Linux-Advocacy Digest #756, Volume #25 Wed, 22 Mar 00 18:13:08 EST
Contents:
A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :) ("Sylvain Demers")
Re: Linux sure is coming around... (JoeX1029)
Re: I WAS WRONG ("Matt")
Re: How can use linux? debates (Roberto Alsina)
SUN: WHERE IS STAROFFICE SOURCE?? (Walter)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Bsd and Linux (Joe Pfeiffer)
Re: Giving up on NT (Leon Hanson)
Re: Giving up on NT (Leon Hanson)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (mr_organic)
Re: Linux sure is coming around... (Terry Porter)
Re: A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :) (Tim Kelley)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) ("SG")
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Tim Kelley)
WARNING! DO NOT USE WORD! (was: UNIX recruiters and MS Word resumes) (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: M$ did come aboard UNIX camp... (Mathias Grimmberger)
Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns... (Tim Kelley)
OS bigotry (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Linux sure is coming around... ("Dirk Gently")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Sylvain Demers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:17:08 -0500
I've started using Linux about a year ago. I'm not a power user. I had some
dos experience, many years with Windows, which means no computer experience,
since the only thing I've ever been able to do to fix Windows was to turn my
computer off and back on.
I'm a home-base worker. I have a small translation company. So I'm using my
computer a lot. I'm saying that because a lot of people using their computer
as an entertaining device (say, a couple of hours max per day) have a hard
time understanding why some of us are that pissed at Windows. When you use
MS Office with Windows 10 hours a day, you can't possibly be very happy with
it. And I don't mean 9 hours of e-mail and a couple of letters. I mean hours
and hours of writing, editing and dealing with Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
My system started to lock up the first day I upgraded from Win 3.1 to Win95.
And that's around that time I started to buy hardware. A lot of hardware.
Now with a brand new Pentium III 500 Mhz with win98se, I thought things
would change. Not. And Office 2000 (which came with the computer, I wouldn't
have bought it - well I must have paid for it in some ways) is the buggiest
version of Office I've ever used. And I still experiment lock-ups at least 3
times a week, everytime loosing some data and wasting my time and money. And
I'm not even talking about the problems I had with NT when I was working in
a company.
Sorry for the long into, but I wanted to give a little background on why I
decided to search for alternatives to Windows.
So I started with RedHat 5.2. That was hard for a complete newbie. But good
to learn. I must admit I put all Linux aside for a couple of months, cause I
didn't have the knowledge and the time to learn. But then Windows problems
made me reconsider Linux more seriously. Then here's the path I folowed in
short :
OpenLinux 2.2 : Great! A graphical install. Not so great. I 've never been
able to use it. Lizard sucked
RedHat 6.0 - Texte install, a breeze.
Mandrake 6.1 - Text install. Even better. Now I really started to think
Linux could compete on WIndows ground.
And then some experimentation :
Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.
Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install. Some device refuse to
work.
RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
many bugs. What the hell's happening?
Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
configure than the others, even on the console. My problem with slack is the
lack of support. Man pages are like cerbo-croatian to me. And how-to's are
somtimes pretty technical.
So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late. RedHat's
contribution to Linux visibility is priceless. But if they want to go too
fast, they may turn out to be the company responsible for the raise AND fall
of Linux.
Thanks, if you're still there :)
Sylvain
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux sure is coming around...
Date: 22 Mar 2000 21:21:42 GMT
i think you may have missed my point some what. I'm simply saying that Linux
is begining to become a "legitimate" OS meaning that instead of only finding it
in specialized comp stores and the net, it can be bought everywhere.
------------------------------
From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I WAS WRONG
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:28:30 -0000
M$ bought the rights to Xenix these were later mostly swallowed up by SCO
leaving M$ with a 15% (+/-) stake in the project. Apparenly they've just
sold their share.
Gooba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:uzXB4.3302$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'm fairly certain I heard something about an MS venture called Xenix.
> Though I could be wrong..
>
>
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can use linux? debates
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:18:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED],net wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:03:40 -0800, Osugi Sakae
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Some people claim that linux is only for programmers /
> >researchers. These same people are generally upset with recent
> >attemps to make linux accessable to less technical types.
>
> That is because they are generally socially inferior folks and Linux
> is their last claim to fame so to speak.
What's that supposed to mean? That Linux users are not allowed in the
same golf courses windows users are?
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Walter)
Subject: SUN: WHERE IS STAROFFICE SOURCE??
Reply-To: n/a
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:30:06 GMT
Ditto.
Sun announced the release of SO source in mid August.
Scott said that in a short time there would have been open
ports for other platforms, just like the Mac.
Now, since they cannot support OS like OS/2,
why don't they act like they promised to,
at least once?
Maybe they are afraid that, with sources,
SO under Linux would have less bugs and
become decent?
Maybe they're afraid of that?
And, btw, why JDK1.2.2 does not supoport
TRUE COLOR (32bits) under Linux?
Is that because solaris can't do 32bit
and they don't want to lose the flag?
------------------------------
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 20:50:43 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:31:33 GMT, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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.
Why would offering another choice dissuade buyers? Perhaps
FORCING them to have OS/2 preloaded might have been a
problem but that's not what's under discussion.
[deletia]
--
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: Joe Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: 22 Mar 2000 14:20:10 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
>
> I'm curious as to whether GTK-- ( the C++ bindings ) are more elegant.
Yes, IMHO. As you say, the problem with GTK+ is that they're using
long names for the things namespaces were invented to do. GTK-- uses
namespaces. Also, a widget makes a very convenient C++ object.
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
VL 2000 Homepage: http://www.cs.orst.edu/~burnett/vl2000/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leon Hanson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:46:54 GMT
On 22 Mar 2000 17:44:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Wolfgang Weisselberg) wrote:
>> <sarcasm>
>> Is performance an issue? Cuz if it's not, he can use Java, right?
>> </sarcasm>
>
>Java: Platform-independent, secure, fast. None out of three
>ain't too bad.
:-) I like that!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leon Hanson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:47:56 GMT
On 22 Mar 2000 17:39:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Wolfgang Weisselberg) wrote:
>On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 19:09:39 GMT,
> Leon Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 16 Mar 2000 22:34:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> (Wolfgang Weisselberg) wrote:
>
>> >Those who give up functionality for experienced users in exchange
>> >for a shorter, shallower learning curve neither deserve the
>> >functionality nor the shallow learning curve. And they have have
>> >to relearn each time they need to upgrade to something more
>> >powerful.
>
>> As in....Microsoft Word? ;-)
>
>1. isn't a text editor, it's a word processor.
>2. I wouln't call Word powerful. It's overdimensioned for small
> tasks yet not good enough for large projects. But then one
> size fits all. :-/
>3. Ever tried to read a word document with an older version of
> word? Or tried to create correct ASCII with it?
I was agreeing with you. Each "upgrade" requires a "relearn" each
time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mr_organic)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 22 Mar 2000 20:50:13 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:42:57 -0300, mr_organic pronounced:
>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'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?
>
>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...
>
>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...
>
>Francis.
>
Why do you see software as a "product"? You can sell the *media* it
comes on, and still make the software Free; you can sell services,
consulting, tech support, you name it. That's how most Linux companies
are doing it; trying to sell the actual *software* is a losing
proposition (in fact, you never *sell* it, but license a given user
to use it, which is a losing proposition in a different way).
Regards,
mr_organic
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux sure is coming around...
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 23 Mar 2000 05:59:58 +0800
On 22 Mar 2000 21:21:42 GMT, JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i think you may have missed my point some what. I'm simply saying that Linux
>is begining to become a "legitimate" OS meaning that instead of only finding it
>in specialized comp stores and the net, it can be bought everywhere.
Sorry JoeX1029, I did see your point, and of course your right, Linux *is*
appearing everywhere these days, even here in Australia.
For those wo are willing to put in a bit of effort, learning Linux
or who already have some idea about it, this is definetly a good thing.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 15:56:37 -0600
Sylvain Demers wrote:
> And then some experimentation :
>
> Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install.
> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install.
> OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
then try the text install! It isn't any harder at all, the
graphical one is really just there for polish so that the ones
that absolutely insist on it have it. If you are having problems
with the graphical one, don't use it. This was my biggest gripe
with corel linux, which would not work for some reason with my
video card, and had no text-based install.
does windows have a text install to fall back on?
> Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.
well, ok
> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
> many bugs. What the hell's happening?
Red Hat's releases have always been horrible for me, with the
exception of 5.2, which was the best thing they produced so far
IMO ... usually they get it right by the third point release.
> Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
> to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
> configure than the others, even on the console.
slackware is very simple. It probably is the easiest in many
ways.
debian is more complicated, but, like slackware, it is very
conservative. The big corporate distros are very rash with their
releases and release dates. Debian is ideal in an environment
where you aren't forced to administrate the machine.
> So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
> market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
> argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
> had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
> the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
> speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
> bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
> RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
> stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late. RedHat's
> contribution to Linux visibility is priceless. But if they want to go too
> fast, they may turn out to be the company responsible for the raise AND fall
> of Linux.
That is why i use debian. Corporations are all the same, they
don't have anything but profits in mind. So, yeah, I think it is
likely that RH will at some point begin to behave like MS (if not
already).
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:41:06 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:15:26 GMT, George Richard Russell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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.
I've already stated that a bulletpoint by bulletpoint comparison
is meaningless. You have no apparent awareness of how you, or how
you presume others, use a spreadsheet.
So attempting to discuss any arbitrary spreadsheet as not
'featured' enough is meaningless.
[deletia]
I would also like to reiterate the point that you are grossly ignorant
or just a plain liar when it comes to certain aspects of older Unix
tools to begin with nevermind gnumeric.
--
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: "SG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: 22 Mar 2000 15:54:08 -0500
Bjørnar Bolsøy <Na> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Did you know, BTW, that the Swedish military fighter Gripen (JAS)
> >is run on PowerPC processors? There's an example of a real
> >realtime system! :)
>
> Cool! Steve, any idea what the Block52 Viper runs for its different
> systems? :)
I honestly don't know. I doubt it uses anything consumer grade, you know,
9+Gs, lightning strikes, relatively unrefined generator based electrical
system, the even less refined backup system(s), massive temp swings, etc,
though I'm only speculating. There's also a lot of different processors
scattered throughout a modern fighter. I do know that L-M advertises the
latest F-16's MMC (funny name, right?) as the most powerful central
computer in any operational fighter. Whatever it uses for processing, the
52's a Pratt, I'll take an even ten block anyday, GE power--31,000lbs of
thrust in a clean 22,000lb jet, what else matters? :^)
--
-Steve.
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:04:58 -0600
Tom Steinberg wrote:
>
> 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
> ----------------------
[snip]
great, but can we see the argument?
It sounds good so far.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: WARNING! DO NOT USE WORD! (was: UNIX recruiters and MS Word resumes)
Date: 22 Mar 2000 22:02:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Codifex Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: Donn Miller wrote:
>:> This one recruiter was really whiney: "But I don't _LIKE_ resumes in
>:> text format". I guess saying "You'll take it and like it" isn't an
>:> option. Why do recruiters in the UNIX field always want resumes in
>:> Word format?
>
>: Solve your problem... use RTF - many UNIX/Linux tools understand this
>: format.
>
>: They wont know the difference.
>
>Perhaps pdf would be even better. dvipdfm works great in converting
>my nice dvi files into equally nice pdf ones that should work
>just about anywhere. It's not like these guys need to *edit* my
>resume. But give me a good open standard over Word any day...
MS Word should be considered a security hole when it is used to
communicate to others. I've been hearing before that Word saves "undo"
information along with the file, so I tried it out myself on a vanilla
Word2000 installation at the office. Yes, text that has been deleted is
saved along with the file, even if you save it with another name.
Maybe this is a feature (i.e., it can be turned off), but I consider it
a blatant bug that it is on by default. (I won't talk about Macro
viruses, this has been talked a lot about already).
I'd say, advise anyone you know, *especially clueless people* to NOT
communicate with documents in Word format. They might leak out
information that should be kept private.
Anyway, I wholeheartly agree, pdf is the way to go. I see no reason why
a recruiter should be able to edit my resume.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
"... being able to break security doesn't make you a hacker any more
than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer."
-- Eric S. Raymond
------------------------------
From: Mathias Grimmberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: M$ did come aboard UNIX camp...
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:11:12 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029) writes:
> M$ is aboard the UNIX camp. A number of years they created a UNIX like OS
> called XENIX. But it no doubt sucks just as bad as win.
MS didn't create it from scratch.
The "Magic Garden" book says it was a descendant of AT&T System III.
Some of the features in XENIX/386 made it to SVR4.0. I have seen it: can
you imagine the shock of logging in to a Sinix box (Siemens' flavour of
SVR4) and seeing it say something like "Copyright 19WX-19YZ Microsoft"?
;-)
MS sold XENIX to SCO. So I guess it doesn't suck anymore (simply because
it ceased to exist). BTW, there is a saying that "All software sucks"
and this is as close to the truth as we will ever get (all hardware
sucks too...).
MGri
--
Mathias Grimmberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Eat flaming death, evil Micro$oft mongrels!
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns...
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:03:35 -0600
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On 22 Mar 2000 12:26:06 GMT, Matt Chiglinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 23:53:23 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
> >> make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
> >> Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
> >
> >Nice sig, but isn't Apple dead? RealPlayer's formats and MPEG are so
> >much more prevalent.
>
> QT4 is alive enough to be a nuisance. I hardly see MPEG.
> It's typically either windows media or realplayer.
I'm really curious about this. Why is straight MPEG2 so
unpopular for video on the net? Is it just because folks aren't
making enough noise about it, or what? Or is it just because
real lets you put streaming video on your site, but does not give
the users the ability to save the video file?
Look at how popular mp3 files are for music, why not video? I
can't stand real video, and quicktime is even worse.
So perhaps there are other reasons. Maybe when bandwidth becomes
cheaper, people will be using video more, and MPEG will become
more prevalent <?>
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: OS bigotry
Date: 22 Mar 2000 22:31:10 GMT
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net wrote:
:> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:03:40 -0800, Osugi Sakae
:> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> >Some people claim that linux is only for programmers /
:> >researchers. These same people are generally upset with recent
:> >attemps to make linux accessable to less technical types.
:>
:> That is because they are generally socially inferior folks and Linux
:> is their last claim to fame so to speak.
: What's that supposed to mean? That Linux users are not allowed in the
: same golf courses windows users are?
Remember, bigotry works best when one can bring forth a powerful
"us versus them" mentality. On one hand you have the "normal"
Windows users (us) and on the other hand you have the sub-human
Linux users (them). Once the two are seperated, the bigot attaches
plenty of offensive stereotypes ("socially inferior", etc.) to
the "them" group in order to elevate the "us" group above them.
The two big constants are the bigot's necessity to present
personal opinion as established fact and an inability to
change his mind on the subject. In this case these folks will
take attacks on their beloved OS so personally that it would
be humorous if it wasn't so sad.
I'm not sure whether to laugh at them or pity them, but
arguing with them is pointless. Life's too short to grovel
in the dust of pedantry and hair-splitting.
(and this applies to everyone - no OS has a monopoly on bigots)
------------------------------
From: "Dirk Gently" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux sure is coming around...
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:39:04 GMT
I think that the Linux distributetors need to understand something. They
aren't selling Linux, they are selling something else. They should name it
Clinux (Commerial Linux). Linux should be freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. $30.00 is
much better than Winblowme XX, but it is $30.00 too much.
--
Jeff Lacy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
> > However this commercialization of Linux has me worried, and I'd like to
say why.
> >
> > Firstly the Aus.linux newsgroup was beseiged by Windows users who had
> > picked up a free copy of Linux, attached to a Windows magazine, which
sprouted
> > about the good and magical properties of Linux, and the army of friendly
Linux
> > users, just waiting to help them should they have any problems.
> >
> > After the first 200 whiney "please hold my hand, while I cry about lost
> > expectations" I kill-filed any mention of this magazine, and cut the
noise
> > considerably.
>
> > To me Linux hasnt really changed since 1997, you still NEED to
understand it
> > to use it, and buying on price alone to me, is a BIG mistake.
>
> Yep - I agree with you here. I first tried Linux in 1995 because it
> was a free unix, and I wanted to run unix on my pc. Nowadays, you've
> got hordes of people using Linux because they simply think it's a
> better version of Windows. Worse yet, you've got RedHat peppering
> their distro with lots of GUI tools to make it easy for the Windows
> converts. These GUI tools put scripts in strange places and it makes
> it hard for us seasoned unix gurus to find the config files.
>
> When I first tried Linux in May 1995, I was expecting a free version
> of unix, not a Windows alternative. The fact that Linux can be used
> as a "Windows alternative" speaks volumes for the flexibility of Linux
> and unix in general. That's why I run FreeBSD instead of Linux -- it
> seems as if FreeBSD is trying to stay true to its unix roots without
> all the hype and commercialization. Of course, I feel that Linux is
> good too, but the hype and commercialization of it has turned me off.
>
> I switched to FreeBSD in Oct. 1996.
>
> - Donn
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
