jobs think Microsoft Windows is 'absolutely tastless' , i
> really would like to know what kind of words will he be using regarding
> X windows, Motif or CDE.
>
> -- this is purely fiction:
> What do you want a big screen(more pixels) for?
> X windows: Bigger letters, of course!
> Windows: So you can see more letters at once.
>
>
I think he would think X provides a crappy desktop experience, especially
compared to Windows.
Fonts suck, even with TrueType fonts (need antialiasing).
2D/3D performance sucks (on XFree86 3.3 series anyway)
Copy, paste works only half the time.
Drag and drop, forget about it.
Xserver traffic making scroll, resizing slow for big apps.
Resolution change requires Xserver restart.
In the past and to this day X has issues.
So even if Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer and Quicken existed for
Linux, the desktop experience would still be poor until these things
improve.
No I can't fix it. That doesn't change the facts. Back when I compared NT
4 to RedHat Linux 5.1 wrt a desktop experience, RH would 20% of NT's.
At that time you had only a poor window manager, gnome was unusable, kde in
beta and a pain to install. Next to no apps at that time and the ones that
existed were often slow, buggy, used non-free toolkits, no standard
look/feel, nothing. Today I'd say X+KDE/Gnome is about 70% there.
So Steve Jobs I don't think would be pleased as he believes in have a
desktop experience that includes a strong GUI, and requires 0% Unix
background, experience. This frustrates me since Linux makes a great server
environment.
Jim Ross
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy.
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 22:17:35 -0500
proculous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:89po9r$col$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Typical LinoNazi behavior. Shoot the messenger instead of discussing
> the topic.
How does you post relate to linux.advocacy again?
Jim
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy.
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 22:21:34 -0500
proculous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:89palo$36p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I notice that the Linux advocacy group seems to have much more traffic
> than any of the Windows advocacy groups. Simple reason is that Windows,
> along with the Mac sell themselves and don't need a band of loonytunes
> around to wave the flag. Now that Linux has become somewhat of the
> darling of the computer press the chips are out on the table for
> prospective users and supporters to try and decide for themselves if
> Linux is worth the fuss.
It doesn't help then for you to post when you yourself don't want to stick
to linux.advocacy.
>
> My opinon is that Linux in and of itself fizzles and burns out on the
> launchpad before it even gets into orbit. Joe computer user weaned on
> Windows needs a hell of a lot more than a free operating system in
> order to even consider switching from Windows. Why should he switch?
It depends what you're doing with Linux.
I really think it's a nice server system.
It does suck as a desktop in many ways.
I hate it, but am waiting as it improves every day.
Since I think sucky fonts in X, among other issues are well known, where is
the value add of your post.
Obviously people here either, a. don't mind b. live with it c. are fixing
it.
Jim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 4 Mar 2000 03:39:15 GMT
On 03 Mar 2000 15:47:16 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
>
>> * WYSIWYG printing.
>
>All the proprietary "WYSIWYG" word processors I've ever used were not
>WYSIWYG w.r.t. tabs.
I don't know, can't say I noticed. The one problem you do have is font
metrics -- if your printer stores a font and your using a different
font with the same name, you can run into trouble.
> I think you have to be a power user to get WYSIWYG
>out of those beasts.
If you want precise layout control, DTP ( like pagemaker ) is the way to
go. But word processors are close enough for most users.
>> * A Word Processor that you can embed a spreadsheet into
>
>You could embed all kinds of objects in the Andrew project's ez editor,
That thing is almost unusable ( I've tried it ). And unmaintained.
>but this functionality has never been in big demand in the free software
>community.
My point exactly. There are some things that proprietary software has done
a goodjob of and some things that free software has done well. We ultimately
get the best of both worlds by having them coexist.
>> * Any word processor
>
>I really think ez and Lyx count. Do you argue that if it doesn't
>(falsely) claim to be WYSIWYG, then it isn't a word processor?
(*) Lyx is publishing software. Personally, I don't count ez as "decent".
BTW, Word processors *are* fairly close to WYSIWYG no matter how you
try to slice it. I used word processors for years and my on screen
and printed output looked equally attrocious (-;
>> * A decent web browser ( Mozilla doesn't count until it's out of alpha )
>
>You have it backwards. There would be no decent web browsers today if
>not for free software and open standards.
Sure, but I never suggest otherwise. I never said we *don't* need
free software. In fact the opposite is true.
> IE's temporary lead is not
>indicative of how this area moves forward. Time was there were no
>proprietary web browsers.
Yes, but there are now, and there will be for some time.
>> You get the picture. If we were stuck only with OpenSource software , we'd
>> still be living in caves. OpenSource software is wonderful and all that,
>> but to suggest that we should desroy the copyright system is simply absurd.
>
>Do you really think there is any serious attempt afoot to destroy the
>copyright system?
This is precisely what I am debating now, because one of the resident
clowns ("Jedi") has suggested precisely this.
> Some people talk about a copyright-free society as
>the ideal, but I haven't heard of anyone seriously pursuing it. The
At least no one with the guts to use their real name.
>pragmatic idealism of the GPL seems to dominate free software efforts.
Hmmm ... there are GPL users who might be "pragmatic", but the utopian
missionaries from the FSF aren't among them.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Twenty1stCenturion once removed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: prepare Income Tax under Linux?
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 03:42:20 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Typical Linux. It takes 10 operations to do what is sooooooo very simple
> under Windows.
>
> Running programs for instance.
>
> What a shame...
>
It is a shame; and ridiculous to boot that there isn't a stable
operating system that doesn't take forever to set up and doesn't need
massive amounts of ram, processing power, etc.
How about BeOS; that's open source.
Is free bsd as screwed up as linux?
Is macintosh stable and seureable?
Sounds like I'm not a computer person after all. Seems a shame to quit
now after five years using windows; well, intermitently. Took win2000
for a test run and garbagecanned that too.
Become an engineer and make my own hardware and write my own OS.
The Internet and computers are getting to be a big waste of time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 4 Mar 2000 03:53:09 GMT
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000 18:43:13 +0100, Matthias Warkus wrote:
>> I've had documents where this kind of thing is useful. An example would
>> be a document that contains several accounting tables. The active data
>> is not vital, but useful.
>
>Right. I go so far to say that for this kind of thing, the ideal
>solution does not yet exist.
I'd agree, but it's orthogonal to my point that proprietary software does
sometimes succesfuly meet needs not addressed by OpenSource software.
> A complete platform for data
>visualisation, application development, Web publishing etc. shoehorned
>into a typewriter may be a jolly good interim solution, but I think in
>this area, there is potential for a revolution.
I'd agree. I'm actually amazed at skillfully the vendors of office
applications copy each others design flaws and limitations. Unfortunately,
the OpenSource crowd aren't doing that much better. However, I give Koffice
a partial thumbs-up for going with a good development platform (QT) and
using a native scripting language ( python ). The main thing that office
apps do attrociously is the basic typesetting -- kerning and ligatures.
>If there was a way to do the kind of things one does with PHP3, SQL
>databases and Web servers in a simpler way, with a WYSIWYG
>point-and-click interface, fully integrated, using nonbinary,
>nonmonolithic document formats that can't be broken by twiddling a
>single bit, extensible etc., with conversion for viewing and printout
>integrated, that would be Godzilla.
This is more a web development thing. I believe that this kind of thing
already exists on Windows ( interdev, cold fusion ) but I don't use windows
enough to be sure.
I think the right way to handle formats is use xml. This way at least
you have parseable text. Hopefully, xml will help make inroads into
compatibility problems that have plagued office suites previously.
>There is clearly a need for LaTeX environments that are orders of
>magnitude better integrated than what we've got today (AUCTeX mode,
>LyX), especially with respect to viewing.
This is kind of tangential but I believe in an interview linked from
trashdot, Knuth said that Adobe incorporated Tex's typesetting engine
into Frame or something like that. I can't remember exactly what he said.
>Surely. That's because most word processors today contain some
>half-hearted DTP extension. The DTP software I know (MS Publisher) is
>better than a word processor for almost any task, but it lacks the
>features it would need for treatment of large amounts of text.
I haven't used publisher. I used pagemaker, and my main gripe with it
is that the UI is not exactly friendly.
>I'd like to see a structural-markup DTP application some day. Usually,
Framemaker+SGML
>> >About as hard as installing any kind of new LaTeX package.
>>
>> Which is not that easy.
>
>There should be a script to do it. Usually, it requires five steps:
>- unpack
>- run .ins file through LaTeX the appropriate number of times
>- create a directory in the TeX tree
>- copy stuff there
>- run "texconfig rehash"
>
>Nothing too difficult. Could be done with a GUI. Again, huge potential
>for improvement here.
Yep. They improved things somewhat with fontinst which autogenerates several
of the macros, but it still requires too much of the user.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: codifex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is a lamer
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 21:52:37 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> After a week of playing around with this Corel Linux shit I have gotten my money
>back at
> the local computer shop. I can't believe that they are trying to sell shit like this.
>
That is your opinion. You are welcome to it and all it entails.
> i agree with others in this club that Linux is really a total waste of time.
If Linux is such a waste of time then... why are you wasting your time
here? Could it be your job or something??
>
> My suggestion is save your money, buy Windows and live your life instead of
>dedicating it
> to trying to make a system run.
>
Yeah, save your money by buying Windows. hehe That's funny. Get
prepared to buy and buy and buy and buy. Round and round we go today;
that's where your going. Dedicate your time to getting Windows to run
then.
> What a piece of junk this Linux is.
More opinions? Or, just plain redundancy.
>
> BOOOOOOBBAAAAAAAAA
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!!
From: pac4854 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 20:14:25 -0800
In article <89pp8f$dgc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
proculous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Benchmarks?
> Where are they? Not some stupid German Linux magazine that
nobody
> reads, but some verafiable benchmarks? Any out there?
I would guess that lotsa Germans read German magazines. And not
to stereotype anybody, but as a country they do seem have an
uncanny knack for knowing good engineering when they see it.
> Total support for current hardware?
I have current hardware. Linux supports it all. Neither NT nor
W2K supports my system.
> Not half assed we can make it work support but real support?
> DVD, Scanners, Printers (not Flintstone models or Po$tcript$
models).
I'm boycotting DVD, my scanner works, and Postscript is a widely
supported standard. I would guess you're opposed to
standards....
> Multimedia?
> Non-existant unless RealPlayer "insert 3 versions ago player
here"
> counts.
Ah, I understand now. You're one of those pirates the RIAA wants
to cut off at the knees.
> So IBM is behind Linux? Of course they are. They are asking
their
> employees to tie rubber bands back together while the
executives get
> rich. A no cost OS is exactly what the rich pig execs want.
> Try http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmunion
> or
> http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmpension
> to find out how happy IBM folks are these days.
There doesn't seem to any relationship to Linux with either of
these. Maybe the permatemps at Microsoft could answer your
questions....
> While the press rumbles with major vendors supporting Linux,
the truth
> is that the support is skin deep if that. Try calling tech
support and
> mentioning Linux and see how far you get.
> Hint: Listen for laughing while you get put on hold.
We have a support contract. It is both better and worse than
what you might get from Microsoft. And of course everybody
laughs; Linux is a lotta fun!
> Compare feature for feature with the Windows version and see
how they
> compare.
Favourably.
> Problem is you Linux Nuts are so used to using inferior
software that
> requires an MSEE to operate that you don't know the difference.
As opposed to having a staff of MCSE's on hand....
> Pathetic is the answer.
And you're the question.
> Linux is a pure scam brought forth by the folks at the major
Linux
> vendors in order to boost the IPO so that a select few could
get rich.
You're pissed 'cause you missed out. Are you sure you're not
"S"?
> When Linux dies a dismal death, and it will very soon, they
will still
> be driving their Vett's and you will still be using an
operating system
> hacked together by a bunch of nuts who report to no one.
.. as opposed to a buncha nuts who report to Bill Gates.
> When the virii code appears in all of the back doors that will
be or
> have been inserted in linux you will pay the price.
.. but because we have the source, the price will be free.
> Good Luck
> Proculous....
Proculous of Borg; that has a nice ring to it, don't you think?
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dell picks Linux over Windows 2000 for dellhost.com
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 04:24:19 GMT
I bought my Dell last October. Linux was an available option then. Their
deals with Red Hat are old news. Do you have anything new to report here?
-- M
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:89l08g$u66$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In a stunning blow to Microsoft, Dell has picked Linux over
> Windows 2000 for dellhost.com
------------------------------
From: Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!!
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 20:28:11 -0800
In article <89pp8f$dgc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, proculous
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compare feature for feature with the Windows version and see how they
> compare.
Let's See:
Windows Linux
--------------------------------------------------
Windowing System X X
Needs Technical X X
Knowledge to
Run/Debug
DOS X
Slow X
Blaoted X
Buggy X
Braindead Registry X
Only One Desktop X
Environment
Kludged 32-bit code X
Kludged PMT X
Proprietary FS X
Visual Basic X
Continuous Upgrade X
Treadmill
ActiveX Controls X
Macro Viruses X
Back Orifice X
Bill Gates calling X
the shots
Must do clean-reinstall X
every 6 months to
maintain stability.
Wizards X
That PaperClip guy in Word X
Costs ~$80 and up X
Hell-bent on monopoly X
General Flakeyness X
and Crashes
WOW! You're right! Microsoft is *WAAAYYYYYY* ahead of Linux on all
these *IMPORTANT* "features!"
> Problem is you Linux Nuts are so used to using inferior software that
> requires an MSEE to operate that you don't know the difference.
Well why waste that MSEE as an unpaid technician for Microsoft? Why
waste brain cells learning about the registry and fighting just to keep
your system stable when you can use those same brain cells to learn
something truly useful (PERL, regex, EMACS, piping) on a system that
is *already* stable? Doesn't take a GED to figure that one out!
Edward
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is a lamer
From: pac4854 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 20:33:07 -0800
There's a really bright side to all this. These two script
kiddies can't even _install_ Linux, which means they'll never
ever be able to figure out how to develop any new exploits
against it. I'm much more comfortable with using Linux now
knowing that these two morons will both remain in the Windows
universe.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: codifex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!!
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 22:26:17 -0600
proculous wrote:
>
> Benchmarks?
>
> Where are they? Not some stupid German Linux magazine that nobody
> reads, but some verafiable benchmarks? Any out there?
Benchmarks say what the commissioning party wants them to say.
>
> Total support for current hardware?
Windows 2000 doesn't have total support for current hardware. (I'm sure
you have something to say about this one so... fire away.)
>
> Not half assed we can make it work support but real support?
> DVD, Scanners, Printers (not Flintstone models or Po$tcript$ models).
All support is half-assed... that's why it's called support.
>
> Multimedia?
I'm not wanting for multimedia in Linux; I have sound, video,
controllers, peripheral galore. It's the games that Windows still has
the lead in.
>
> Non-existant unless RealPlayer "insert 3 versions ago player here"
> counts.
Hehe... very astute. This is funnier than Divorce Court!
>
> So IBM is behind Linux? Of course they are. They are asking their
> employees to tie rubber bands back together while the executives get
> rich. A no cost OS is exactly what the rich pig execs want.
So what? You want to give your money to Bill Gates and Co? Have you
been brainwashed?
>
> Try http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmunion
> or
> http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmpension
>
> to find out how happy IBM folks are these days.
Great! If profit can be made from Linux by intelligent people then I
say more power to them.
>
> While the press rumbles with major vendors supporting Linux, the truth
> is that the support is skin deep if that. Try calling tech support and
> mentioning Linux and see how far you get.
If the support is skin deep then that is deeper than it was a year ago
or tho years ago. If Linux had 1% desktop marketshare (don't quote me
on the numbers... I'm pulling these figures out of the air for
demonstration's sake) a year ago but today has 4% or some such... isn't
that a 300% increase in marketshare?
>
> Hint: Listen for laughing while you get put on hold.
If they are laughing then it's because they don't know how to support it
and are amused that someone would ask. Remember: They are all
intelligent because they are supporting a Microsoft program... and we
all know that Microsoft is the best and the only software to use.
(Hint: I'm being funny here so laugh... you do like laughing right?
Hello?)
>
> Compare feature for feature with the Windows version and see how they
> compare.
Name some of these "features" would you?
>
> Problem is you Linux Nuts are so used to using inferior software that
> requires an MSEE to operate that you don't know the difference.
Define inferior. Does it mean that Linux has an inferior price? Maybe
it is Linux's inferior reboot needs? Maybe it is the inferior quality
of the software - it is always under development and constantly is being
upgraded (wait, this means that you get your upgrades at next to no cost
- sorry... bad example - my bad) so... it must be inferior right? Thing
is... I do know the difference! I have used Microsoft software... if
something is wrong with the current version... they usually don't fix
this version... they release the fix as the next version and charge you
for it. Hmmmm....
>
> Pathetic is the answer.
Hehe... you are all knowing! You are omniscient! You are omnipotent!
You are.... I better stop here.
>
> Linux is a pure scam brought forth by the folks at the major Linux
> vendors in order to boost the IPO so that a select few could get rich.
Yep. I feel scammed! How dare they release a stable product that does
everything I want it to do! I wanna pay for everything all the time!
That is why there are distribution makers! To satisfy those folks who
feel they have to pay for everything! I could take a bag of garbage (or
substitute some other colorful word) and box it up pretty and sell it to
some idiot like you; but I could set some perfectly usefull implement on
your doorstep and you'd likely think it was garbage and throw it away.
The distribution makers are just boxing up the implement and selling it
to you so you wont know you're actually getting something worthwhile.
Shh!
>
> When Linux dies a dismal death, and it will very soon, they will still
> be driving their Vett's and you will still be using an operating system
> hacked together by a bunch of nuts who report to no one.
Yeah, when Linux dies a dismal death... just like Novell and Apple and
well, you get the idea right?
>
> When the virii code appears in all of the back doors that will be or
> have been inserted in linux you will pay the price.
Ahh... the myth of the virii in the code... but wait! Isn't that code
open and available for all to see unlike Window's source code? Where is
the Windows Source Code? Is it on some unnamed server or CD somewhere
in the bowels of the Redmond campus or some vast underground vault the
even the government knows nothing about? Maybe it's on a planed delete
timer or security system that will destroy the code if security is
breached in the event of a Warrant? What happened to the Windows 3.1
source? Did Microsoft BOB delete it?
>
> Good Luck
Thank you but... you'll be needing some yourself.
>
> Proculous....
Get your Nikes on... the comet's comin!
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is a lamer
From: pac4854 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 20:41:13 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mr_rupert) wrote:
>
>It is so sad when Drestin resorts to bogus identities.
This is _way_ too lame for Drestin. I'm thinking maybe 'S' got
good behaviour time or got matrixed out and released early. But
this'll probably violate him on his probation terms....
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: codifex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy.
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 22:35:33 -0600
proculous wrote:
>
> I notice that the Linux advocacy group seems to have much more traffic
> than any of the Windows advocacy groups. Simple reason is that Windows,
> along with the Mac sell themselves and don't need a band of loonytunes
> around to wave the flag. Now that Linux has become somewhat of the
> darling of the computer press the chips are out on the table for
> prospective users and supporters to try and decide for themselves if
> Linux is worth the fuss.
>
> My opinon is that Linux in and of itself fizzles and burns out on the
> launchpad before it even gets into orbit. Joe computer user weaned on
> Windows needs a hell of a lot more than a free operating system in
> order to even consider switching from Windows. Why should he switch?
> Graphics? Doubtful considering X-Windows blurry, distorted and hard on
> the eyes method of displying fonts.Don't tell me about rendering for
> Titanic I know the entire story. Linux was like the GroundsKeepers at a
> ballgame. Necessary, but nobody comes to see them.
> Free Web Access? Try again. Most of those free CD's that come in the
> mail don't work with Linux. AOL has a huge user base and to the best of
> my knowledge does not work with Linux. Multimedia? Sure, you can run an
> obsolete version of RealPlayer if you wish. DVD? maybe in the future.
> Scanners and printers that ordinary folks can afford (non postscript or
> in the case of scanners non scsi), that by the way work great under
> Windows, not to mention all the free software like Adobe for instance
> that comes with most of them. Easy one stop GUI mail/news programs?
> Network kits that install right out of the box so the clueless can
> install them and have a simple home network up in minutes? Try again.
> Hardware support for today's hardware not some 5 year old soundboard?
> Mixed bag.
> Ease of use? Well Linux with a good gui like Gnome is certainly easy
> enough to used if it pre-loaded. The problem arises when the user wants
> to update.
> This lib, that lib all around the lib we go. It's like a fsking library
> merry-go-round only the names keep changing. Oh you didn't know that
> XYZ.lib is part of the ABC.lib package? Silly you for not reading, and
> reading,and reading and then reading some more. Then you find that
> ABC.lib has some requirements of it's own and back you go. All I want
> to do is instal a friggin program, and don't give me that RPM crap
> because 7 times out of 10 (and yes I did count) I never seem to have
> what is needed. This is a pure waste of time.
>
> Ok so binary files are the answer. Or are they? Do you have the right
> kernel version? Are you able to edit makefiles to change SMPCheck and
> other housekeeping checks just so the damm thing works? Seen vi lately?
>
> beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeppppppppppp....What the fsk is that awful
> beeping? Do people actually use this garbage?
>
> Anyway, that's my rant. One only needs to try Linux to see how much it
> lacks for normal folks. Keep it in the geek realm where it can fester
> and provide joy and enlightenment.
>
> Linux is as doomed as the Titanic when it comes to normal folks. Leave
> it in some geeks server farm where it belongs, and rightfully so.
>
I must apologize Proculous. I thought you were a blowhard at first. I
must revise my opinion having read your article that contains more than
just short snippets of opinions.
Linux is not perfect. Oh! I said it didn't I? I said it on Usenet too
- omigod! It's true though. If Linux was perfect then there would be
nothing left to do for it! But, Linux is NOT perfect and thank god for
that. Linux is still new... it still has that new smell on it... it
has room for growth and improvement! Linux has a firm foundation and a
solid development model that grows as it's users grow! Linux gets
better all the time! Rapidly.
So, cheer up! At the rate that Linux is progressing... Microsoft will
not be able to keep up my friend. Linux will be what the users want it
to be - not what Microsoft wants it to be. It is our OS not thiers...
where do I want to go taday you ask??? I want to go where *I* want to
go... not where Microsoft wants me to go! For all I care... they can go
take a long walk on a short pier.
> PROCULOUS
>
> --
> I love my kernel. I really do. I hate my girlfriend.I love only Linux.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
