Linux-Advocacy Digest #954, Volume #25 Wed, 5 Apr 00 01:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (abraxas)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (abraxas)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (abraxas)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Kaz Kylheku)
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty (JEDIDIAH)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (Terry Porter)
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (abraxas)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters. (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Hal Burgiss)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Grant Edwards)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters. (Terry
Porter)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Kaz Kylheku)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Date: 5 Apr 2000 04:12:28 GMT
Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> since there are at least 2 C interpreters, (EIC and another one the name
> of which escapes me) and compilers for python (the byte code compiler built
> into the interpreter for one.) and for tcl.
Simply compiling a script to binary does not make the original script
a *program*, and thus writing it is not by nessesity *programming*.
Can I call this a program:
ssh -l foo -c blowfish -C -p 31337 -q -x foo.bar
if I make it a tcsh script and compile it?
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Date: 5 Apr 2000 04:13:55 GMT
Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dang, I am tired, didn't finish the post, yawn anyway, since there are
> compilers for some interpreted languages, and interpreters for some compiled
> languages, do you believe (eg) Python is not a programming language? if
> so, could you describe what feature python lacks, thus striking it from
> the roll-call of "programming languages"?
Python (and most ive discussed this with agree) is a controversial beast.
It seems to be a scripting language that acts just like a programming
language.
And thats if you DONT embedd C.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:13:37 GMT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 20:10:54 -0400, JOGIBA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Microsoft makes more money in one hour than all the Linux companies made in
>the last ten years. Linux will never be a mainstream desktop OS .
Yeah, sure... people just LOVE paying more than they have to for things...
[deletia]
--
It is not the advocates of free love and software
that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
one option among many, like in some regime where
product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: 5 Apr 2000 04:17:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Boris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what? Linux companies are going nowhere. Actually, it's good time to buy MS stock.
> Another good stock is Compaq; it's pretty low right now. They are having exciting
>high-end
> servers(Wildfire) based on Alpha chip released this Summer. If you take a look at
>CPU95
> and CPU2000 results on www.spec.org , you'll see that Compaq Alpha is by far the
>fastest
> CPU available. X86 is in the middle. Sun Sparc is deep in shit-hole.
Neat. And I have a 500 dollar compaq screwdriver to take the screws off and
everything.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:16:43 GMT
On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 16:34:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Just installed Linux Redhat 6.2 after a few years away from the OS.
>I'm stunned at how much is changed, but i'm beginning to miss the
>things which caused me to return to windows in the first place.
>I'd love a mail program that can sort and search mail. One that can
>automatically place mail in folders based on simple rules. A contact
My mail filter analyzes headers, pings four or five anti-spam databases and
automatically junks spam.
>list that integrates with the mail program so I only have to maintain
>one list of contacts/email addresses. Netscape mail really sucks. It
>has corrupted my archives several times.
Netscape mail really sucks; agreed.
>The news reading programs are very weak. I simply want the ability to
Slrn is one of the best newsreaders I have ever used.
I once tried newsreading under Windows with Forte Free Agent, which is touted
as some hot shit in the Windows. I lasted a remarkable two weeks. I'm still
trying to block the painful memories. What an obnoxious piece of crud!
No wonder Windows users stumble around Usenet like they are lost. ;)
>select what articles I want to download, tell it to download, and have
>it happen. I'd also like the ability to have it automaticly combine
Slrn doesn't do download tagging; that's really useful only if you have a straw
for an internet connection. It just grabs the headers and fetches the bodies on
demand. If the newsgroup has many unread messages slrn simply asks you how many
recent headers to grab.
>and decode messages. Several windows programs, (outlook, agent, etc)
>have these abilities. I'm surprised Linux still doesn't.
>Are there any modern applications in development that meet these
>needs? Everytime I tried to search for an answer to this question, I
>found a lot of advice saying to use mail, trn, etc. Yeah, I used those
trn can automatically extract binaries, so can slrn. At least
semi-automatically. There are cases that no program can easily deal with
because some people just don't know how to post binaries correctly. In slrn,
you can simply tag the portions and then extract. I believe that if the
articles are threaded together, then you can just extract by thread, or by
common subject line or something like that. I'm not into getting binaries over
Usenet, so the details escape me.
--
#exclude <windows.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:08:20 GMT
I> Perhaps you've misunderstood me; it's not that I think Orifice for
> Linux would be a useful tool for the likes of us; just that, once the
> apps are widely ported, there won't be the same pressure to use
> Windows; and once other software vendors can write just as
> effectively for Windows, there won't be the same pressure to use the
> Microsoft apps; if that happens, they've lost the stranglehold on the
> market, and that's good.
I'm afraid this makes no sense. It's as though you think Microsoft is
the only company that writes Windows software. They're not. MS could
port its entire portfolio of software, and it _still_ wouldn't make the
other software vendors port their software to the other platforms. They
just won't invest unless they think they can make more money porting
than not porting.
This phenomenon also is not unique to Windows. Way back in the day,
there were machines running MS-DOS which were not 100% IBM compatible.
The DEC Rainbow 100 is a good example. It ran MS-DOS or CP/M 86, or a
terminal emulator. It ran MS-DOS as well as popular DOS applications
like Lotus 1-2-3 v2 and dBase II.
But it never ran Lotus 1-2-3 v3 or dBase III because the vendors
weren't interested in supporting the platform. Even though it ran the
exact same operating system as the IBM PC.
I don't know why it would be different today.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:20:51 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:28:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <ubA*[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> If their applications division is separate from their OS division,
>> they no longer have the same interest in having their applications
>> only run on Windows; they can maximise their profit by porting them
>> everywhere.
>
>David,
>
>You are assuming that it is possible to make more money by selling and
>supporting MS's Application software on multiple platforms than by
Assuming that they coded their applications with portability
in mind then deploying X other versions won't be that much
more expensive. Plus, breaking it on a wider variety of systems
will help expose problems with the reference codebase.
>selling and supporting it only on Windows. I believe this to be a false
>assumption.
>
>First, which applications are you referring to? MS makes a lot more
>than just Office. Must they port them all? Surely MS Works need not be
>ported to Solaris?
If it's portable: why not?
>
>Second, do you have any idea how much money it costs to support
>multiple platforms? They have to train staff in multiple platforms,
Some of us even have working experience in such things...
[deletia]
--
It is not the advocates of free love and software
that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
one option among many, like in some regime where
product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 5 Apr 2000 12:22:43 +0800
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:34:37 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nope it's Heather/Steve/Amy, the Ms Troll, who's looking sad these days.
>You just don't like losing arguments jedi. You try and try to fog the
>issue. You throw rhetoric around. You change the subject when you are
>losing (which is quite often these days) and you resort to name
>calling when all else fails, and it usually does. You hope that when
>someone is on to your obvious ignorance that you can baffle them with
>double speak and they will disappear, but you see I won't go away.
>
>Let's see: in the last few weeks we have had you arguing:
>1. How SBLive support under Linux is equal to Windows.
Incorrect, Jedi has not said that.
>2. How Some Linux spreadsheet is the equal of Lotus or Excel.
Wrong again, your use of expansive, emotional, and ambiguous
wording illuminate the troll under the bridge, "Steve".
>3. Find under Windows is a kludge, despite being much faster than
>Linux.
I musta missed that one,
>4. And the rest of your convoluted word twisting rhetoric thrown in
>for good measure.
If you cant keep up with Jedi, thats your problem "Steve".
>
>
>Linux would be better off with you on the Windows side.
Nope, wrong again, Jedi has used Windows and is intelligent enuf to know a
loosing OS when he sees one.
Unlike "Steve" Jedi's integrity isn't for sale. "Steve" has been a anonymous
MS Troll here for over 2 years, he's in everyones kill files under several fake
aliases, and has *ZERO* credibility.
The last thing "Steve" would want known, is his real name.
Who could trust someone like this, or anything he recommended ???
>You prove our point about linux every time.
You have no point "Steve", as usual you're flapping around like a blowfish
on the wharf, that's been disgarded as worthless.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 23:45:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 22:11:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:24:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Actually, in those days, the hardware was considerably better.
>>>
>>>You're kidding right?
>>>How about CMI drives that self destructed in the original IBM AT.
>>
>> The MACINTOSH hardware, shillboy.
>>
>>[deletia]
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 days 17 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: 5 Apr 2000 04:23:50 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How about using find under Linux and find under Windows and see what
> happens.
> Linux churns away for an eternity and Windows has the result in a
> couple of seconds.
Lesse:
[yttrx@self yttrx]$ locate Gtk-Perl-0.6123.tar.gz
/opt/stage/Gtk-Perl-0.6123.tar.gz
That was under 1 second.
Lets try another one:
[yttrx@self yttrx]$ which BitchX
/usr/local/bin/BitchX
That was under 1 second too.
Luckily, gnu-find-utilities come with every version of linux I can think
of.
> I'm not talking about FastFind either, just the normal find that comes
> with Windows.
Hell, lets compare it to fastfind. Its still faster.
> Windows wins by a large margin, searching a similar number of files.
Windows users loose by settling for what microsoft feeds them instead
of demanding innovation.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS
supporters.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:23:26 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 01:09:16 GMT, Leonard F. Agius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 23:44:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:57:04 GMT, Leonard F. Agius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >>fmc wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> "Mark S. Bilk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In article
>> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > >Linux truely speaks for itself. For every geek that loves the control
>> >>> > >there are 500 normal users that need to accomplish tasks that require
>> >>> > >software that simply is not available under Linux. Or if it is
>> >>> > >available, it is so crude and ugly looking it is not worth mentioning.
>> >>> > >Or it's simply not compatible with what the rest of the free world is
>> >>> > >running.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > The true situation is that applications fulfilling the
>> >>> > requirements (with the exception of games) of most Windows
>> >>> > users are *now* available under Linux, almost all of them
>> >>> > at no cost.
>> >>>
>> >>> Most people have some requirements that go beyond the standard
>> >>> WP/Spreadsheet/Browser. I need a financial app like Quicken or MS Money, a
>> >>> tax preparation program like TurboTax, TaxCut, or TaxSaver, and project
>> >>> management software like MS Project or CA-SuperProject. These don't exist
>> >>> for Linux. I also can't manage my bank accounts online. That requires
>> >>> either Windows or Mac.
>> >>>
>> >>> For myself, I'll wait to try Linux again until solutions for my needs become
>> >>> available. It will be a long wait if I have to rely on the open source
>> >>> community to provide them.
>> >>>
>> >>> fmc
>> >>
>> >>fmc hit the nail right on the head. There aren't the off-the-shelf solutions for
>> >>Linux, or any of the other OS's, save Apple/Mac. I can't port my scanner's
>> >>software to Linux or BEOS, I can't get as inexpensive AND well supported (notice
>> >>I qualified it with both inexpensive AND well supported) an image editor as
>> >>Paint Shop Pro. I can't get a fax/voice mail solution like Win Fax or Talkworks
>> >
>> > Gimp satisfies that criterion quite nicely actually. As far as
>> > 'porting' something, that's your burden. There are abstractions
>> > available for that sort of thing (SANE vs. TWAIN).
>>
>> Don't make me laugh. My $69.00 Canon scanner came with enough "free"
>> software to blow the doors off anything Linux has, including Gimp.
>> Not to mention it worked perfectly out of the box.
>> The wizards did everything from configuring to prompting me through
>> making my first scan.
>>
>> Worked like a charm right out of the box and no overpriced SCSI
>> needed.
>>
>> Sane?
>>
>> Should be called insane...What a joke.....
>>
>> Linux misses the boat again. When will you people understand that
>> setup.exe is your friend?
>>
>> In this case all I did was pop the CD in and away it went.
>>
>> Steve
>
>LOL!!! You tell 'em, Steve. When the hell are these people going to realize that the
>majority of people WANT the MS Monopoly...they want a COMMON STANDARD, not a bunch of
>incompatible Unix variants!!!
That rhetoric doesn't address just where the Linux defficiencies
are with respect to a standardized device layer, image manipulation
software, OCR or anything else you care not to mention.
--
It is not the advocates of free love and software
that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
one option among many, like in some regime where
product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:24:07 GMT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 21:21:13 -0500,
Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >My phone bill is almost $22.00 before I even make a call.
>>
>> Is that a direct consequence of deregulation, or is that due to over
>> taxation?
>
>Most of it goes to pay for things like "access charges". For instance, you
>pay money to allow other phone companies to have access to your local phone
>companies wires. Most of the taxes go to paying for regulation bodies.
>
If most of the taxes go towards paying for the regulation bodies, then
I'd say sack 'em all and deregulate allready.
>> >Linux buries itself on it's own accord. It doesn't need any help.
>>
>> If it doesn't need any help, then surely you have an explanation for
>> the Microsoft "Halloween" document, right?
>
>Oh, you mean that memo that was written by ONE PERSON? You act as if it was
>sent out by Bill Gates or some other board memo as company policy. It was a
>proposal written by one person to his superiors. I could write any number
>of such plans, with even worse content and it wouldn't mean a thing unless
>it were accepted by my superiors and turned into company policy. There is
>no evidence that this is the case.
Halloween II
Kerberos and M$'s little "addition" (undocumented)
>> >It's fun watching you guys squirm and set up a human shield to protect
>> >the beloved kernel.
>> >Only in this group do you see threads arguing over a single word
>> >trying to define what constitutes programming. That's the very reason
>> >why MS will win the war and Linux will peak and head toward ground
>> >faster than one of Von Braun's V2's.
>>
>> Take a look at Netcraft's numbers for IIS vs. Apache. Are you quite
>> sure that it's headed toward ground?
>
>It's really hard to tell, since Netcrafts figures count domains and not
>servers. Given that most domains are hosted by their ISP's, and run on
>whatever equipment their ISP has, it seems that very few ever CHOOSE which
>server to use. Additionally, since ISP's run mostly on Unix of some sort,
>that means that most domains will run on Unix.
There are enough (barely, what, less than 20%?) domains on IIS, so there is
enough choice available that if people want to run their site on IIS, they
can, but there doesn't seem to be much demand, wonder why...
>> >So why aren't people running in mass from M$ if they can get all of
>> >this great stuff for free?
>>
>> Because they're not used to it, it's different, it doesn't run Word,
>> it's not what their employer uses, it's not what came on their
>> computer, etc. In other words, lots of reasons.
>
>And how is that going to change?
>
Day by day.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:25:28 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:16:43 GMT, Kaz Kylheku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 16:34:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>My mail filter analyzes headers, pings four or five anti-spam databases and
>automatically junks spam.
OK, let's talk turkey. Please post or email me if you will with details.
What do you mean 'pings antispam dbs'? Like ORBs?
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:28:25 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:34:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You just don't like losing arguments jedi. You try and try to fog the
I was complimenting Mac hardware to the detriment of PC hardware.
It's just as simple as that, your foaming at the mouth not
withstanding.
>issue. You throw rhetoric around. You change the subject when you are
>losing (which is quite often these days) and you resort to name
>calling when all else fails, and it usually does. You hope that when
>someone is on to your obvious ignorance that you can baffle them with
>double speak and they will disappear, but you see I won't go away.
>
>Let's see: in the last few weeks we have had you arguing:
>1. How SBLive support under Linux is equal to Windows.
Why should most users care?
>2. How Some Linux spreadsheet is the equal of Lotus or Excel.
How so, exactly? What part of Excel are you stressing.
Either that or demonstrate that at least most users
use 100% of Excel.
Mind you, Quattro Pro was just released.
>3. Find under Windows is a kludge, despite being much faster than
>Linux.
It's not much faster, even using your own example with the
most skewed example tool possible.
[deletia]
--
It is not the advocates of free love and software
that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
one option among many, like in some regime where
product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:29:56 GMT
On 4 Apr 2000 15:29:46 GMT, David T. Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 4) And of course the most simple thing of all, opening multiple
>> mail messages at the same time.
>
>By opening multiple xterms and running mutt in each ???
This causes problems if both messages are in the same IMAP
mailbox. I shoot myself in the foot that way about once a week.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Does that mean
at I'm not a well-adjusted
visi.com person??
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 5 Apr 2000 12:39:33 +0800
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:07:54 GMT, fmc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Mark S. Bilk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Linux truely speaks for itself. For every geek that loves the control
>> >there are 500 normal users that need to accomplish tasks that require
>> >software that simply is not available under Linux. Or if it is
>> >available, it is so crude and ugly looking it is not worth mentioning.
>> >Or it's simply not compatible with what the rest of the free world is
>> >running.
>>
>> The true situation is that applications fulfilling the
>> requirements (with the exception of games) of most Windows
>> users are *now* available under Linux, almost all of them
>> at no cost.
>
>Most people have some requirements that go beyond the standard
>WP/Spreadsheet/Browser.
They sure do.
Thinks like, multi user, remote admin, stability, and freedom.
> I need a financial app like Quicken
Then use Quicken, your money your choice.
> or MS Money,
Ms Money is crap, I purchased 2 versions. Now I use CBB and I'm happy
at last. CBB for Linux is excellent.
> a
>tax preparation program like TurboTax, TaxCut, or TaxSaver, and project
My accountant does that in 10 mins, with the summaries I give him from CBB.
>management software like MS Project or CA-SuperProject. These don't exist
>for Linux.
No Linux does not make MS Project oe CA-SuperProject.
>I also can't manage my bank accounts online. That requires
>either Windows or Mac.
Not for long.
>
>For myself, I'll wait to try Linux again until solutions for my needs become
>available.
Hey keep waiting, waiting is a cargo cultists speciality.
>It will be a long wait if I have to rely on the open source
>community to provide them.
The Free Software community have better things to do than design software
for you.
Please feel free to continue to pay the Windows tax.
>
>fmc
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 days 17 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:37:22 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:25:28 GMT, Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:16:43 GMT, Kaz Kylheku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 16:34:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>My mail filter analyzes headers, pings four or five anti-spam databases and
>>automatically junks spam.
>
>OK, let's talk turkey. Please post or email me if you will with details.
>What do you mean 'pings antispam dbs'? Like ORBs?
By that I mean that it takes the originating IP's and looks them up against
ORBS, MAPS RBL, MAPS DUL, and Radparker databases.
I rarely see any spam at all; maybe once a month or even rarer. The ones that
get through are from the lone losers typically operating from dial-up accounts.
The procmail filter that I use is a little thing I found somewhere, called
``Spamdunk''. It's pretty low maintenance: largely setup and forget.
Except when you add yourself to new mailing lists, you have to let it know.
>--
>Hal B
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
My reply-to: address is perfectly genuine. I'm not going to modify how I
interact on Usenet and elsewhere; it's spammers that must change their
sociopathic behavior, not me. ;) ;) ;)
--
#exclude <windows.h>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
