Linux-Advocacy Digest #786, Volume #25 Fri, 24 Mar 00 01:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: From the Horse's Mouth ("doc rogers")
Re: Advocacy??? (Jim Richardson)
Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (Terry Porter)
Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans (Ciaran)
Re: Weak points (Arne Adolfsen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "doc rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: From the Horse's Mouth
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:16:51 -0500
Norman D. Megill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8bdr8g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8bb0km$u6d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> doc rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Below is the response I received from Gateway's techs.
> ...
> >This document contains the instructions to format and reinstall the
> >Solo 2500
> You are comparing apples and oranges. This is not the same machine as
> the 2300XL.
I didn't say it was the same machine, I don't believe.
The procedure looked close to what you were trying to describe, though,
minus the goofy stuff.
Given how I contacted their support, I didn't want to bug them again, as I
couldn't even give them a serial number or anything.
As I said, I asked about the Gateway 2600 because T. Max kept talking about
it with respect to your post as if he had the same machine that you did. I
didn't remember that you said you had a 2300 until Gateway informed me that
there is _no_ 2600 and I wondered what you said you had.
> I did discover that Gateway now has a web page describing the 2300XL
> installation procedure:
> http://www.gateway.com/support/techdocs/portable/2300/30718.shtml
> You will see that it follows my procedure quite closely, including 10
> reboots during the whole process.
Their description is much clearer and doesn't have a lot of the wacky stuff
in it that your's did.
> Strictly speaking their procedure is incomplete, since the first FDISK on
> a new machine will require setting labels to uppercase to workaround an
> FDISK bug, which they do not show;
I've never encountered that bug. That's probably why they don't show it.
It must be rare enough that it's not part of an OS reinstall in almost all
cases.
> they do not show how to workaround
> FDISK bugs if the partitions are corrupted;
Same deal here.
> and they do not show the
> details of the driver Wizard bug where it produces error messages
> because it "forgot" the driver location you specified earlier.
Ditto.
> Most
> users could probably deal with the last, since you soon discover you
> just have to give it the driver location again. For the FDISK problems
> I guess they expect you to call Gateway support.
Do you have info that that's a common problem on this machine? I would
think it would be listed in that case. I would also think it is indicative
of a hardware oddity.
> Also, in six places they just tell you to "follow the on-screen
> instructions", which I suppose is adequate. In my procedure I made
> these steps explicit so I could verify as I performed them that the
> installation was proceeding as expected. I also put in my own warnings
> or comments, such as the dire consequences of clicking OK instead of
> Apply at the end of the video driver installation, to help me keep alert
> at critical points.
As I mentioned, that isn't a MS problem, though. I would guess that it is a
hardware problem, or maybe a badly coded driver.
> Anyway this is the "official" procedure, so any further comments
> regarding the 2300XL procedure should be redirected towards that web
> page.
Too tired to do that after midnight . . . maybe tomorrow :-)
--doc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Advocacy???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 05:17:33 GMT
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 18:33:31 -0600,
Tim Kelley, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Richard Wilson wrote:
>
>> I'd like to share with you something that happened to me on IRC Undernet
>> #linuhelp channel. I was having some trouble recognizing all my memory
>> and it was something to do with my lilo.conf. Someone asked me to send
>> my lilo.conf so I pasted it into the linuxhelp channel. I was
>> immediately and unceremoniously kicked out of the channel with "ask
>> before you do this". I got back on and stated that I was actually asked
>> to do this by someone on the channel.
>
>The best thing is to upgrade to linux 2.2, the memory problem doesn't happen
>there.
>
>Otherwise, put your money where your mouth is and send me your lilo.conf.
>It's been a while, but it's just a little statement you put in there ... I'm
>sure you can find this on deja news or on the web.
>
>I've rarely used IRC for help, most irc people I've met have been somewhat
>xenophobic, if not rude.
>
>Try the newsgroups.
>
If someone on IRC asks you to send them something, they don't usually
mean cut-n-paste it into the chat window, but to dcc it, or e-mail it.
'Course, if you're a newbie, they are assuming too much maybe.
>
>--
>Tim Kelley
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:36:47 -0500
Ahhh. New Zealand - exactly the first place I think of when I think of
cutting edge technology and the most wisened IT personal.... NOT!
That's like saying: 90% of the people in that insane assylum all use sodium
penathol so it must be good for everyone!
Sounds like New Zealand is broke and free bsd and free linux and free apache
fits their price tags.
"root" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 1. The New Zealand Army uses Sun Servers running Solaris for mission
> critical needs. Use Linux for Intranet server. When I asked the system
> administrators why they did not use NT there response was:
>
> "You have got to be joking, we would not touch NT with a
> 40 foot pole"
>
> 2. 90% of ISP's in New Zealand use Linux as their Proxy server running
> squid. Xtra (250,000 users) and Ihug (40,000 users) to name a few. Over
> 60% of Websites in New Zealand (Including Government departments) use
> linux/FreeBSD and Apache for their websites.
>
> 3. Unix has been around for over 20 years thus making it a superior
> operating system. If Microsoft believes they can cram 20 years of
> devlopment into 9 years then I must be a millionaire!
>
> I am currently running Corel Linux, although the GUI is not as smooth as
> you would get on such os's as BeOS it is gradually getting there. The OS
> itself (Kernel and associated files) is at stage where to make the
> 'Great Leap Forward' to the average persons desktop the GUI needs to be
> tightly intergrated with the OS, take the best aspects of each GUI
> (BeOS, KDE, GNOME, Windows, QNX) and create a package that can be
> installed with minimum fuss. Although Hardcore Linux users may say that
> this is terrible one must realise the average person does not want to
> type in commands and learn cyptic codes, they want a simple point and
> click interface in which they can interact with minimal learning
> required. Once this occurs it can then jump onto the Business desktop
> because of the low learning curve required there is only a small cost in
> training, and now that there is Citrix Winframe Client for Linux, Linux
> can now be used as a cheap thinclient.
>
> What do you think of this observation?
>
> MattyG
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 24 Mar 2000 13:53:51 +0800
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:32:14 GMT,
George Richard Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 23 Mar 2000 10:14:53 +0800, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 14:14:22
>> GMT, George Richard Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 22 , The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Call us when it reaches a release version, comes out of alpha and beta testing,
>>>and has functionality equivalent to Windows 3.1 Works Suites.
>>No we wont call you George, no one is going to dumb Gnumeric down to
>>"Ms Works", which is a buggy piece of crap.
>
>And yet is more powerful and fully featured. Hmmm...
>Hint - you'll need more functionaility in Gnumeric before you can dumb it down.
I'm sure more functionality will be added in time.
>
>>>
>>>>Word processors? Lyx is pretty good, so I've heard; AbiSoft; StarOffice.
>>>> Emacs (sort of).
>>>
>>>LyX - is emphatically not WYSIWYG. Its more a document formatter / typesetter.
>>Who said WYSISYG ??, that is a MS retrograte offering,.... keep it.
>
>for those who need it, its essential.
For those who "believe" they need it you mean ?
>
>>Lyx is WYSISYW, way better imho, have you ever actually used Lyx George ?
>
>Yes, and KLyX too, it doesn't offer too much layout control without the
Thats the whole point of Lyx, it does the typesetting.
>insertion of La(TeX) codes into the document, but its the easiest way to do
>maths in documentes I've found.
cool
>
>>I'm always amazed when someone writes of Lyx as a document formatter/typesetter
>>when it's a GUI frontend for Latex and very easy to use, it has a spellchecker
>>formulae facility, help, templates etc, the list is huge.
>
>A litle more work on GUI independence, file type handling ( LaTeX import!) and
>some more templates for more DTP stuff (an abuse of LyX's core idea, but would
>be useful)
Yeah for sure, but every software package has a few things some would like
and some dont. Plus the Lyx architects may well add these things.
>>>Gravity and Forte have no mature equivalent on X11 - but Xagent, PAN, krn, knode
>>Bullshit, George.
>>Slrn works nicely in a Xterm, mouse, colors the lot.
>
>And if thats the best GUI newsreader - hmm. GUI newsreaders are like the list
>above, not slrn.
Whats the difference ?
Slrn in a Xterm is operable by a mouse, this makes a CLI newsreader a GUI
newsreader easily and without fuss.
I can read news thru a 386 with a mono screen using slrn, or via my hi res
17" Apple monitor. This kind of facility does not exist in Windows.
Btw I'm speaking of *my* news facility, used on my pc, or if its not available
ie kids playing Quake or Koules on it, then I use a old mono pc, to access
my news facility via telnet.
>
>>>>So...why is Linux not ready for the desktop?
>>It is of course!
>
>Optimist, aren't you?
No I've been using Linux on the desktop since Aug97, full time. This isnt
optomism, it's cold hard fact.
>
>>>
>>>Too much like Unix of course. I mean, if you don't realise Emacs is not an
>>>option for desktop usage, then you won't realise why linux isn't ready for the
>>>desktop.
>>I believe Linux is as ready for the desktop as Windows ever *was*.
>
>Really? I don't see
>a) Hundreds of Thousands of preinstalled Linux systems
I see hundreds of thousands of self installed Linux systems
>b) Massive third party software range
I see a *massive* Free Software range
>c) All the hand holding books that Windows has
I see tons of on-line support.
>d) The ability to do everything by point and click
*everything* ?
>
>>The "Windows is a good Desktop" sentiment is a myth.
>>Does a good Desktop crash, or lock up ?
>
>It shouldn't, but then, it would be shutdown at the end of the day as well.
The latter does not invalidate the former.
>Uptime is not really an issue. Although warnings like "save your work every 20
>minutes to avoid disappointment" are most worrying. Recently seen at another
>Uni where there using NT + Citrix for remote desktops.
Yeah kinda unsettling, tho I do every 30 secs, anyway, a legacy of many years
of Dos and Windows.
And it's not always the fault of the OS.
>
>>Should a good Desktop, be able to run remote GUI or cli apps on another
>>box, easily ?
>
>Remote GUI - why ? Yes, I know the geek reasons, big deal.
Its a handy deal if you need it.
>CLI apps - there is a telnet client. It sucks, but its there.
Yeah true, but no GUI. Its interesting that Windows has the famous
GUI only front end, and GUI configurations, but only a text telnet facility.
This makes remote admin impossible, even if Windows had multi user
facilities.
>
>Not really typical desktop needs.
I'd say that typical desktop needs may well be controlled by what facilities
the desktop has, as users adapt ?
A desktop user needs to use his desktop, and remote admin can save him hours
if his desktop has that facility.
If you don't have it I guess you dont miss it, but one should be carefull
about deciding what is "typical" based on their own Windows
experience.
>
>>Should a good Desktop, offer many Window managers, instead of just the one?
>>We are not all alike, hence different cars, colors, etc.
>
>We all have to start from somewhere, hence the initial consistency, and besides
>I hate car analogies, and all (ok ok most ) cars have pedals and a steering
>wheel.
Yeah I hate car analogies too, next time I'll use girls knickers, and their
differences as an example ;-)
>
>>Should a good Desktop allow me to log into it, if I'm away from my pc ?
>
>Sounds more like a server task.
Only Windows has tried to delineate the two tasks, server and desktop.
Linux is inherently a X server etc. The two tasks fit perfectly together.
> Besides, isn't it better to use sshd, than
>telnetd,
I use Ssh (Secure Shell) myself, but telnet is handy.
> and what is more usual on Linux?
Telnet is very common, as is Ssh these days.
>
>>>Most desktop users have never started a text editor, and frankly, a decent
>>>desktop should remove the need unless their software developers.
>>Again I disagree George, unless we are talking Desktops for Dummies. If thats
>>the case, let them have Windows.
>
>What should be accessible only via a text editor? Why bother.
Configs are easily modified with only a text editor.
Configs like "tkdesk" my app manager etc.
And these configs can be changed remotely by using telnet, or ssh, if needed.
GUI is a farce except for the simplest of tasks, however I use it all the time
in combination with Xterms, that allow me the power of a CLI.
>
>George Russell
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
Subject: Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans
From: Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 22:02:21 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Drestin Black"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ahhh. New Zealand - exactly the first place I think of when I
think of
>cutting edge technology and the most wisened IT personal....
NOT!
>
>That's like saying: 90% of the people in that insane assylum
all use sodium
>penathol so it must be good for everyone!
>
>Sounds like New Zealand is broke and free bsd and free linux
and free apache
>fits their price tags.
Jeeez.. you windows guys have to resort to making fun of other
peoples countries instead of defending your OS properly ?
How disappointing.
Cheers,
Ciaran
PS Only Australians are allowed to make fun of New Zealanders.
* 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: Arne Adolfsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 05:51:48 +0000
Do Micros~1 employees get monthly bonuses for this kind of
stuff?
Mr. "SetMeUp" wrote:
> 1) Serious and easy modem/fax and printer support.
> (sendmail makes me laugh, postscript printers suck)
I don't use my PC as a fax machine -- that's what fax
machines are for. Or are you one of those people who think
that what the world needs RIGHT NOW is a combination
television-hair dryer-telephone-toaster oven? As for
serious -- whatever that means -- and easy modem and printer
support, I've never experienced a single problem since I
replaced Window~1 95 on my home machine with Red Hat 5.0 in
August 1998.
Miss "SetMeUp" continues:
> 2) Coherent window manager configuration files and behaviour.
I haven't any idea what you're babbling about here. In 18
months I've never had a single window manager problem on Red
Hat 5.0, Red Hat 5.1, Red Hat 5.2, Linux-Mandrake 5.2,
Linux-Mandrake 6.0, or Linux-Mandrake 6.1.
Signor "SetMeUp" goes on with:
> 3) If easy installation methods are to be so, better go back text mode
> installations or else improve the so called "easy" installations, because
> really suck.
I managed to install Linux-Mandrake 6.1, from scratch, in 15
minutes, and it asked at most about 12 questions. Really
difficult questions, too, of the nature of "What kind of
printer do you want to connect to?" How hard is it to look
at the label on the front of my printer? (No, I'm not a
system administrator or any kind of computer professional.
I'm an office worker who basically does word processing.)
Madama "SetMeUp" then went on to ask:
> 4) Apart from saying that there's decent software lack, just point that
> the tries to make it (aka Staroffice) produce such a bloated software as you
> claim Microsoft Office and the kind are. I disagree, Microsoft Office is far
> ahead from Staroffice, not to mention Applixware, LyX (huuhuhu), ...
I think Micros~1 Office is a bloated piece of crap -- lucky
me, I am forced to use it at work -- but I'm not going to
stick up for StarOffice either. I really don't need an
office suite at work or at home, and I'm more than pleased
-- I'm thrilled in fact -- with the WordPerfect 8 port to
Linux. WordPerfect always has and still does make Micros~1
Word look about as advanced and usable as Wordstar 1.0. Is
there a reason, for instance, for why Word doesn't allow
dual justification for a single line of text -- that is, the
first few words of a line are justified left and the rest
are justified right? (No, forcing people to create tables
for text in the middle of a text file is not acceptable.)
"SetMeUp"-san continued with:
> 5) Games ... yeah yeah, not every one like the 10 decent games. And
> besides, X11 was awful and slow, perhaps XFree86 4.0 get it closer to
> Windows desktop, though I don't think so. KDE ? Don't make me laugh, have
> you ever tried to change an icon on a 350MHz and 256MB SDRAM machine, hehe,
> pitiful.By the way, I do not like Quake, any more ? Huhu
I have less than no interest in computer games.
Mrs. "SetMeUp" asked:
> 6) Serious internet tools : pine sucks, Netscape breaks more than Windows
> 3.11 and is awful and slow. Nothing like IE 5 (the browser) and Outlook
> Express (yeah yeah, virus are a problem ... but prefer them than slrn, tin,
> krn and such sucky tools).
Again, I have no idea what you mean by "serious". My mail
reader of choice is still elm. I haven't any idea why you
think pine "sucks"; I don't care for it, but it clearly
doesn't suck. Netscape under Windows 95 crashes for me at
work on average a dozen times a day (no exaggeration); it's
never crashed even once for me at home under Linux. And
it's not slow in the least in my experience. I've never
used Internet Explorer or Outlook Express, mostly because
I've never felt the need to do so. And I'm at a loss as to
your characterization of tin and krn as "sucky".
Master "SetMeUp" blathers on:
> 7) Yeah yeah, Apache runs very well under Linux ... but do not forget
> that under Solaris, FreeBSD, and even NT/2K too, and besides, home users
> don't really need a web server. Is Linux offering anything to home users ?
Apache runs 60% of the web worldwide -- up some 2% in the
last month alone. (Have you checked the Netcraft numbers on
how IIS usage is steadily declining in real numbers and
percentage-wise?) Sure, Apache runs under Solaris and
FreeBSD, but so what's your point here? Is Linux offering
anything to home users? It offers me, for one, an
incredibly stable and fast OS, and that counts.
Mademoiselle "SetMeUp" continues:
> And be serious, do not tell me about BSOD's evey 5 minutes because Windows
> 2000 (and NT almost) has never frozen.
I'd rather run my home PC on Linux for, at most, $50 for its
unbelievable stability and speed on a Pentium II than spend
thousands of bucks for Window~1 2000 software and the
hardware it requires to run it, in return for which
applications freeze up constantly, there are system crashes,
and the memory leaks are so humongous that you have to
reboot at least once a week. Unless you change any
configurations or install software or stuff like that, in
which case you have to reboot.
"SetMeUp"-sahib sez:
> 8) I am going to stop in here, and wait for your answers, I hope you to
> do it without FUD and with real arguments (if any).
Give it your best shot, doll.
Arne Adolfsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
