Linux-Advocacy Digest #590, Volume #25 Sat, 11 Mar 00 03:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Why post? ("Mike")
Re: A little advocacy.. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: A little advocacy.. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Steve/Keymaster/etc. is violating AT&T usage policy (was: As Linux Dies a Slow
Death.....Who's next? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Steve/Keymaster/etc. is violating AT&T usage policy (was: As Linux Dies a Slow
Death.....Who's next? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: XFree86 v. 4.0 hits the street. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Disproving the lies. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Disproving the lies. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Why post? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux is a lamer (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux ("Jim Ross")
Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: prepare Income Tax under Linux? (JEDIDIAH)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why post?
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:38:08 GMT
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Anti-Linux:
>
> As for the anti-linux camp, I am not sure. What motivates anti-anything?
> Usually hate of some kind. Hate is usually irrational, and when it comes
> to inanimate objects like an OS, it must be irrational. The only other
> alternative, and this is falls into the conspiracy theory, is that it is
> an effort which is funded by a corporation, like an astroturf movement.
...
> I have never met a windows user, except for these people, that isn't
> frustrated with Windows' instability and forced upgrade strategy of
> Office. Many windows' users would drop Windows the first opportunity
> they get.
Well, Mark, we've never met, but if we did, I'd tell you that I'm not
frustrated by Windows instability, or by Office. In fact, I run an NT box at
work and an NT box at home, and the one at work has crashed once in the past
year (putting it on par with both my HPUX and Sun boxes). The machine at
home has never crashed. I run Office on both. It _never_ crashes. Not only
would I not trade my NT machine for a Mac, I wouldn't trade it for _any_
Unix machine.
The problem with Unix isn't its lack of stability. But we've been down this
path before, and in the end, it's not a question that's going to be resolved
here (or anywhere else except a Linux or Windows convention). Suffice it to
say that in many applications, stability isn't enough. It never has been.
Here's the thing that might surprise you: There _are_ things about Office
that I don't like, and that are big enough irritations that would make me
switch to a competing product if it was better. The problem is in that
definition of 'better'. So far, no other products come close to Office. And,
NT makes a nice platform for Office suites - nicer than Unix, especially
since it supports cool things like drag and drop, OLE, and COM. There is
talk of Linux supporting these things, but it's been _years_ since that
support was supposed to arrive, and it still isn't here. And when it does
arrive, it won't be part of Linux, but part of an add-on GUI desktop, so a
Linux application may support that desktop, or it may support X, or Lesstif,
or the other GUI desktop, making CORBA support non-existent or incompatible.
Ugh. It will likely be years before some GUI finally wins, and software gets
written for it by default. Until then, welcome to hell.
Not a very good scenario if you want to take over the world.
You've argued before that there's no reason that Linux can't do these
things. I would argue that the only thing stopping Linux from being great is
the Linux community. You need different users: those who complain when
things aren't easy to use. And, you need different developers: those who fix
things when users complain. Maybe someday, but I'm not holding my breath.
Despite opinions to the contrary by many of those here, I still maintain
that Linux needs a better printer model, a more consistent user interface, a
help system, and all that OLE and COM stuff. Stability is only the first
step.
> Are they threatened by Linux for some reason?
> What could be threatening about a PC OS?
Indeed. Aside from the number of people I work with who regularly threaten
to put Linux on my PC, I can't think of a thing that's threatening about it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: A little advocacy..
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:29:56 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 21:05:09 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Because you already know linux. Someone that uses computers in a
>> >non-technology field won't feel the same way.
>>
>> There's a first time for everything. Even Windows, hell even
>> Finder has to be LEARNED. That's not a very useful counterpoint.
>> It's even less useful considering the likelihood that anyone
>> disgruntled enough by WinDOS to switch to something else has likely
>> already been exposed to the nasty guts of the PC architecture
>> already by that 'easy OS'.
>
>We're not talking about "people disgruntled enough" with windows. We're
>talking about Linux replacing Windows on the desktops of people that just
>use computers and are not computer hobbyists.
The point is that Windows is far from perfect. It fails at
begin a MacOS wannabe or fails at being a Unix/VMS wannabe.
The userbases that exists for OS/2, FreeBSD, Be and Linux
are a reflection of that.
As the percieved viability of other options grows and the
common consumer becomes more aware of other options, what
they are willing to 'settle for' are likely to change.
>
>Yes, everything has to be learned, but at this stage of the game, most
>people that need computers are using them and they have already learned
>something. They don't want to have to learn another something that is
>perhaps 2-10x more work than the thing they already know.
The work isn't so much in the thing as it is in letting go
of what rut they've already worn for themselves.
>
>> Windows is no MacOS.
>
>Nor is MacOS Windows.
It doesn't need to be. It's better. The only thing that
Windows can claim is marketshare/mindshare. That even DOS
had.
[deletia]
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: A little advocacy..
Date: 11 Mar 2000 04:37:26 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 21:05:09 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >Having done this several times, it's quite easy. Fiddle a few settings
>in
>> >your X config, causing the video card to fault the bus.
>>
>> That sounds rather vague actually.
>
>That's because it's different for every card. I can't tell you specifically
>how to cause this, but give me 5 minutes on your system and I guarantee you
>i'll configure something wrong enough to cause lockups or crashes. These
>tend to be things of the "Why would you do that?" variety, and the answer
>would be "because I don't know any better", or more accurately, because a
>user without detailed knowledge of a specific item doesn't know any better.
The problem with this is you need to make some effort to crash the system
using this strategy. Never mind that most users will not be editing their
X config file.
>Which is the same reasons that Windows becomes unstable. Because the user
>doesn't know any better.
You can "make Windows unstable" without working very hard. In the example
you give, you'd have to be making an effort to screw things up
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Steve/Keymaster/etc. is violating AT&T usage policy (was: As Linux Dies a
Slow Death.....Who's next?
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:05:53 GMT
On 10 Mar 2000 02:21:18 GMT, Mark S. Bilk wrote:
[ snip ]
I would also guess that initiating threads with homophobic diatribes on
COLA also violates just about any reasonable use policy.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Steve/Keymaster/etc. is violating AT&T usage policy (was: As Linux Dies a
Slow Death.....Who's next?
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:14:28 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 19:48:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>The email account is real...you're welcome to try it if you like.
That's completely orthogonal to the point. You are using multiple accounts
to post the same cr*p. This is dishonest ( because you are attempting to
dupe people into thinking that your 101 sock puppets are real people who
share your views ) and it is also annoying and intrusive, because it makes
you harder to killfile, and believe me, you make fine killfile fodder.
It seems clear that on this count alone you are violating acceptable use
policy. Of course, if you want to prove me wrong, I challenge you to report
yourself to your ISP ( CC the email to my address ), showing them your fake
names and off topic homophobic diatribes, and see what they say about it.
Let's not even start on the fact that initiating homophobic diatribes on
this newsgroup is completely inappropriate, because you are clearly posting
hateful comments that have no relevance whatsoever to the newsgroup in
question.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: XFree86 v. 4.0 hits the street.
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:22:53 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 19:41:25 -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
>"Bobby D. Bryant" wrote:
>
>> XFree86 v. 4.0 just hit the streets a few hours ago.
>
>Anyone get DPMS working? I've done an "xset +dpms" while in XFree86
>4.0, and so far it hasn't kicked in yet. :( DPMS didn't work in any
>of the 4.0 snapshots for me, either, and I saw where Linux people had
>this problem as well.
>
>Oh well, no big loss. I think the dpms screen savers are most usesful
As someone with a 19" monitor who leaves X on all the time, it'd be
a big loss for me (-; ymmv.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Disproving the lies.
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:27:03 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:28:12 -0500, Drestin Black wrote:
>*looks at person who'll publically admit he can't install windows and keep
>it running for over a day* What an idiot.
Well, there's one idiot who's kept Linux running for four months. Hey, I guess
this Linux thing must be easy, even an idiot can keep it up for months (-;
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Disproving the lies.
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:30:54 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:27:25 -0500, Drestin Black wrote:
>
>oops - hehehe - my boo boo, but the point still stands, 600,000 new users
>this week eh? I don't think so.
Rex Ballard's "statistics" are pure fantasy -- they're more or less
arbitrary. The redeeming feature is that they're so outrageous that we
all know that he made them up.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Why post?
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:39:12 GMT
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 23:17:40 +0100, Mig Mig wrote:
>Is this so different from Satanism where [many] satanists define Satanism
>as being to opposite of Christianity in any aspect?
>(Off course Satanism= Windows Christianilty=FreeUnices some (Drestin
>and Chad) might view this the other way around)
I dunno. He still hasn't told us why he's "Drestin Black". Perhaps he'd
rather go with Satanism. Given the choice, I'm not sure which I'd go with.
However, I object to your claim that free Unices are the "opposite" of
Windows. They are just another tool. They don't try to be "anti-windows".
Also, if satanists attempt to define themselves in a reactionary manner,
they are really just conformists -- controlling a car that turns left
when you move the steering wheel to the right takes some getting used to,
but it certainly can be done.
I'd like to add further that there are groups such as wiccans and pagans
that are often mistakenly confused with / associated with satanism. These
groups are not anti-christian reactionaries, and have beliefs orthoganal
( as opposed to parallel or opposite ) to those of the christian doctrine.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux
Date: 11 Mar 2000 06:44:13 GMT
On 10 Mar 2000 20:16:09 GMT, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 03:34:01 -0500,
> Stephen Voss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> My favorite, is that even if you tell RH to install KDE it will install
>> Gnome.
>
>Not to defend RH, but you know that KDE and Gnome are related in
>the same way as X and a window manager? Gnome != WM. KDE == WM.
What ???
kwin/kwm == WM
KDE is
(a) an API that includes QT widgets and some other stuff.
(b) a collection of applications including a WM.
it is entirely analagous to GNOME.
in short,
x11 <-> x11
e <-> kwin , kwm
gtk <-> qt
gnome <-> kde
In fact there are much more parallels, because GNOME and KDE are
quite similar.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:41:05 GMT
On 8 Mar 2000 21:32:46 GMT, Salvatore Denaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 8 Mar 2000 14:06:09 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Why didn't Apple make a Quicktime player for Linux?
>
>Linux has 4% of the desktop and 25% of servers shipped last year. What
A Linux port would also cover the gruntwork for any posix
compatible system including ALL the other Unixen and quite
likely BeOS.
>would have a better chance of getting used, a quicktime _server_
>targeted to people to push video to the 90% of users that use Windows
>and Macs or a client for the 4% of users that use Linux?
>
>Second, in order to port Quicktime to windows, Apple had to port a large
>amount of Quickdraw. After all, CARBON is based on QuickTime. This might
That sounds like they could stand to do some fundemental
re-architecting. This sounds as silly as IE on Solaris
requiring a win32 subsystem to go along with it.
>take a large investment in man hour that Apple might not think is worth
>it when the majority of Linux use is on the server side and not the
>desktop side.
>
>The Quicktime _file format_ is a published standard. In fact, it is the
>basis of the MPEG4 file format standard. The CODECs on the other hand
>are owned by others. It might cost Apple money to port the CODECs to
>Linux.
This is the real rub. Linux developers are willing to do this
work, even under NDA, yet they're being snubbed. Apple isn't
even being open with it's CODEC licencing, nevermind source
or specs...
[deletia]
They're quite the hypocrites when they drone on about 'freeing'
an OS core which they got most of for free to begin with...
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Let's blow this Linux Scam Wide Open!!
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:52:48 GMT
On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 01:35:10 GMT, proculous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Benchmarks?
>
>Where are they? Not some stupid German Linux magazine that nobody
>reads, but some verafiable benchmarks? Any out there?
>
>Total support for current hardware?
>
>Not half assed we can make it work support but real support?
>DVD, Scanners, Printers (not Flintstone models or Po$tcript$ models).
I can play the Criterion version of Robocop just fine (as
far as the DVD drive itself is concerned). Relatively bleeding
edge USB scanners and printers are supported under Linux and
this notion of only PS printers being supportable under Linux
is just one of those stupid oft repeated lies that just shows
you for the sad little troll you really are.
>
>Multimedia?
>
>Non-existant unless RealPlayer "insert 3 versions ago player here"
>counts.
RealPlayer ~ proprietary data decoding application.
proprietary data decoding application != multimedia.
[deletia]
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:44:23 GMT
On Thu, 09 Mar 2000 13:16:39 GMT, John C. Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>John Jensen wrote:
>
>> Why didn't Apple make a Quicktime player for Linux?
>
>How many man-years would you put up to support sound under Linux? (Not
>to mention the living hell of trying to render video in real time under
>X on god-knows-how-many displays.)
Podlipec seemed to be up to the challenge. Is a mighty corporation
to be outdone by some lone hobbyist? This is quite a lame arguement.
Mind you, if Apple's code wasn't up to snuff an interested end user
could always choose to up the task priority or (assuming Apple would
be willing to tolerate this option) convert a piece of media to
something easier to code in realtime.
>
>QT on Windoze was just barely doable. QT on Linux is more trouble than
>it's worth.
This is a bald assumption borne out of total ignorance.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux is a lamer
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:56:26 GMT
On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 03:08:39 GMT, proculous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sing it baby! Tell it like it is!!!!
If you're DUMB enough to buy something for testing
purposes that you can get for free, LEGALLY, then
you deserve any misfortune you happen to come by.
>
>You were lucky that you could get your money back. I hope you burned a
>CD to give to your enemies so they can screw up their computers too
>just like Linux did to you!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Linux smokes the bone,,,,
>
>
>proculous
>
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [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.
>>
>> i agree with others in this club that Linux is really a total waste
>of time.
>>
>> My suggestion is save your money, buy Windows and live your life
>instead of dedicating it
>> to trying to make a system run.
>>
>> What a piece of junk this Linux is.
>>
>> BOOOOOOBBAAAAAAAAA
>>
>
>--
>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.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 01:55:07 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 10. X-Windows fonts look like shit. Go "borrow" true-type fonts and
> they still suck. Mac looks great. Windows looks good. Linux looks like
> shit. Not to mention X-Windows is slow as shit.
>
All this is true and when I use Linux as a desktop OS it is very obvious.
Plus there are other issues like copy, paste and drop and drop. One usually
doesn't work, the other rarely works ever.
So using Linux as a desktop OS is cab be very painful.
Most of these issues don't affect Linux as a server where I think it's
great.
And I look at it this way. If there were no Linux, what would be the next
best alternative to Windows then? ? ? ?
OS/2. I really couldn't deal with that. Sorry to you OS/2 fans out there.
Linux is the best focusing power of the MS alternative yet. And in that
light it is very good.
The differences in package formats and versions and stuff don't make up for
the extreme damage done
by there being too many different package formats and binary compatibility
seems to suck under Linux.
I think whether not one believes there should be so many package formats,
there would be a large payoff in
all distributions (or most) adopting a universal package format. I bet tons
of software developers and companies
would port if they thought the compatibility was good (i.e. not require 8
recompiles, and 8 more when those distributions change),
and stealing Java's thunder, write once, run anywhere, you port once and
they universal package runs on any distribution.
A good example of the problem.
Pretend I'm a new user and want to try Linux on the cheap and have a modem
like most other users/newbies.
My Windows apps won't work if I have any.
Free Corel doesn't come with many apps.
I buy the "free Corel". Well, most free software on the web is released in
RPM first or at all. I usually can't use it, even with Alien (too many
differences you know).
I often can't use DEBS, I don't know why, but they won't work in Corel, and
are hard to find.
I see binary .tar.gz files that I don't know what to do with or only word in
RedHat.
I see a source .tar.gz. I don't know what to do with it, and it only
compiles on RedHat.
Oh, same thing on Caldera. Comes with no apps, no apps work with it on the
Internet.
Best part, no compiler.
In Corel, they trade off stability and speed for ease of use. Well what's
wrong then.
a. Still not as easy as Windows so why bother?
b. Stability and speed were the selling point of Linux. Now that those are
gone, nothing really left there . . .
Jim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux is it's own worst enemy.
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 07:01:23 GMT
On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 02:52:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Why don't you refute the guys post instead of throwing spears?
>
>Last time I checked RealPlayer for Linux was way
>behind although this may have changed by now.
Yup, lack of support by a vendor-lock pusher is certainly
grounds to claim somthing 'sucks' (NOT)...
>
>I don't run Linux cause it sux big time.
>I tried it and it looked, ran and installed like
> a piece of software from 1981 so I dumped it.
More hyperbole from the jealous Lemmings...
Jealous they actually paid good money for things like DOS.
>
>Many others agree despite what you may think.
So? Many other Lemmings have been FUDding anything different
since the comparison was between DOS3 and the Macintosh...
[deletia]
People like you, with an apparent fear for others enjoying
their liberty is nothing new and doesn't really prove anything.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin
or Linux
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:45:40 GMT
On Thu, 09 Mar 2000 13:59:59 GMT, John C. Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>John Jensen wrote:
>
>> I remember something about an open source developer trying to get some
>> information released so he could try it. IIRC, he was one of the
>> developers of an X11 MPEG player. Perhaps someone else remembers more.
>
>QT handles much more than MPEG.
Sorenson was the particular issue. Podlipec was the developer.
Apple & friends basically gave him the cold shoulder. The more
open stuff has already been implemented. Things like realtime
DVD playback are now just a matter of optimizing the associated
code.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: prepare Income Tax under Linux?
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 07:07:33 GMT
On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 23:55:40 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've run both TurboTax and Tax-Cut under Windows with no problems and I
>don't have Netscape on my machine. Why does he have to jump through all
>kinds of hoops to run a program?
Adobe was lazy.
The underlying OS or User shell really doesn't have
anything to do with it...
>
>I slapped the CD in and away it went.
>
>
>Typical Linux. It takes 10 operations to do what is sooooooo very simple
>under Windows.
>
>Running programs for instance.
>
>What a shame...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 15:28:54 -0800, Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Jon Claerbout wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> : Jon Claerbout wrote:
>>
>>> :> I tried Intuit,
>>> :> but they tell me to make pdf work as as a Netscape plug-in.
>>> :> I did not succeed with that.
>>
>>> : If all you need to do is view a pdf after clicking the link, netscape works
>>> : fine.
>>> : Go to Edit->Preferences->Navigator->applications
>>> : New...
>>> : desc: PDF file
>>> : MIMEType: application/pdf
>>> : Suffixes: pdf
>>> : Application: <pathtoacroread> %s
>>>
>>> : You should then be able to click a pdf link,
>>> : and it'll fire off acroread to read it.
>>
>>> : Note: an example application line would be:
>>> : /usr/local/bin/acrocread %s
>>
>>> The tax software says it needs a plug in,
>>> not simply a file download and fire off an acroread job.
>>>
>>> Probable problem is the dynamic linking of netscape and pdf
>>> use different libraries.
>>>
>>> Thanks guys, I guess I'll have to rent a Windoze
>>> machine for a couple days.
>>
>>acroread 4 comes with a plugin so you can read PDF's inline
>>in Netscape. The instructions are in INSTGUID.TXT that
>>comes with acroread 4. If it doesn't automatically
>>set up the plugin in NS, the only thing that's different
>>from Mike's instructions above is that the Application
>>should be nppdf.so. Read the instructions though - the
>>plugin is in a weird subdirectory.
>>
>>You can probably get it off of Adobe's site, or it comes
>>with SuSE 6.3 (and is automatically installed if you
>>install acroread and netscape).
>>
>>Arthur
[deletia]
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
