Linux-Advocacy Digest #319, Volume #26 Sun, 30 Apr 00 16:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Split Dude! (Christopher Browne)
Re: TYPING ERRORS (Jim Richardson)
Re: which OS is best? (Jim Richardson)
Re: which OS is best? (Jim Richardson)
Gates admits MS "engineers" suck? (Scott Babb)
Re: Web page rendering Linux (KDE) vs. windows 2000 (Darren Winsper)
Re: which OS is best? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Gates admits MS "engineers" suck? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Chad Myers Lies 205 Times For Microsoft (was: Time for the MS-rats to desert
(Charlie Ebert)
Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition! ("Mark Weaver")
Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition! ("Mike")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Split Dude!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 17:45:51 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jim Richardson would say:
>On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:46:37 GMT,
> Kevin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>>Jim Richardson wrote:
>>>
>>> You get to decide who says what on usenet? that's... pretty fascistic itself
>>> don't you think?
>>>
>>> And from the odd coincidence dept, April 19 is the day that the US assaulted
>>> the compound at Mt Carmel, in which almost all the davidians died. April 19
>>> is also the day that the Nazis burned the wasrsaw ghetto down...
>>
>>Godwin's law! You lose.
>>
>Perhaps you should have read the post to which I was replying, and perhaps you
>should also read Godwins, which is invoked when someone is compared to either
>Hitler or Nazis, not when they are mentioned.
It also misses that Godwin's Law indicates only that threads on Usenet
will _eventually mention the Nazis,_ and does not indicate who "wins"
or "loses."
--
Know how to blow any problem up into insolubility. Know how to use the
phrase "The new ~A system" to insult its argument, e.g., "I guess this
destructuring LET thing is fixed in the new Lisp system", or better yet,
PROLOG.
-- from the Symbolics Guidelines for Sending Mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 18:10:23 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:21:01 +0100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Grant Fischer wrote:
>>
>>
>> If QWERTY wasn't the best keyboard layout for mechanical typewriters
>> then why did it win?
>
>It was designed to be the worst design with the least obvious key layout
>design. The reason for thgis is that old mechanical typewriters couldn't
>keep up with the very fast typing speeds of professtonal typists (the
>keys jammed) so a layout was designed to reduce typing speed. It then
>became the standard.
>
If you had read the post he was replying to, you might have had a different
opinion. Yes, the layout reduced jamming, but not by reduction in speed. (in
article, it mentions competitions in the 1920's where 95+wpm sustained speeds
were neccessary to win, on *mechanical* typewriters. Hardly a slow down.)
--
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] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 18:16:07 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:58:43 GMT,
Roger, in the persona of <roger@.>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:17:30 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
>Richardson wrote:
>
>> Why does linux have no problems with ps files, but M$ does?
>
>Linux does have problems, without an app to do the translation. Such
>apps are also available for Windows, so the only benefit Linux has is
>the inclusion in the distro (assuming you have one that does)
Could you name a major distro that doesn't?
--
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] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 18:17:36 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:03:17 GMT,
Roger, in the persona of <roger@.>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 01:11:21 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
>Richardson wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 07:54:40 -0500,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>>Reinstall the latest Acrobat from Adobe.
>
>>Why? it prints okay as is, it just has to open it first. With a working
>>windows 9X setup, you don't tinker uneccesarily. THe registry is fragile
>>enough as it is.
>
>But it * doesn't * print okay -- it asks for an association that it
>shouldn't.
It means that I have to open the file in AAcrobat, and print from there,
annoying, and time consuming, especially if there are more than a couple
of files, but not worth risking screwing up the registry.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Scott Babb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Gates admits MS "engineers" suck?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 18:19:42 GMT
OK, I know that MicroSoft bashing isn't really Linux advocacy,
but I feel the need to vent today.
I went to MicroSoft's web site to see what their particular
spin on recent events is. What really irritated me was their
"Freedom To Innovate Network." As usual, they're claiming that
they're making all sorts of technical innovations, while
ignoring the fact that their "innovations" are entirely in the
realm of marketing, and they've purchased nearly all of their
"innovative" software from other companies (usually by buying
those companies.)
Anyway, in the middle of one of their pages I noticed this:
"Breaking up Microsoft into separate companies is
not in the interest of consumers and is not supported
by anything in the lawsuit," said Bill Gates, Microsoft
chairman and chief software architect. "Microsoft never
could have created Windows® and Office if they were
in separate companies. Innovations that began within
Office have quickly been incorporated into Windows so
they are available to every applications developer."
First there's the revisionist view of history where Microsoft
"created" Windows and Office. I thought they just ripped off
Apple, Xerox, Digital Research, MIT, WordPerfectCorp, VisiCorp,
Lotus, etc. What they didn't copy they bought outright, like
Spyglass Mosaic (now known as Internet Explorer,) etc. It's
like saying Warren Buffet "created" all sorts of things simply
because he bought the companies that actually created those things.
The real gem in that quote, though, is the admission that
MicroSoft engineers aren't capable of doing what Apple, MIT, Corel,
Lotus, WordPerfectCorp, Linus Torvalds, Borland, StarDivision,
and even I have been able to do with relative ease: Write an OS
and the applications that run on that OS.
I'm also wondering exactly what "innovations" appeared in Office
that were begging to be included in Windows. Did it go like this:
"Hey Ralph, we just put some of that newfangled "memory
management" stuff into Office and now it only crashes every
hour or so!"
"Damn, Frank! Ya think that stuff might help Windows?
How's it work?"
"I dunno, we just copied it from Ritchie's book..."
No wonder it recently made news that some PC manufacturers are
so confident that Microsoft has finally shipped a reasonably stable
operating system (after over 15 years of trying) that they feel
they can now remove that button from the front of the PC that
grounds a pin on the CPU every time the OS locks up. Of course,
the owners of those PCs have discovered that quick access to the
power switch is essential now.
Does anyone have any quotes from the AT&T or Standard Oil cases
where spokespeople for those corporations were making statements
about how breaking them up would thrash the world economy and
they'd win on appeal anyway?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Subject: Re: Web page rendering Linux (KDE) vs. windows 2000
Date: 30 Apr 2000 18:59:11 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:05:48 -0400, Jim Ross
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Judging from cross platform software like Mozilla and AbiWord, the Linux
> environment seems
> to slow things down (lack of mature thread support, less advanced 2D/3D
> video drivers/servers),
> lack quality fonts (smaller selection of TrueType fonts, lack of
> anti-aliasing support, etc).
For a start; the slow development of Mozilla is not due to Linux.
Around 97% of Mozilla is now platform *independant*. The reasons for
the time taken to develop Mozilla are:
1) The current version is only a year and a half old (They only started
the new codebase in Oct. 1998)
2) They are rebuilding the browser from scratch with far fewer
resources than MS are throwing into the Windows version of IE alone.
3) Mozilla is practically a platform rather than a browser. They've
developed XPToolkit, XPCOM and a few other bits which have allowed
them to make it very easy to port to other platforms. Remember,
WinIE and MacIE don't even have the same rendering engine.
And about the anti-aliasing; Windows' anti-aliasing is nothing to be
proud of.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 30 Apr 2000 14:03:23 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:17:30 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
>Richardson wrote:
>
>> Why does linux have no problems with ps files, but M$ does?
>
>Linux does have problems, without an app to do the translation. Such
>apps are also available for Windows, so the only benefit Linux has is
>the inclusion in the distro (assuming you have one that does)
The difference, which you can view as an advantage or not, is that
in unix/Linux you can use any program written to use stdin/stdout
(easy to write/test/reuse) as a printer filter, where under
windows you have to write something specifically for the
print driver API.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gates admits MS "engineers" suck?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:22:05 GMT
Yes, but when your dealing with a bunch of people with a chip in their=20
butt's,
the LOGIC ballgame is over.
I had no idea most of the skinhead population of loosers were on the=20
Microsoft
Advocacy newgroup. =20
I suppose we could use this as a guage of somekind. When we start=20
seeing them
in the Linux Advocacy then I guess our install has finally reached the=20
ease
of that of Microsoft's. Moron level.
It absolutely sickens me to see so many people who are simple=20
skinheads writting
in the advocacy. =20
Oh well, HEY RUBE!
Charlie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 4/30/00, 12:19:42 PM, Scott Babb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding =
Gates admits MS "engineers" suck?:
> OK, I know that MicroSoft bashing isn't really Linux advocacy,
> but I feel the need to vent today.
> I went to MicroSoft's web site to see what their particular
> spin on recent events is. What really irritated me was their
> "Freedom To Innovate Network." As usual, they're claiming that
> they're making all sorts of technical innovations, while
> ignoring the fact that their "innovations" are entirely in the
> realm of marketing, and they've purchased nearly all of their
> "innovative" software from other companies (usually by buying
> those companies.)
> Anyway, in the middle of one of their pages I noticed this:
> "Breaking up Microsoft into separate companies is
> not in the interest of consumers and is not supported
> by anything in the lawsuit," said Bill Gates, Microsoft
> chairman and chief software architect. "Microsoft never
> could have created Windows=AE and Office if they were
> in separate companies. Innovations that began within
> Office have quickly been incorporated into Windows so
> they are available to every applications developer."
> First there's the revisionist view of history where Microsoft
> "created" Windows and Office. I thought they just ripped off
> Apple, Xerox, Digital Research, MIT, WordPerfectCorp, VisiCorp,
> Lotus, etc. What they didn't copy they bought outright, like
> Spyglass Mosaic (now known as Internet Explorer,) etc. It's
> like saying Warren Buffet "created" all sorts of things simply
> because he bought the companies that actually created those things.
> The real gem in that quote, though, is the admission that
> MicroSoft engineers aren't capable of doing what Apple, MIT, Corel,
> Lotus, WordPerfectCorp, Linus Torvalds, Borland, StarDivision,
> and even I have been able to do with relative ease: Write an OS
> and the applications that run on that OS.
> I'm also wondering exactly what "innovations" appeared in Office
> that were begging to be included in Windows. Did it go like this:
> "Hey Ralph, we just put some of that newfangled "memory
> management" stuff into Office and now it only crashes every
> hour or so!"
> "Damn, Frank! Ya think that stuff might help Windows?
> How's it work?"
> "I dunno, we just copied it from Ritchie's book..."
> No wonder it recently made news that some PC manufacturers are
> so confident that Microsoft has finally shipped a reasonably stable
> operating system (after over 15 years of trying) that they feel
> they can now remove that button from the front of the PC that
> grounds a pin on the CPU every time the OS locks up. Of course,
> the owners of those PCs have discovered that quick access to the
> power switch is essential now.
> Does anyone have any quotes from the AT&T or Standard Oil cases
> where spokespeople for those corporations were making statements
> about how breaking them up would thrash the world economy and
> they'd win on appeal anyway?
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Chad Myers Lies 205 Times For Microsoft (was: Time for the MS-rats to
desert
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:23:49 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 4/29/00, 11:01:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote regarding=20
Re: Chad Myers Lies 205 Times For Microsoft (was: Time for the MS-rats=20
to desert:
> In article <15OO4.1002$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Boris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Hey asshole, didn't take your Proziak again? I pity you, lousy liar.
> >
> >Boris
> Ahh, Boris, there you are! Like a beacon glowing in the night,
> made of burning tires and *stinky* garbage, warning people away
> from the jagged rocks of Microsoft!
NOPE! He just stuck his bic down at Chad's bun hole and made him=20
stand upside down.
> >"Mark S. Bilk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:8eg5fr$s23$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <8e7bns$jr2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"John Unekis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message=20
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >[SNIP: Hateful ignorant blathering]
> >> >
> >> >Is this what anti-MS people think? No real logical foundation, it'=
s=20
just
> >> >"hip" to hate MS because they're a big bad corporation? They're th=
e
> >> >big-bad-corporation-to-hate-d'jour?
> >> >
> >> >Man, you should go back on the medicine, you really have a problem=
.
> >>
> >> Since Chad Myers is so self-righteously critical of what he
> >> claims is "hateful ignorant blathering", it makes a person
> >> wonder if he's ever done anything like that himself. Let's
> >> see...
> >>
> >> DejaNews shows that Chad Myers has posted 168 articles con-
> >> taining the sentence "Have you recompiled your kernel today?".
> >>
> >> According to Myers' lie, Linux users have to recompile the OS
> >> kernel frequently. In fact, very few Linux users ever have
> >> to do it even once, since the kernel can easily be customized
> >> by using loadable modules. If a new kernel is needed to fix
> >> a security problem, only one person has to compile it and make
> >> it available to everyone else via the Web or FTP (e.g., from
> >> a Linux distributor). Myers keeps repeating his lie in order
> >> to frighten people away from Linux and make them stay with
> >> Microsoft.
> >>
> >> DejaNews shows that Chad Myers has posted 14 articles contain-
> >> ing the sentence "Friends don't let friends use Linux."
> >>
> >> According to Myers' lie, Linux is harmful, like drunk driving,
> >> which is what that warning is associated with in a widespread
> >> TV advertising campaign. In fact, Linux is very beneficial for
> >> users; the only thing it's harmful to is Microsoft's profits.
> >> Myers keeps repeating his lie in order to frighten people away
> >> from Linux and make them stay with Microsoft.
> >>
> >> DejaNews shows that Chad Myers has posted 23 articles with the
> >> phrase "Open Sores", in reference to Open Source software.
> >>
> >> According to Myers' lie, Open Source software is dangerous and
> >> disgusting, and people should stay away from it. In fact, OSS
> >> is very useful, reliable, and secure -- generally as much or
> >> more so than proprietary software, since the code is examined
> >> by more people, and bug reporting and fixing is much faster.
> >> The only thing it's harmful to is Microsoft's profits, and
> >> those of other companies whose software isn't worth what they
> >> charge for it. Myers keeps repeating this lie as well, to keep
> >> people away from Linux and other Open Source products, and make
> >> them go on paying hundreds of dollars every year to Microsoft.
> >>
> >> Chad Myers has never revealed his motivation for posting all
> >> these lies in favor of one particular corporation, and the
> >> richest man in the world. We can only wonder...
> >>
> >> Here's what John Unekis wrote about Microsoft, which Chad Myers
> >> labeled as "hateful ignorant blathering". If what John says is
> >> true about MS protecting senior managers from falling stock
> >> values, while letting the rest of its employees fend for them-
> >> selves, it reflects very badly on the company, and will cost it
> >> much of its support, not only from its own employees, but from
> >> working people everywhere.
> >>
> >> ] There is an old joke about a hooker who goes into a bar,
> >> ] orders a drink, and pays with a 20-dollar bill. The
> >> ] bartender holds the 20 up to the light and remarks - "Hey,
> >> ] you can't use this, this $20 is counterfeit!" To which the
> >> ] hooker exclaims - "Oh, no, I've been raped!"
> >> ]
> >> ] Now that Microsoft stock is in free-fall, quickly heading for
> >> ] under $50/share, there must be a lot of Code-Ho's up in
> >> ] Redmond who have sold their souls to Bill for stock options,
> >> ] dreaming of retiring young and rich, who are now realizing
> >> ] they've been raped.
> >> ]
> >> ] I noticed that Microsoft is reimbursing its senior managers
> >> ] for their stock losses with new stock options which are
> >> ] adjusted for the lower share price.
> >> ]
> >> ] For regular employees, MS is encouraging them to take a "long
> >> ] term view".
> >> ]
> >> ] The only thing long-term at Microsoft is the duration of the
> >> ] screwing that employees are getting.
> >> ]
> >> ] I imagine that it is going to become very difficult to find
> >> ] u-haul trailers in the Redmond area as more and more victims
> >> ] of the "Cult of Bill" awaken from their trances and decide to
> >> ] show Microsoft a long-term view of their ass.
> >> ]
> >> ] Remember all you Microserfs, the ones who bail first will get
> >> ] all the good jobs down in Silicon valley, the stragglers will
> >> ] end up fetching them coffee....
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: "Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition!
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:35:17 GMT
>
> Real Windows code??? DOS-based shit on Linux...that would go over like a
> cement cloud.
>
The Win32 subsystem has nothing in particular to do with DOS (it exists on
both 9.x and NT). Windows doesn't need DOS to run Win32 applications. And
there are already Win32 subsystems for Unix using MS licensed code (from
Bristol and Mainsoft) and they've been available for years.
> >
> > You want to run Office (or other Win32 apps) on Linux? Fine, but you
> gotta
> > buy yourself a copy of WDE which--surprise!--has the same OEM pricing as
> > Windows 9.x.
>
> Why? It probably ALREADY runs under WINE. (Has anyone tried it?)
>
If Windows already ran as well under Linux/WINE as under Windows, there'd be
little point breaking up Microsoft so that the MS apps company will be free
to produce software for other operating systems, would there?
> >
> > I suspect that if the breakup does happen and the pieces of Microsoft
> start
> > turning their attention to Linux, Linux fans may find they preferred the
> > good old days when Microsoft left the Linux market alone.
> >
> > Personally, I'd like to be able to buy WDE which would run Office and
> other
> > Win32 apps on top of the Linux kernel--but I suspect others here might
> have
> > different opinions.
>
> Yes, we do. For that, I still have Windows machines. Why reinvent the
> [square] wheel?
>
I have dozens of Windows applications that do useful work for me and for
which there is no Linux equivalent--nor is there likely to be any time real
soon. For example, I'm not holding my breath for the day my Marine
Navigation software package is available in a Linux version (nor am I really
interested in re-buying it if there were such a version). I don't find
switching back and forth between dual-boots or machines or running VMWare as
a particularly convenient or ideal solution.
Mark
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition!
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:50:11 GMT
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mike wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > 3. The application has no way to know or find out what the printer is
> > capable of. Single sided? Duplex? E-Size? Envelopes? Transparencies?
Color?
> >
>
> But why does the application need to know this? True, I have to say what
kind
> of printer (HPLJ 6) I have, and how much RAM (for config.ps), but is this
a
> problem? I do print transparencies in LATeX and AMS-TeX, but I just put
them
> in tray 1 and print. lpr doesn't need to know whether there is a
transparency
> or just plain paper. That's the user's job. The same for color and so on.
1. Printing on a B size sheet may be different than printing across two A
size sheets. My application can do what's appropriate - if it knows what's
going on.
2. Scaling can be automatic. If I create an A size PS output from my
application, it prints as A size when I send it to a printer with a B size
tray, even if I send it to the B size tray. I have to edit the PS file or
have some other filter to change that. Ghostscript doesn't seem to have any
built in scaling parameter.
3. In a sense, I agree that it's the user's job. But, I think the user's
job is made much easier if all of the information needed to make the
decision is provided. I have handwritten tables attached to my Unix box
listing printers, capabilities, and options needed to get stuff to them. I
need no such helper for my PC.
This isn't to say that a command line interface to the printer/driver isn't
needed. But, within an application, there's quite a bit that can be done by
the application if it knows the properties of the printer.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
