Linux-Advocacy Digest #868, Volume #25 Wed, 29 Mar 00 06:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (Terry Porter)
Re: Why did we even need NT in the first place?
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (Terry Porter)
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451633 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451633 (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (George Richard Russell)
Re: Giving up on Tholen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Mar 2000 16:37:57 +0800
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:10:41 GMT,
George Richard Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Mar 2000 18:31:37 +0800, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>That a GUI? I don't think so...
>>Sure it is, Slrn behaves just like a gui in a xterm.
>
>Not in konsole, which is what I'm using at the moment. It seems to ignore all
>mouse input. Could be konsoles fault tho.
No ones fault, SLRN doesnt use the mouse by default, its in slrn.rc.
>
>slrn is still not like a GUI in any way.
Incorrect, it operates with a mouse, this makes it a gui.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>>The rc file is self explanitory, because its TEXT. You're stuck in your world
>>>>of binary registeries George.
>>>
>>>Really, does it explain entries which can be added but aren't present?
>>Hahahah does the registry ?
>
>The input dialog of the app should have a big help button, and reject values
>that are gibberish too.
In the registry ?
>
>>>All the possible values? Valide ranges? Next you'll say the sendmail.cf is
>>>friendly since its text.
>>Um no I won't, and you picked one of the most obscure text config files
>>possible, and on purpose.
>
>Lots of people have problems with rc.d/* lilo.conf XF86Config .fvwmrc and
>various others too. sendmail.cf is just the canonical example.
And *lots* don't have any probs with them, the Dotfile Generator caters for
fvwm perfectly.
>
>>>>>Not terribly novice welcoming. Nor is falling back to vi as editor.
>>>>Incorrect: Slrn does not "fall back to Vi"
>>>$EDITOR then - and on what Linux system is thise remotely likely to not be vi?
>>We were talking about SLRN, and its default editor is JED.
>The emacs lilke editor - thats really a step up. At least it has menus.
You'd know it if you actually had ever used Slrn.
>
>>Your "restart" was carefully worded tho, so lets be plain, we only require
>>a restart of SLRN, for some config changes, NEVER the Linux OS.
>
>Just major components, Like the X Server - when did you last change colour
>depth on the fly?
I never change color depth on the fly its always at my cards limit.
Again if you had any real experience with Linux youd know you can run
*two* X servers with diferent color depth at the same time.
>
>Most Windows restarts are onlt needed to exit and restart the GUI - hold
>shift when choosing restart, and it goesto DOS and back. Just like 3.1,
>and for all non server usage, the same as killing and restarting X.
Same with X, whats your point ?
>
>>>>>> 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?
>>>>Sure, at least we *can* George, where are your tcp wrappers in Windows ?.
>>>
>>>Who needs them? I'm not running a server OS prone to remote shell exploits.
>>No your running a OS, prone to trojans, virii, and lockups.
>
>read the headers, hmm?
Yes George you run Linux when you post, big deal, its a no brainer.
Nothing is proved by the os you use to post with, the content of those posts
show you to be a Wintroll to me.
>
>I've never heard Linux called that before.
I mean in your real life, cause you've only run Linux a few weeks it seems
to me, based on your lack of understanding of text based config files
and your preference to GUI everything.
>
>>>The dotfile generator understands few . files - it could do bashrc not tcshrc
>>>for a trivial example.
>>Yes atm, but its not stuck at that level indefinetly.
>
>I saw it in 97 - its been totally eclipsed by efforts such as linuxconf -
>a shame, since I'd rather generate the rcfile for a lookover before
>having the changes made to the system.
Theres no way its totally eclipsed, TDG is quite a different thing.
>
>>Whats your choice in free registry editors ??
>
>Surprisingly good, actually. Try a Windows freeware site.
No thanks, unlike you, I don't use MSWindows.
>
>>>There are more obscure rc formats than frontends.
>>Obscure rc formats are the exception I assure you.
>
>Err, no, the use of m4 macros etc does help to obfuscate things.
M4 is cool, if you know how to use it.
How obscure is the Windows registry ???
>Mixing settings and code is always good, too, lisp in .emacs
>sh is various others, a bit of csh, some perl + sed + awk
>
>rc files are frequnetly a mess.
Rc files are frequently neat and self documenting.
Show us how to add " uncomment this line for a pink border"
in the Windows Registry will you please George ?
>
>At least KDE / Gnome have sensible formats KEY = VALUE in [SECTION] or
>similar, like Win 3.1 ini files.
>>
>>She was there, shes a long term Windows user, she couldnt do it. This
>>puts the gun to the head of your assertion that Windows GUI config is
>>*easy*.
>
>It asked for them at install time.
BS, free-agent just installed as far as she said. Remember I wasnt there,
I don't use and haven't see free-agent in over 2 years.
Now if she had Linux, I could have telnetted in and done the *whole* thing.
Windows is a crippled, bloated, expensive pile of expensive, eye candy.
What's telnet and *text based config files* good for George ?
>
>>>
>>>>It makes NO difference whether its GUI or text, if you dont know the
>>>>news server addy, you're screwed.
>>>
>>>Yes, but at least its obvious where to enter the server name is the GUI - none
>>>of the hunt the rc file game.
>>Bulltwang!
>>She spent age's searching thru the menues, and was totally lost.
>>It would have been easier in a text file.
>
>Yeah right, you'd have to teach her to use a texteditor first.
No I'd be telnetting in, if you actually used Linux, youd know that.
>Theres a sodding great help file in the rightmost menu - tell
>her to read it, or if thats too hard, look at the pictures.
She did it all, the ease of use of a GUI config is a myth.
>
>
>>>>>But they shouldn't force me to setup and run a local server, just to read news
>>>>>offline.
>>>>They dont, slrnpull is easy to set up.
>>>
>>>Just more difficult to add a group than in Agent or change your groups etc.
>>HUH ?
>>"L" (list groups)
>>*get.a.clue.about.linux.*
>>move cursur to desired group
>>"S" (subscribe)
>
>>How hard is this ????
>
>And nothing happened
Wrong I got the group, I'm using slrn *on-line* .
> - you have to add the group to the list in
>/var/spool/slrnpull/slrnpull.conf to be fetched
Yes you're right, I would have to do that if I used slrnpull.
>
>Seperate programs, seperate config. Great, isn't it.
When I had slrnpull, I had a button on my tkdesk app bar that had all my
configs. They would open in the editor of my choice. Easy.
It's hard only if you don't know how to make it easy George.
And yes it is great, its the unix way, seperate small easily maintainable
programs. That's why unix works so well.
>
>George Russell
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 day 46 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why did we even need NT in the first place?
Date: 29 Mar 2000 08:51:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrew wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrew wrote:
>>
>> However the Terminal Services Package is not part of the standard W2K
>> release is it ?
>
>As of W2K, it is, although not installed by default IIRC. You won't find it on
>Pro, though, just the various server flavors. :/ MS also allows you to run TS
>with an administrative license without needing to purchase TS licenses.
I'm speaking of W2K pro as I don't have a Demo copy of the server software
and I'm not going to purchase it.
>
>> You see ones you have your software developed you can scale it on Unix by a
>> simple re-compile..If I would choose NT I would have to rewrite most
>> applications thus wasting money. I'm one of those poeple who doesn't like
>> wasting money and thus also energy having to rewrite a whole application
>> because for example Intel systems don't perform well on IO. For this I can
>> state that a Sun Sparc 2 with 64 MB Ram outperforms a SMP Intel Box on Raw
>> IO Performance. Also my alpha & Risc system's perform better then Intel on IO
>> based stuff. You see I'm steadely disposing of my Intel based hardware and
>> replacing it with Real Hardware. The only system I will be keeping that is
>> Intel based is a SCO workstation for the rest I don't want Intel systems
>> anymore.
>
>You're saying here that NT cannot run on the hardware you want to run, you have
>an already-existing UNIX network architecture and a patent dislike of NT's
>native hardware.
I do not dislike the Intel architecture ...it just DOUSN'T perform as well
as my other hardware. Then again when I compare the cost of my other systems
compared to Intel, the intel boxes are cheap even with SCSI discs + cdroms.
> You're starting to sound like Drestin Black when he runs Linux
>in VMware and says it sucks based on that tiny experience plus the already
>existing prejudice. You've made up your mind already.
Yes I actually did because it is still the same piece of junk like windows
3.1 was. Okey it is a little bit better but it's not yet upto my
standards of good.
> You're certainly not
>expecting a hell of a lot of the OS and honestly,
No I don't because anything Microsoft produces is made for the most common
denominator of user..e.i. the ones that would be better served by a piece of
paper and some colored cayons.
> not giving it much of a chance
>to *do* anything, much less exploring what the OS brings to the table.
I did test it.. okey for joe average but my needs are beyond the scope of
that.. as I said in a previous post I need a system that ones I start it up
it keeps ticking over for months or years on end as I travel arround a lot
and for periods of time lasting three to four months I need a system that
keeps on working so that I can access the network from my Tadpole notebook &
mobile to retrieve documents & mail etc...
Michael
--
Michael C. Vergallen A.k.A. Mad Mike,
Sportstraat 28 http://www.double-barrel.be/mvergall/
B 9000 Gent ftp://ftp.double-barrel.be/pub/linux/
Belgium tel : 32-9-2227764 Fax : 32-9-2224976
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Mar 2000 17:17:07 +0800
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:44:22 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:44:32 -0700, John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>George Richard Russell wrote:
>>>
>>> What free spreadsheet has equivalent functionality to Lotus 123 from SmartSuite
>>> 96, the last 16 bit windows 3.1 version?
<snip>
>>See above. Xess is pretty good.
>
> Xess is actually quite pathetic. A pox on you for recommending it.
Umm Jedi, I don't quite know how to say this, but I've been using Xesslite4
for a year and I don't mind it at all :)
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 day 46 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451633
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:06:56 GMT
Pascal Haakmat writes:
>> All of us are mortals, George. Obviously there's some other reason
>> for your inconsistency that your own mere mortality.
> Dave, you're wonderful.
Beginning to appreciate simple logic, Pascal?
>> Here are the facts:
>>
>> David Sutherland sent a complaint to the University of Hawaii. Indeed,
>> he sent it to at least ten different people, which provides an indication
>> of his true motivation. His complaint was forwarded to me. I demonstrated
>> that the text about which Sutherland was complaining had in fact been
>> written by someone else, not me. I also demonstrated that the posting of
>> mine in which I quoted that text did not involve any University facilities
>> (that is, I was using cable modem service *before* Sutherland complained).
>> The person who forwarded the complaint to me recommended that Sutherland
>> be ignored. I pointed to a particular statement in Sutherland's complaint
>> in which he was lamenting the lack of action by the University, and noted
>> that if the University ignored him, he would likely persist with his
>> complaints until he got some sort of response, thus I recommended that a
>> a response be sent to him, such as a statement that it wasn't a University
>> matter, given that no University facilities were involved.
>>
>> Note that Sutherland was lamenting the *lack* of action by the University,
>> while Glatt is claiming that action was taken. Interesting, no?
> Drama, conflict, action, what a movie.
How much would you pay to see it, Pascal?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451633
Date: 29 Mar 2000 10:26:54 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> All of us are mortals, George. Obviously there's some other reason
>>> for your inconsistency that your own mere mortality.
>
>> Dave, you're wonderful.
>
>Beginning to appreciate simple logic, Pascal?
There's something irresistible about you.
>>> Here are the facts:
>>>
>>> David Sutherland sent a complaint to the University of Hawaii. Indeed,
>>> he sent it to at least ten different people, which provides an indication
>>> of his true motivation. His complaint was forwarded to me. I demonstrated
>>> that the text about which Sutherland was complaining had in fact been
>>> written by someone else, not me. I also demonstrated that the posting of
>>> mine in which I quoted that text did not involve any University facilities
>>> (that is, I was using cable modem service *before* Sutherland complained).
>>> The person who forwarded the complaint to me recommended that Sutherland
>>> be ignored. I pointed to a particular statement in Sutherland's complaint
>>> in which he was lamenting the lack of action by the University, and noted
>>> that if the University ignored him, he would likely persist with his
>>> complaints until he got some sort of response, thus I recommended that a
>>> a response be sent to him, such as a statement that it wasn't a University
>>> matter, given that no University facilities were involved.
>>>
>>> Note that Sutherland was lamenting the *lack* of action by the University,
>>> while Glatt is claiming that action was taken. Interesting, no?
>
>> Drama, conflict, action, what a movie.
>
>How much would you pay to see it, Pascal?
fl. 10 or fl. 15 if you star in it.
--
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Richard Russell)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:43:50 GMT
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:44:22 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:44:32 -0700, John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>George Richard Russell wrote:
>>>
>>> What free spreadsheet has equivalent functionality to Lotus 123 from SmartSuite
>>> 96, the last 16 bit windows 3.1 version?
>
>StarOffice 5.1 does better Excel import than Smartsuite 97, actually.
In a Linux ng, being misunderstood about 'Free' as in Open sourced,
not SCSL.
There is more to functionality than import filters.
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
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on Tholen
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:55:00 GMT
Jim "little boy" Stuyck writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still can't get your attribution straight, eh Stuyck (little boy)?
> I cannot fail to note that this "rebuttal" wasn't posted from his
> "university account."
So what, Stuyck (little boy)? I have my choice. Something wrong with
my choice?
> Could it be that he's afraid of yet another reprimand?
On what basis do you use the word "another", Stuyck (little boy)?
> I doubt if "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" will respond to this article.
Your doubt is irrelevant, Stuyck (little boy). The facts are relevant,
and the fact is that I have my choice.
>> Jim "little boy" Stuyck writes:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Still can't get your attribution straight, eh Stuyck (little boy)?
> Where did I go wrong?
The first four letters, Stuyck (little boy).
>>>> Here are the facts:
>>>>
>>>> David Sutherland sent a complaint to the University of Hawaii. Indeed,
>>>> he sent it to at least ten different people, which provides an indication
>>>> of his true motivation. His complaint was forwarded to me. I demonstrated
>>>> that the text about which Sutherland was complaining had in fact been
>>>> written by someone else, not me. I also demonstrated that the posting of
>>>> mine in which I quoted that text did not involve any University facilities
>>>> (that is, I was using cable modem service *before* Sutherland complained).
>>> Hmmmm....This is from DejaNews:
>>>
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Tholen)
>>> Subject: Re: Jason S. digest, volume 2450863
>>> Date: 19 Feb 1998 00:00:00 GMT
>> Note the date, Stuyck (little boy): early 1998. I continued posting from
>> my University account throughout 1998, and also throughout 1999. The claim
>> is that I'm using hawaii.rr.com as a result of action taken by University,
>> which clearly refers to Sutherland's early 2000 complaint to the University,
>> because that's when people started noticing that I was using hawaii.rr.com.
>> In other words, you've got the wrong message. No surprise there.
> How about that 1998 complaint?
You mean the one in which Sutherland lied about the number of articles I
post a day?
> What was the outcome of that? A reprimand?
Having reading comprehension problems, Stuyck (little boy)? It's quite
obvious that I continued to post from my University account throughout
1998. I continued to post from my University account throughout 1999.
I am continuing to post from my University account in 2000.
>>> Message-ID: <6ch4ba$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Organization: University of Hawaii
>>> Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Did you try to "get a rise" out of her too, Jason? The reference to "former"
>>> speaks volumes, Jason. Maybe you tried, and she determined that you're a
>>> kook and a queer.
>>>
>>> NOT from a "cable modem service": From "hale.ifa.hawaii.edu."
>> Note the date, Stuyck (little boy): early 1998. I continued posting from
>> my University account throughout 1998, and also throughout 1999. The claim
>> is that I'm using hawaii.rr.com as a result of action taken by University,
>> which clearly refers to Sutherland's early 2000 complaint to the University,
>> because that's when people started noticing that I was using hawaii.rr.com.
>> In other words, you've got the wrong message. No surprise there.
> How about that 1998 complaint?
You mean the one in which Sutherland lied about the number of articles I
post a day?
> What was the outcome of that? A reprimand?
Having reading comprehension problems, Stuyck (little boy)? It's quite
obvious that I continued to post from my University account throughout
1998. I continued to post from my University account throughout 1999.
I am continuing to post from my University account in 2000.
>>> NOT "posted by someone else": Original "Tholen."
>> Irrelevant, given that we're talking about Sutherland's early 2000
>> complaint, Stuyck (little boy), not his early 1998 complaint, which
>> clearly did not result in me using hawaii.rr.com.
> What was the result of the "early 1998 complaint?" Reprimand?
Having reading comprehension problems, Stuyck (little boy)? It's quite
obvious that I continued to post from my University account throughout
1998. I continued to post from my University account throughout 1999.
I am continuing to post from my University account in 2000.
>>> NOT "quoted the text": Original "Tholen."
>> Irrelevant, given that we're talking about Sutherland's early 2000
>> complaint, Stuyck (little boy), not his early 1998 complaint, which
>> clearly did not result in me using hawaii.rr.com.
> I'm happy to talk about the "early 1998 complaint?"
Aren't you sure, Stuyck (little boy)? In other words, why the question
mark?
> Are you?
I already have, Stuyck (little boy).
> Will you?
I already have, Stuyck (little boy).
> Will you from the "university account?"
I already have, Stuyck (little boy).
>>> Someone's "demonstration" to his employer was full of lies.
>> Once again, Stuyck (little boy) demonstrates that he doesn't know what
>> he's talking about. Sutherland even requested that I reproduce his
>> complaint in this newsgroup, which I did, using my University account
>> no less, thus the evidence that what I told the University is the
>> truth has been available in this newsgroup for weeks, Stuyck (little
>> boy).
> Did you tell the university the "truth" when responding to the
> 1998 complaint?
Absolutely. Meanwhile, Sutherland did not. And I noticed how you
didn't acknowledge that you don't know what you're talking about,
Stuyck (little boy), nor did you produce any evidence to support
your libelous claims about me lying to my employer.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
