Linux-Advocacy Digest #115, Volume #26 Thu, 13 Apr 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress ("Keith T. Williams")
Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do
you?) ("Keith T. Williams")
Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you? ("Keith T. Williams")
Re: Linux for a web developer ("Davorin Mestric")
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 dubious at best? ("Jim Ross")
Re: Linux for a web developer (JEDIDIAH)
Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do
you?) (JEDIDIAH)
Re: uptime -> /dev/null (Mike Marion)
Re: uptime -> /dev/null (Mike Marion)
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 dubious at best? ("Jim Ross")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Keith T. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:06:43 -0400
matts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Wine implements the win32 API under Linux. When it is per-
> > fected, any win32 application that runs under Windows should
> > also run well under Wine and Linux without modification (if
> > the app itself is bug-free). Wine will be, in effect, a
> > win32 subsystem for Linux.
> >
>
> Any programmer knows bug-free software is near impossible. The day that
> happens, we're God.
There are no bugs, just unintenitional features.
>
------------------------------
From: "Keith T. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get
it, do you?)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:16:29 -0400
You are the one who introduced it... when you talked about the "Western
Moral Tradition", so don't get pissed at me for quoting one of the major
sources of that tradition (even if it is in translation)
Keith.
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Keith T. Williams" wrote:
> >
> > The bible says, "Is not the workman worthy of his hire?", referring to
> > payment for services rendered...
>
> The Bible says no such thing. Perhaps some translation may say
> something, but unless you can read the various languages in which the
> original writings of the various passages are in, then you can't
> actually quote the Bible because you haven't actually read the Bible.
> Even then, outside those religions which rely on miracles and dogma, it
> has no real importance.
>
> A religious document, or set of documents, has no place in a technology
> forum. Just because you believe that there is some man, in the sky, that
> watches everything you do, and will send you to a place that is full of
> fire and suffering if you do something which he does not like, but loves
> you and needs money, (paraphrase of G. Carlin) does not mean that others
> care.
>
> >
> > JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On 12 Apr 2000 12:06:41 -0400, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > >On 12 Apr 2000 15:20:59 GMT, Damien wrote:
> > > >>On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 05:38:17 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
> > > >
> > > >>Okay so by owning the copyright you have the right to limit what I
do
> > > >>with my property,
> > > >
> > > >Yes, it does. This is not unusual. There are a lot of limitations on
> > > >what you are allowed to do with your property. Generally, you're not
> > allowed
> > > >to harm others. Attempting to subvert the authors means of
compensation
> > > >clearly counts as "harming others".
> > >
> > > No it doesn't. 'subverting profit' can mean a great many things.
> > > Whereas the property limitation you use as an example is related
> > > to things considered to be more important natural rights.
> > >
> > > 'right to profit' does not exist anywhere in the Western moral
> > > tradtion. Infact, the opposite is true.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >> namely to prevent me from placing it in a certain
> > > >>arrangement as exists in my mind
> > > >
> > > >Unless you've memorised the copyrighted work verbatim, it does
> > > >not "exist in your mind".
> > > >
> > > >> and to distribute it as I see fit.
> > > >
> > > >Well yes. The whole point of copyright is to put terms and conditions
> > > >on distribution. Even the GPL attaches strings to redistribution.
> > >
> > > [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.
>
> --
> 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: "Keith T. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:18:36 -0400
If it is our "common intellectual capital" then it is mine as much as anyone
else's, and if I take something which is still there and available to anyone
else, how am I stealing?
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 23:48:15 -0400, Keith T. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It's still the physical representation of an Idea, you haven't diminished
> >the National Bank of Intellectual Capital by withdrawing an idea from it.
>
> You can say the same thing of conventional piracy actually.
>
> >You have merely used a body of knowledge to create a new thing. That is
why
>
> You have used something that is not yours to create a new thing.
> If you did this with your employers tools, or on their time, they
> would lay claim to it.
>
> >both patent and copyright law require substantial differences from
existing
> >work in order to issue either a patent or a copyright, which is why even
if
>
> This is true only in theory and in practice "substantial" is not
> well enough defined to be useful. That's why there is such a
> mess with patents now.
>
> >I had a magnificent musical idea which happened to sound a lot like
Handel's
> >Messiah, and even though due to a) time and b) lack of copyright
protection
> >at the time it was originally written, I could not get a copyright on my
> >musical idea, expressed as a specific set of notes which happen (by only
the
> >purest of co-incidences) to resemble within 95% of the Messiah.
> >
> >Keith.
> >
> >JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 05:45:32 -0400, doc rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >> >JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >> >>What a load of Horse Pucky. If I express an IDEA and you take the
> >IDEA
> >> >and
> >> >> >>do something with it, more power to you. BUT if I take that Idea
and
> >> >> >>produce something of value with it , whether it is a book or a
> >computer
> >> >> >>program, a song or an algorithm, then that something is mine...
> >> >
> >> >> What makes you think you own that IDEA lock-stock-and-barrel?
> >> >
> >> >You own the right to copy a particular instantiation of stuff--code,
> >notes,
> >> >paint, words, etc. not the idea, per se.
> >>
> >> No you don't. You've been granted the limited time distribution
> >> rights to that 'representation'. This is a representation that
> >> is not only the product of your own mind but of the shared
> >> intellectual capital that exists in whatever culture you happen
> >> to be a part of.
> >>
> >> The 'representation' is not purely a product of your own labor.
> >>
> >> It's primarily a product of that intellectual capital that has
> >> been developed before. This realization is likely why US law
> >> frames 'copyright' in terms of contributing back to that common
> >> pool of knowledge. Without further contributions to that pool,
> >> future 'inventors' have limited resources to work from.
> >>
> >> [deletia]
> >>
> >> Newton admited such, why can't some pissant with a business
> >> model patent or some overly derivative computer algorithm or
> >> musical arrangement?
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> 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: "Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for a web developer
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 03:17:49 +0200
my point is that unix/apache and nt/iis are simply not comparable in ease of
use, functionality and speed. and if we consider high-end solutions, you
get much better scalability at 2 to 5 times less price.
(http://www.objectwatch.com/Figures/Issue26/Issue26Figs_files/frame.htm)
also, to a asp developer, web development on unix looks archaic. asp is so
much nicer to use than anything on unix. with php you are required to use a
single language, weird db access, i don't know what support you have for
debugging your scripts.
on iis, thanks to com, you have plugable scripting languages, you have a
nice debugger in interdev, you can easily and type-safely use other
components in any language. equivalent functionality and level of
integration simply does not exist on unix.
with asp you can use ado for your db access in a same way you can use it
from a vb or vj or vc program. with php you use different method, from cgi
scripts you use yet another, etc.
also, run time environment, transactional support you get with mts (com+) is
simply not available with unix/apache.
if you want to use xml and xsl for your site, i have no idea what level of
support you would get on unix/apache. on windows, you can get xml from ado,
you get nice xml and xsl implementations etc.
on windows you get a nice java virtual machine, your java objects
automatically become com objects, can be used from asp, etc. etc.
on windows you get excellent debuggers for anything, you can use hundreds of
existing components for your web development. unix is simply lagging
behind. unix is simply no match for nt in web development.
have fun
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess the point is that if you're developing for UNIX, then UNIX is
probably
> a better development platform. You can run perl, Apache and some other
stuff
> on NT, but why bother ? Half of the perl functions you want to use will
> not work. Apache will not work the same way ( maybe not all the modules
> will work for example ). Most of the stuff doesn't ship with Windows.
Linux
> gives you a UNIX web devlopment environment OOTB, while to get a UNIX
webdev
> environment under Windows, you need to dress it up as UNIX.
>
> OOTH, if you're developing for an NT web server, by all means go out
> and get visual studio !
>
> --
> Donovan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 10:37:48 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> I will agree with you that Wine will never be a match to Windows. Also,
> Wine doesn't solve the pesky .DLL overwrite fun and games whereby adding
> an app overwrites a .DLL and an earlier app loses some .DLL call and of
> course crashes. So, you have to hit ALT-F2 and login as root to type in
> "shutdown -r now".
Uh isn't that the windows solution to app crashes. How about just 'kill
<bad-app-pid>'.
IanP
--
"Dear someone you've never heard of,
how is so-and-so. Blah blah.
Yours truly, some bozo." - Homer Simpson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress
Date: 13 Apr 2000 20:41:48 -0400
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:51:37 -0700, Bob Lyday wrote:
>Yet if Wine is merely a library of the Win32 API and M$ could
>somehow break Wine, it would also end up breaking say, previous
>versions of Windows.
Wine is not the same as Windows. It might ( and probably is ) possible to break
one and not the other.
>> > Doesn't add up. >
>> >Besides, they could be forced to release it and get permission
>> >to update it.
>>
>> Highly unlikely.
>
>Hmmmm, a breakup is possible but a relative slap on the wrists
>like releasing the API is not...okay...
What do you mean by "releasing the API" ? If you mean that they have
to document it, this doesn't really help much because they already do
document it. It's all well to say "they have to open their specs" but
in prqactice this is unenforceable and there's too much gray area. No
documentation is perfect, so where do you draw the line ?
If you are saying that they'd have to OpenSource their API,
well this is not easy to do, because they can't "take" something away from
MS without giving them financial compensation.
>Over in the other group someone was saying that the government
>can bring criminal charges in an antitrust case which could
"Some guy in a newsgroup" does not constitute a credible source.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 dubious at best?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:42:13 -0400
> This is classic fragmentation.
> Corel WP installs ONLy on Corel Linux.
> Corel WP Office 2k installs ONLY on Corel Linux...
>
> I see a chink in the Linux "let's love everybody" support philosophy
> here.
Actually I've heard that both install much better in RedHat than Corel.
So there is probably no truth to that.
Jim Ross
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux for a web developer
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 00:48:24 GMT
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 03:17:49 +0200, Davorin Mestric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>my point is that unix/apache and nt/iis are simply not comparable in ease of
>use, functionality and speed. and if we consider high-end solutions, you
>get much better scalability at 2 to 5 times less price.
>(http://www.objectwatch.com/Figures/Issue26/Issue26Figs_files/frame.htm)
>
>also, to a asp developer, web development on unix looks archaic. asp is so
>much nicer to use than anything on unix. with php you are required to use a
>single language, weird db access, i don't know what support you have for
>debugging your scripts.
What's so weird about imbedded SQL with either ODBC or whatever
native interface the php coders care to implement. Even the OCI
interface is not that much different than what php uses.
>
>on iis, thanks to com, you have plugable scripting languages, you have a
>nice debugger in interdev, you can easily and type-safely use other
>components in any language. equivalent functionality and level of
>integration simply does not exist on unix.
Sure it does. You can just use server side java. Meanwhile,
with either solution you are not merely limited to the one
platform you happened to code it on.
>
>with asp you can use ado for your db access in a same way you can use it
>from a vb or vj or vc program. with php you use different method, from cgi
>scripts you use yet another, etc.
Of course different languages and approaches are going to have
their divergences. That's rather part of using distinct options.
--
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] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get
it, do you?)
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 00:50:24 GMT
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:16:29 -0400, Keith T. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You are the one who introduced it... when you talked about the "Western
>Moral Tradition", so don't get pissed at me for quoting one of the major
>sources of that tradition (even if it is in translation)
If it were really a part of the Western Moral Tradition, you
wouldn't have to restrict yourself to biblical references.
You could cite biblical scholars as well as secular philosophers.
Infact, you missed a rather obvious example in that regard.
>
>Keith.
>mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Keith T. Williams" wrote:
>> >
>> > The bible says, "Is not the workman worthy of his hire?", referring to
>> > payment for services rendered...
>>
>> The Bible says no such thing. Perhaps some translation may say
>> something, but unless you can read the various languages in which the
>> original writings of the various passages are in, then you can't
>> actually quote the Bible because you haven't actually read the Bible.
>> Even then, outside those religions which rely on miracles and dogma, it
>> has no real importance.
>>
>> A religious document, or set of documents, has no place in a technology
>> forum. Just because you believe that there is some man, in the sky, that
>> watches everything you do, and will send you to a place that is full of
>> fire and suffering if you do something which he does not like, but loves
>> you and needs money, (paraphrase of G. Carlin) does not mean that others
>> care.
>>
>> >
>> > JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > On 12 Apr 2000 12:06:41 -0400, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> > > >On 12 Apr 2000 15:20:59 GMT, Damien wrote:
>> > > >>On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 05:38:17 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
>> > > >
>> > > >>Okay so by owning the copyright you have the right to limit what I
>do
>> > > >>with my property,
>> > > >
>> > > >Yes, it does. This is not unusual. There are a lot of limitations on
>> > > >what you are allowed to do with your property. Generally, you're not
>> > allowed
>> > > >to harm others. Attempting to subvert the authors means of
>compensation
>> > > >clearly counts as "harming others".
>> > >
>> > > No it doesn't. 'subverting profit' can mean a great many things.
>> > > Whereas the property limitation you use as an example is related
>> > > to things considered to be more important natural rights.
>> > >
>> > > 'right to profit' does not exist anywhere in the Western moral
>> > > tradtion. Infact, the opposite is true.
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >> namely to prevent me from placing it in a certain
>> > > >>arrangement as exists in my mind
>> > > >
>> > > >Unless you've memorised the copyrighted work verbatim, it does
>> > > >not "exist in your mind".
>> > > >
>> > > >> and to distribute it as I see fit.
>> > > >
>> > > >Well yes. The whole point of copyright is to put terms and conditions
>> > > >on distribution. Even the GPL attaches strings to redistribution.
>> > >
>> > > [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.
>>
>> --
>> 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"
>
>
--
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: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: uptime -> /dev/null
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:06:20 GMT
Pedro Ballester wrote:
> In fact, I think a lot of Linux users just leave their computers turned
> on doing
> nothing, just because it does not crash. Linux is not ecological :-))
Or they help with distributed efforts, which not only uses that CPU when you're
not there, but it helps the computer by leaving it on...
Also, many of us do things like serve our own mail, login to/from work, etc.
You'd be surprised how useful a 24/7 net connection and a running machine
(properly secured of course) can be.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
[X] YES! I'm a brain-damaged lemur on crack, and I'd like to
order your software package for $459.95!
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: uptime -> /dev/null
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:07:16 GMT
Pedro Ballester wrote:
> Agree, but almost each case; anyway, tell me any Linvocate (me
> included) that does not install avery patch falling in its hands :)
OK..me. I don't apply a patch right away unless it fixes something that is
broken.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
In the back of the room are four Apple ][e computers. Apple ][e ... my God. How
can our educational system be this neglected? What a geek I am to be fretting
over the lack of computing power available to the students. Kids smoking crack?
It's only drugs. Teenage pregnancy? The responsibility of a newborn will add
character. 6502 CPUs with 64K of RAM, daisychained to a single low-density 5
1/4" floppy drive? Great Scott! Are we not barbarians for stranding our future
generations on a precarious foundation strung together with 8-bit processors
and low-resolution graphics? -> Ad Nauseam - "Speed geek"
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 dubious at best?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:45:10 -0400
Cary O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8d4f37$f8n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 01:53:18 GMT, Itchy wrote:
> >>On 12 Apr 2000 21:45:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
> >>wrote:
> >
> >Firstly, you completely destroy your credibility by not showing the
decency
> >and integrity to post under a single name.
> >
> >>But the fact remains that the "holy grail" of office suites for Linux
> >
> >Wrong. Corel Office isn't and never was the "holy grail" of office
suites.
> >Applix has been around a lot longer, and Corel, as the new kid on the
> >block needs to prove itself. Thus far, it doesn't appear to be taking
> >the crown from Applix.
> >
>
> But Corel is stealing some thunder. I get these flyers from elinux.com,
and
> on page 2 or something is a full-page ad pushing Corel Office 2000. 3
> pages later is 1/4 page for applixware. And how often do you see
something
> about Applix on linuxtoday.com compared to how often there is something
> about Corel?
>
> The Applix marketing people have got to get on the stick. They have a
great
> product[1], but they've got to get more mindshare.
>
> -- cary
>
Actually I don't see any Linux related ads.
Really Microsoft seems to be the only one know either "gets it" or "can
afford it".
Linux is popular but no thanks to commericals.
Jim Ross
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
