Linux-Advocacy Digest #800, Volume #25 Sat, 25 Mar 00 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Weak points (Terry Porter)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (Terry Porter)
Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser. (Matthew Haley)
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] (Allin
Cottrell)
Re: Weak points (mlw)
Re: A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :) (Terry Porter)
Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans (mlw)
VMWare vs. Bootmanagers ("gcaldwel")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Weak points
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 25 Mar 2000 11:57:19 +0800
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:27:21 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 24 Mar 2000 14:46:56 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>Porter) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 22:31:23 GMT,
>> Itchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 24 Mar 2000 06:07:36 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>>>Porter) wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:50:48 GMT, SetMeUp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Well well well, a new wintroll or a old wintroll in discuise.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Serious and easy modem/fax and printer support.
>>>>Serious and easy ???
>>>>
>>>>> (sendmail makes me laugh, postscript printers suck)
>>>>Sendmail is the backbone of the internet, IBM and HP dont think
>>>>postscript printers suck, but hey, who are they to argue with a troll like you ?
>>>
>>Hi Steve :)
>
>
>Hello Terry:)
>
>How's things down under these days?
About the same, but now we have a "gst" tax system :(
>
>>>Running a system that needs a large number of users with Email and
>>>don't mind, or actually are able to decipher sendmail, then it works
>>>fine. You know you might be in trouble though when the package
>>>description (SuSE I believe, but might be Redhat) says something along
>>>the lines of not for the faint of heart. At any rate it is a powerful,
>>>though somewhat difficult program.
>>True, Sendmail is difficult to configure for me, but works so well.
>
>Well we agree for a change!
Yeah wonders never cease, but don't be dismayed, it wont last ;)
>
>>>
>>>There is nothing wrong with PS printers except the price. Why pay 3x
>>>or more the going rate for a normal printer for one? You could walk
>>>into CompUSA and pick any printer with a blindfold on and chances are
>>>it would work up to it's full potential under Windows. Same can't be
>>>said for Linux.
>>Well Macs use them, its not just Linux.
>>Futhermore it has been demonstrated here recently that PS printers are
>>similary priced to other printers.
>
>That $99 Lexmark PS printer is a closeout and a quick check on the net
>shows it to be of dubious quality. But for $99 if they still make
>cartridges I guess it's worth a chance.
Steve, I just have to say, I *don't* believe you.
>
>>I won't mention I got my IBM 600*600 dpi PS laser for $70 (second hand).
>
>You've already mentioned it about 100 times already :)
Yeah I know :)
>It's a fine printer BTW and almost impossible to kill.
True.
>Only problem I have seen is it tends to curl the output sheets, but
>this varies depending on moisture content of the paper.
True again, but hey, nothing except Linux is perfect ;-)
I use the laser to print onto "drafting film" (pollyurethane) and you orta
see that curl!
However 2 prints overlayed, produce the best looking, finest res PCB'S
(after exposing and etching) via Linux "pcb", I've seen yet. Better than
my HP pen plotter.
As a development environment for electronics/coding/user manuals and mech
design, Linux has already earnt me thousands of dollars. Its reliable, uncrash
able, and totally confidence inspiring.
>>>
>>>Why do you call everybody who does not wave the Linux flag a troll?
>>>He made some good, and valid points.
>>>Take off the blinders Terry.
>>After you Steve ;-)
>
>I've tried recent versions of Linux. All of them in fact except
>Slackware (last I used was 3.6) and Mandrake (never used it).
Sure you have, you need to, so you can aquire at least a passing
knowledge of Linux, in order to slam it.
Fortunately some long termers here on COLA know you, and are happy to point
out your mission to Linux newbies.
Note to Linux newbies or lurkers, "Steve" who's real name may possibly
be Mike is a long term Wintroll, whos mission is to spread FUD about
Linux.
>
>What was the last version of Windows you used? Win95?
On my desktop, win95 prior to Aug97.
I have used Win98 a couple of times whilst out on courses etc, and have found
it to be no better than Win95.
>You make reference to Linux being your only desktop system since 199x?
1997 Steve.
<snip>
>>At least you have the choice of diff Wm's :)
>
>True but I don't like any of them so there!
Well bully for you, theres over 21 of them, I bet youve only tried the
monoliths, and Windows look alikes ?
Be brave, step outside the square!
>>>BTW that is you've not youv'e.
>>>
>>>You must find a better spell checker Terry.
>>I do it on purpose, Steve to give you a valid reason to critisise me ;-)
>
>And I point it out for the same reason.
Hahahahahh!
>
>My but we are playful today :)
Yeah, I prefer your usual agro, argumentative self.
>
>In my case it's because I got my $2700 tax refund from the leaching
>IRS.
Hahahah I knew only money would cheer up a Wintroll like you. Now you can
go and spend it all on the latest version of Windows.
HEY, you can get a decent printer too, instead of that junk you use!
>Thanks TaxCut for catching those deductions I would have missed.
>Best $19.95 I ever spent.
Hahaha CBB got me a $4500 tax return last year, and cost me $0.
Enter that in your "TaxCut" and see if you can figure out who got the better
deal ?
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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), ...
>>>>Far ahead ? In what way ?
>>>
>>>Take one 10 minute tour of both and you will see.
>>Why not tell me here, cant you remember these glowing improvements.
>>I have *zero* interest in going to look at a Windows product, when my current
>>OS does all I need.
>
>Then you should stay with what you like and what works for you. I
>wouldn't argue with that.
I have and you do ;-)
>
>>> Remember YOU are the
>>>one claiming Linux has been your ONLY desktop since 1997 (year
>>>correct?).
>>Yes correct, Linux has been my ONLY OS , and only desktop since Aug1997.
>
>Nothing wrong with that. Windows has improved quite a bit since then
>though.
>If you like to critize it you should really try and stay a little more
>current instead of parroting others who do the same.
Current !!!
With a OS thats years behind ?????
How does that compute?
Single user and no remote GUI, tell me Steve, has Win98 caught up to
these features that were present in my Linux install of 1997 ?
>
>Win95 was no bargain and was certainly a disaster for some.
Well I'm not complaining about Win95, it was stable enuf, but could never do
what I need, ditto with Win98.
And if you think I'm spending $$$ on NT, think again. Linux does everything I
want NOW.
>
>>>
>>>Windows has come a long way since then.
>>So has Linux.
>
>Agreed. And I will even say that Linux has come a quantum leap further
>in the past 2 years compared to Windows. At the current rate, assuming
>it continues, Linux may be a serious challanger for the desktop for
>everyone, not just the techies.
Well I'd have to say I really don't care, world domination of the desktop
by Linux has NEVER been my interest.
I just dispute Wintrolls such as yourself, who state that "Linux is not
ready for the desktop".
>I believe it will eventually happen unless MS starts dropping it's
>prices and stops pissing people off charging for bug fixes ala 98SE
Yeah probably, but as you may know, I'm against adopting Linux for price
only reasons.
>>>
>
>
>Steve.....
>
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 25 Mar 2000 12:07:53 +0800
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 07:47:19 GMT,
Miles Falworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think Windows is much easier for first-time computer users. However,
>most people are a first-time computer users only for a short period in
>their lives.
>The reason I use Linux now more than Windows is that it lets me get
>more done more quickly. and run it.
<snip>
> Linux lets me do
>the job right out of the box in three lines, and the whole thing ran in
>a few seconds:
>foreach f (*.tif)
>tifftopnm $f | cjpeg > {$f:r}.jpg
>end
I think Miles post sums up Linux and Windows perfectly.
Miles I couldn't have put this better myself :)
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Haley)
Crossposted-To:
rec.video.satellite.dbs,alt.satellite.tv,rec.video.satellite.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.infosystems.www.browsers.x,comp.infosystems.www.browsers,comp.infosystems.www.browswers.misc
Subject: Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser.
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:08:05 GMT
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:33:49 +0000,
Randy Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Simply amazing.
>
>I just tried to visit http://www.dishnetwork.com, but every
>time it crashed Netscape within visiting one, or at most two
>links off the main page. (I'm running Linux Redhat 6.0,
>Netscape 4.61, and I'm no newbie to Living Without Windows.)
Just back from roaming the web site with NS 4.72, no problem.
>On the main page DN states that they DO NOT SUPPORT Netscape.
>Period. If you want to visit their site, "You should download
>Internet Explorer". They claim that it's Netscape's problem
>that their site crashes and burns and there's nothing they can
>do about it.
Did you actually _read_ the message?
--
Petition for Linux Drivers -> http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
slrn -> http://www.slrn.org
Xnews (Win32) -> http://xnews.3dnews.net
Xnews Installer (Win32) -> http://xnews.webhop.net
------------------------------
From: Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:08:26 -0500
John Loukidelis wrote:
>
> I haven't tried xfinance; I'll check it out. But does it download
> transactions from Canadian banks, obtain quotes on Canadian equities
> and mutual funds, support tax cost tracking for registered retirement
> savings plans? Etc. etc.
No. I concede. There may be some things you need Windows for.
--
Allin Cottrell
Department of Economics
Wake Forest University, NC
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:28:08 -0500
SetMeUp wrote:
>
> 1) Serious and easy modem/fax and printer support.
> (sendmail makes me laugh, postscript printers suck)
Not sure what you mean here. I am running an HP DeskJet 870Cse on my
Linux system which is NOT a postscript printer, but all of my apps can
print. I have my modem answering my phone, playing a message and
collecting faxes when sent. I can send faxes, easily. Hmm, what are you
getting at?
>
> 2) Coherent window manager configuration files and behaviour.
Again, "Coherent" by who's standards? Microsoft where you can have any
Window manager that you want as long as it is the one they wish you to
use. What is the actual configuration problem? My system was easy to
configure.
>
> 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.
Again, the latest RedHat 6.1 is sweet. Installs no problems for 99% of
the computers out there. I bet that's better than Windows 2000's
ability.
>
> 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), ...
Actually side by side, Micros~1 office, Star office, and Applix, I like
Applix. Fast, full featured, very reliable, never had anything I could
do under MS office that I could not do under applix.
>
> 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
That's what playstation and dreamcast are for. I just can't imagine why
someone would play a game on a computer.
>
> 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).
Why do you say these tools suck? Macro viruses make MS products
completely unacceptable for any serious professional use. Anyone reading
internet mail with a Microsoft macro-virus incubator is a fool.
>
> 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 ?
> And be serious, do not tell me about BSOD's evey 5 minutes because Windows
> 2000 (and NT almost) has never frozen.
Perhaps for you, but for countess others NT and Win2K (as well as the
application on these platforms) are far too unreliable for practical
use.
>
> 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)
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
"We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
lobster"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 25 Mar 2000 12:33:19 +0800
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 03:10:35 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My first Linux install was a bitch from hell. And then I made the
>decision that I didn't need Windows at all, trashed the dual boot
>crapola, and it's been a breeze ever since.
>
>Although it may not be true in your case, many of the complaints that I
>keep reading about Linux installs are really problems trying to make
>Windows and Linux co-exist on a single spindle. And that's not so much
>a problem with Linux as it is with whatever boot manager package was
>included in your Linux distribution.
>
>Get yourself a second disk and keep the two OS'es separate.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Good advice.
Another problem is trying to live with both Windows and Linux. I found when
I trashed Windows in 97, my life became a LOT easier. What I mean is that
just trying to send data between them is a hassle, if you have one app
that runs in Windows, and try and use data from Linux, life can be very hard
because Windows has so much proprietary and non standard stuff.
For instance I had a Dos assembler, but used a Linux C compiler. The Makefile
was a train wreck, including unix2dos, 8 character file names etc.
When a Linux assembler for the target became available life was a LOT easier.
But I still used a dos programmer, and this was a pita also.
So in the end I wrote a Linux programmer for the target chip, and my life
then became as smooth as silk.
The only thing I use Dosemu for now, is reading a DB3 supplier pricelist.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:33:05 -0500
Drestin Black 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!
Do you know anything about New Zealand? At all?
>
> 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.
Did you read what you write?
>
> "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
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
"We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
lobster"
------------------------------
From: "gcaldwel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:45:31 -0800
I'm going to install multiple OSs on my computer, so I nailed it down to
uses Partition Magic and Boot magic or VMware.
Are any of you using VMware for Linux? How does the virtual platforms
perform. Is there any problems with performance do to running in a virtual
window. Can files be shared between the installed platforms.
I have 256 megs of ram and a 30 gig drive in my PC
I'm looking for some pros and cons of each to help me decide which
configuration I want to use.
1) VMware
Remove windows from the OS and installed Linux .
Install VMware for Linux
Then install windows 98 on a virtual platform
install windows NT on virtual platform
install BeOS on virtual platform
2) Use partition magic to create new partitions
Install Linux in second
then Windows NT in next
then BeOS in next
use IBM Boot manager or Boot Magic to boot between the operating
systems
Any comments would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance
Gerald
[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
******************************
