Linux-Advocacy Digest #755, Volume #25 Wed, 22 Mar 00 17:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development
("Drestin Black")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (George Marengo)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (George Marengo)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary ("Tim Haynes")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (George Marengo)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Richard Watson)
Re: How can use linux? debates (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (John Winters)
Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development (David
Steinberg)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux Newbie Needs Some Help (JoeX1029)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (George Richard Russell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 15:01:07 -0500
"Daniel O'Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], net wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't call a SoundBlaster Live card and a Canon printer circa
> > 1999 odd.
>
> *opens eyes wide in suprise*
>
> DAMN! While I don't know about that particular model printer, I
> could've sworn that Creative Labs made a driver for SB live under Linux,
> and that it even came with my distro (SuSE 6.3)! My mistake.
it's not an official release from CL yet - just a hobbled together hack and
if you take a second to compare what the Win driver does versus the linux
hack you'll see the HUGE disparity. Feel free to enjoy 1/3rd of the features
of your card which you paid the same as I did - but I have full support and
features...
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:22:56 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:26:53 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<snip>
>> That maybe true but my point was your use of the term "highly
>> customized Solaris" is just as misleading. Correct me if I'm wrong but
>> besides the tcp/ip stack we don't know what has or hasn't been
>> customized, how its been customized, nor the effort this customization
>> took.
>
>Microsoft has stated that they have highly customized the TCP/IP stack and
>the file store.
Incorrect... they never used the term "highly" -- they said that the
filestore and stack had to be customized. Adding highly is just
your personal spin and even MS didn't spin it that way.
>That doesn't mean that they have or have not done any other
>customizations, only that this is what they have said. It's entirely
>possible that they may or may not have done other work, and to
>me quite possible that they have.
Given MS's history to take credit even where credit may not have
been due, I find it highly unlikely that they wouldn't have changed
it any further and not said anything about it.
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:27:20 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:26:07 -0500, Bob Germer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 03/22/2000 at 08:54 AM,
> George Marengo, a wothless pile of Microsoft paid pondscum
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> >It is FUD because IBM had no more choice than a restaurant owner who was
>> >told by the local Mafiosi that he would install a cigarette machine, use
>> >XYZ garbage collection company, and pay $100 a week "insurance". And you
>> >know damn well that is the case.
>
>> Oh please... IBM knew darn well the selling their PC's with OS/2 would
>> be financial suicide for the PSP division -- that's why they didn't do
>> it. If they really thought that they could sell their machines in that
>> configuration, they could have told MS to pack sand concerning Windows
>> licensing.
>
>More pure FUD. Since MS was a co-owner of the OS/2 code per the terms of
>the development contract, IBM still had to provide a portion of the
>license fee to MS until they worked out a settlement on the fee.
Sure, but if they had done that, they would NOT have had to pay any
licensing fees for Windows. Why didn't they just install OS/2 as a
preload and be done with Windows?
------------------------------
From: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 22 Mar 2000 20:34:33 +0000
"Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm a researcher / developer, but I don't see myself working for somebody
> else in a commercial setting. Still, I'm playing with the idea of setting
> up my own company, developing and selling software. The thing is, so many
> people are claiming these days that the only good software is free
> software. How is my business supposed to survive if I can't charge for
> my software?
*Sigh*. I want Free software, I'm open to suggestions about free. Read up
on open-source licensing.
> Of course, things are different for big companies: they can afford to
> give away some of their software, or even all of it, if it happens that
> they have other sources of income...
Indeedie. Other ways & means of making an income. Check out what the folks
at http://www.zope.org/ do with their lives.
> So, what will happen? Will we all go back working for Big Blue, as in the
> Dark Ages? Too bad most geeks are too young to remember those days...
Hey, didn't SGML have some origins at IBM or am I totally up t'spout there?
~Tim
--
| Geek Code: GCS dpu s-:+ a-- C++++ UBLUAVHSC++++ P+++ L++ E--- W+++(--) N++
| w--- O- M-- V-- PS PGP++ t--- X+(-) b D+ G e++(*) h++(*) r--- y-
| Flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow
| The sun is melting over the hills, | http://www.glutinous.custard.org
| All our roads are waiting / To be revealed | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:31:33 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 09:54:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:54:58 GMT, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:25:27 -0500, Bob Germer
<snip>
>>>It is FUD because IBM had no more choice than a restaurant owner who was
>>>told by the local Mafiosi that he would install a cigarette machine, use
>>>XYZ garbage collection company, and pay $100 a week "insurance". And you
>>>know damn well that is the case.
>>
>>Oh please... IBM knew darn well the selling their PC's with
>>OS/2 would be financial suicide for the PSP division -- that's
>
> Why would it be financial suicide? It would be just another
> option, hardly something that they would be 'betting the
> farm over'.
I said it would have been financial suicide for the PSP _division_,
not the company, because I don't think they would have sold many
PC's if they decided that they would offer only OS/2 on those
machines.
>[deletia]
>
> Now, a 5x increase in licencing is another matter. While they
> still might have thought that they could sell OS/2 it might
> have been in smaller numbers. This doesn't necessarily mean that
> it would have been something that they would have not done other-
> wise. It just means that it wouldn't have been lucrative enough
> to counteract the damage done by Microsoft's punitive pricing.
If they decided to dump Windows altogether, they wouldn't have had
to deal with MS's licensing. Why didn't IBM simply tell MS to take a
hike, we're going to install OS/2 on our PC's?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
From: Richard Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Mar 2000 18:05:47 +0000
"Tom Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A couple of weeks ago, I sent out a set of questions about the history and
> role of Linux, as background research for an article I am planning to write.
> I had many responses, which I am hugely grateful for. I have just finished
> the introduction, and I thought I'd place it here, in true Open Source
> style, to see what people had to say about it.
>
> thanks
>
> Tom Steinberg
>
>
>
> The Meaning of Linux
> ----------------------
By Minix Python?
<snip interesting bit>
Interesting start but I'm not sure if you're on the right tack. By
professional software do you mean people making money at it? Surely
Suse and RH make money too it's just their business model is
different to the established ones.
--
Richard Watson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pentagon Web Design Ltd
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can use linux? debates
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:37:40 GMT
In article <NdBB4.4254$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Osugi Sakae
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ><SNIP>
> > So, if everyone is free to make changes, why should anyone be
> > surprised or even care if some people want to make linux "easy"
> > enough for windows users to use? It isn't like the programers /
> > researchers are forced to install kde or gnome. A computer
> > running linux with apache and no x-windows is still a linux box.
> > So if some nice folks want to write the ACME Desktop
> > Environment, how is their project any less worthy than the
> > statistical analysis project from another group?
> >
>
> If our only intention is to copy windows or the mac, then we are going
> to inherit all the problems those platforms currently have (and there
> is some evidence that this problem is happening already).
I keep reading this all the time, and, well, it seems to me as such
a huge strawman... who is the "we" whose "only intention is to copy
windows or the mac"?
If there is no such we, there can't be such an intention, right? ;-)
If "we" includes "the people who develop KDE", I can tell you that
"our only intention" is not that, at least for many of "us".
[snipabit]
> It hurts in a way because it blinds us to other (and maybe better)
> ways of doing things. Ever since the Mac GUI came out (which was
itself
> a copy of the Xerox PARC GUI),
Oh, come on. Did you ever use a Xerox STAR? It didn't even have
overlapping windows for christ's sake!
[snipabitmore]
> But even if we accept that the WIMP interface is the best way to do
> things, we sacrifice a lot in the name of "compatibility" with
> Windows. For example, consider the key bindings -- Windows users are
> used to using CTRL-C to copy and CTRL-V (or SHIFT-INSERT) to paste.
> Now, there is nothing fundamental about these key combinations; in
> fact they are counterintuitive to someone who uses Emacs all the time.
There IS something fundamental about them:
They are not worse than any other proposed alternative (at least no
alternative I saw).
They are defined in the CUA standard.
They are easy on the fingers (unlike Alt-C/X/V).
They are simpler than the emacs ones.
They are, yes, used in many applications and environments (CDE, for
instance), so why be gratuitously different for no reason?
> But since Windows does it that way, both GNOME and KDE feel compelled
> to do it too.
Here, you assign a motive to others, without knowledge.
Was "windows does it this way" part of the reason why KDE and GNOME
did it? Yes. Was it the only reason? No. Were we "compelled"?
Hell, no.
BTW: KDE tries to support emacs keybindings where possible (Ctrl-A,
Ctrl-E and Ctrl-K, for example).
> (Yes, I know the bindings can be changed, but I'm trying to make a
> point here.)
You are not making one. You see, one default MUST exist. Why not this
one? Keep in mind that KDE, for example, can't even take Ctrl-X-C as
a shortcut (I'd guess GNOME can't either, but I don't really know).
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Winters)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 22 Mar 2000 20:48:27 -0000
In article <8bb7dc$m5f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Francis Van Aeken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tom Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8baq2v$uq0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> This paper aims to assess whether the threat of Linux to professional
>> software is real, and if so, how this might affect the economies of
>> developed countries.
>
>What worries me is that the leading developers of, say, Linux, are all
>working for other people. The best example is Linus who's doing marketing
>for Transmeta, a company owned by some of the richest people on the planet.
I think you'll find he's doing rather more than just marketing.
>I'm a researcher / developer, but I don't see myself working for somebody
>else in a commercial setting. Still, I'm playing with the idea of setting up
>my own company, developing and selling software. The thing is, so many
>people are claiming these days that the only good software is free software.
>How is my business supposed to survive if I can't charge for my software?
Charge for your services. Various people have discovered that if you
write a single piece of software and then sell it to large numbers of
users you can make extremely large amounts of money for relatively
little effort. The trouble with this model is it doesn't leave
anything to fund support and leads to very frustrated customers. It's
also at odds with the well established fact that the development cost
of software is a relatively small part of the total life-cycle cost.
>Of course, things are different for big companies: they can afford to give
>away some of their software, or even all of it, if it happens that they have
>other sources of income...
This isn't the point of free software - it isn't a loss leader.
>So, what will happen? Will we all go back working for Big Blue, as in
>the Dark Ages? Too bad most geeks are too young to remember those
>days...
I'm not. You think having one excessively dominant player is worse
than having another excessively dominant player? I don't. I remember
well when "it must be IBM" was the rule (it wasn't that long ago remember)
and IBM are still larger in revenue terms than Microsoft.
John (making a living out of free software).
--
John Winters. Wallingford, Oxon, England.
The Linux Emporium - the source for Linux CDs in the UK
See http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development
Date: 22 Mar 2000 21:03:43 GMT
Drestin Black ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: it's not an official release from CL yet - just a hobbled together hack
: and if you take a second to compare what the Win driver does versus the
: linux hack you'll see the HUGE disparity. Feel free to enjoy 1/3rd of
: the features of your card which you paid the same as I did - but I have
: full support and features...
I am enjoying all of the features that interest me on my SoundBlaster
Live. I can play digitized audio, I can play midi, I can pass-through my
CD-ROM's audio out. I can play from multiple programs at once. What,
exactly, am I missing?
Does any normal person actually use the other 2/3 of the "features," or
or did creative just add them so that they would be able to justify
charging more than $15 for their product?
Considering that my SoundBlaster Live costs a third of what my
SoundBlaster Pro did so many years ago, I don't feel so bad.
Hey! Come to think of it, it also costs one third of Windows 98 SE,
retail priced...
$65 SB Live Value + $12 Linux from Cheapbytes (shipping included) = $77
OR
$65 SB Live Value + $200 Windows 98 SE = $265
(All prices in Canadian funds)
Both satisfy my audio needs completely. I'm happy...
--
David Steinberg -o) Boycott Amazon.com! Fight
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \ the "1-Click Order" patent:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v http://www.nowebpatents.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:48:47 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:27:20 GMT, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:26:07 -0500, Bob Germer
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On 03/22/2000 at 08:54 AM,
>> George Marengo, a wothless pile of Microsoft paid pondscum
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>>> >It is FUD because IBM had no more choice than a restaurant owner who was
>>> >told by the local Mafiosi that he would install a cigarette machine, use
>>> >XYZ garbage collection company, and pay $100 a week "insurance". And you
>>> >know damn well that is the case.
>>
>>> Oh please... IBM knew darn well the selling their PC's with OS/2 would
>>> be financial suicide for the PSP division -- that's why they didn't do
>>> it. If they really thought that they could sell their machines in that
>>> configuration, they could have told MS to pack sand concerning Windows
>>> licensing.
>>
>>More pure FUD. Since MS was a co-owner of the OS/2 code per the terms of
>>the development contract, IBM still had to provide a portion of the
>>license fee to MS until they worked out a settlement on the fee.
>
>Sure, but if they had done that, they would NOT have had to pay any
>licensing fees for Windows. Why didn't they just install OS/2 as a
>preload and be done with Windows?
The same fact that has hobbled anyone for the last 20 years,
the fact that there's more to gaining utility out of an OS
than just having the system software sitting on a disk.
Everything else has to come along with it including driver
support and 3rd party application support.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux Newbie Needs Some Help
Date: 22 Mar 2000 21:14:59 GMT
If you want to learn Linux just head over to the library or Barnes and Nobles
and get some books on it. O'Reily and Associates writes wondeful books on
Linux and so does Sams Publishing. Basically all you need to learn Linux is a
book, spare time and.. a little patience (you actually don't need the book, at
least i didn't) Also use the man pages they are very useful. Hope your Linux
experience is a good one.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Richard Russell)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:15:26 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:39:59 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:17:31 GMT, George Richard Russell
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Because a free stable and released spread sheet that is equivalent to Win 3.1
>>era spread sheets doesn't exist?
>
> That's nothing more than repeating an unsupported assertion.
> Repeating something over and over again doesn't, by itself,
> make something true.
What free spreadsheet has equivalent functionality to Lotus 123 from SmartSuite
96, the last 16 bit windows 3.1 version?
Go on, list them Jedi.
If Gnumeric is all you've got to offer, you lose.
>>
>>SIAG is as good as it gets, or Ksiag, the Qt / KDE port.
>
> 'As good as it gets' by one person's underdetailed
> subjective estimation isn't a very useful metric
> for determining whether or not something might be
> sufficient for a wide range of users.
Sufficient for a wide range of users does not equate to equivalent
functionality, Quit moving the goalposts. And answer the question.
>>
>>>>StarOffice just is horrible. Usable, sure, but not nice.
>>>
>>> Please define 'horrible' in less meaningless terms.
>>
>>In your words, bloated. Badly designed, poorly documented, unoptimised,
>>and a poor and inacurate clone of a better interface.
>
> Bloated is an aspect of trying too much to be like msoffice
> and is not a problem limited to StarOffice.
At least Office has seperate executables - I don't want SOffices integrated
desktop, browser, PIM, db, spreadsheet, mail / news client, image editor,
slide show tool etc when all I want to do is view a document and edit it.
V3 had it right.
>How is it poorly
> documented?
Context sensitive help that isn't available in every context.
Missing docs on various topics and features.
> StarOffice is not that remarkable in terms of being bad or good.
In terms of price and platform support, it excels, in given features too,
in docs, no, performance, no, UI, no.
>>
>>> The 3D effects on SO5's graph are actually quite spiffy
>>> and manage to be eye candy superior to it's MS counterpart.
>>
>>Its file filters are inferior, its slower, has redraw / refresh problems,
>
> Actually, it's file filters aren't bad. They're not 'perfect'
> but then again nothing short of 'office itself' is going to
> provide that.
Lotus (ime) has always been the best. Especially for range of filters -
from dead DOS WP's on up to Office.
The redraw problems are a real pain.
>>poor documentation, inferior macro langauge / capabilities, and fewer
>>"spiffy" graphing effects, and handles fonts poorly (across platforms, too)
>
> Unless you're someone that makes extensive use of fonts in interesting
> ways, this whole 'bad fonts' bit is just a red herring. Also, without
> more detail in terms of what you can't do 'bad macro language' is still
> quite vague.
Actually, it had problems with fonts at random times, making all fonts fixed
width in presentations / word processed documents. In Solaris and Win 98.
The macro langauge is not as complete as VBA, despite similarities.
>>The tools for Unix i.e. its Word processors are less capable.
>
> No. They are quite capable. The big problem is that anything not
> 'the one true program' will typically have problem dealing with
> data from that 'one true program'. This is no less a problem running
> under Windows if you happen to think exercising one of the other
> choices is appropriate for you.
Nope, most Linux WP's only seem to support documents in RTF and are therefore
limited to what can be expressed in RTF physical markup.
Those that don't are like kword, abiword, pre releases, or Commercial, still
not comparable to first rate WP's.
>>
>>>>for years, nothing better could be had for Unix.
>>>
>>> So? You still haven't told us why we wouldn't want to use
>>> it over something else.
>>
>>Its not as good, put simply. Good enough for some perhaps.
>
> That is too simple. It is completely meaningless in relating
> to how anyone else uses those applications. It's useless in
> determining whether or not you have a point or are just full
> of hot air and rhetoric.
Because they lack features that users want. Grammar checking. Templates.
Auto correction. Mail merging. Wizards. the list goes on.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>E-mail? Good old mutt and elm; Netscape (when it works); emacs.
>>>>
>>>>All lacking in the warm fuzzie ease of use and setup stakes - Netscapes client,
>>>>essentially the same across platforms, sucks, and uses Motif.
>>>
>>> So? Exactly how much easier would the competitors be to deal
>>> with and why?
>>
>>Familiarity. Integration. Decent documentation. Modern interface. Tool tips.
>>Sensible defaults. GUI configuration. Intended for Desktop Usage.
>
> Sensible is subjective.
> GUI configuration is available.
for mutt and elm? Show me where.
> "intended for desktop usage" is gibberish.
As opposed to console usage on a multiuser system.
It does mean novice friendly documentation. Tried reading mutts docs?
> Integration is also present, it just requires applications
> to be able to communicate via Motif facilities. Gnome
> has this.
Gnome is in no way integrated with say, mutt or elm, and to Netscape only
to the extent of understanding DND when its not crashing. They can't
even match colours.
> The interface is no more or less modern than it's main
> competitor.
In Netscape? Its what, how old since they did more than add a
shopping button? When was the last change to the UI of
the integrated mail / news tool, 4.5 or was it 4.0?
elm and mutt do not have especially modern UI's - and are not intended
to have.
> Tool tips really shouldn't be that crucial for NS.
Its just and example of the comforts of a well desinged UI, so
lacking in Linux / X11 / Nutscrape whatever.
>>Like integration, documentation, ease of use and setup, designed for offline
>>use, familiarity, etc.
>>
>
> Integration should not need to mean 'built into one huge indeterminate
> mass'. A caching nntp server integrates fine with any other client.
Yeah right, its configuration system is mentioned in the client documentation,
the setup tool available from a clients menu, right?
An integrated news reader will let you configure how and from where your
news is fetched without other sw, like leafnode or suck.
> Documentation is not an issue with nntp clients.
Comapre the docs with say, slrn to those of Agent. slrn's assume more
knowledge and familiarity with Unix / USENET / etc.
Its also not terribly task based - there is no documentation of howto
change, for example, the colours used. It just says edit the rc file.
Not terribly novice welcoming. Nor is falling back to vi as editor.
Nor having to quit and restart to change configuration options.
Nor having slrnpull a sperately configured and run application.
>Ease of setup is
> also pretty much a non-issue. Leafnode is quite nice in this respect.
Yes, you like to edit things like /etc/inetd.conf? /etc/leafnode/leafnode.conf?
There are some web and GUI config tools, but incomplete and unstable.
> Any gui client will have a configuration system comparable to any
> other gui client. A proper news client shouldn't care whether or not
> it's functioning offline or not.
But they shouldn't force me to setup and run a local server, just to read news
offline.
>>ispell via a pipe - I'd rather have Word like underlining, or a spellcheck
>>toolbutton to press.
>
> Then use a different $EDITOR or pester the author if this facility
> in the gui newsreader in question is not available in a nice shiny
> happy fashion.
It was an example - I can think of few uses to me for piping messages.
> Your position is based on lies and GROSS ignorance.
And yours simply on the assumption that if Linux doesn't have it, its not
worth having.
George Russell
--
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.
Lord of the Rings, J.R.R.Tolkien
Hey you, what do you see? Something beautiful, something free?
The Beautiful People, Marilyn Manson
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
