Linux-Advocacy Digest #337, Volume #26 Tue, 2 May 00 11:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Split Dude! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: A split? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites ("Frank")
Re: Government to break up Microsoft ("Otto")
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (david
parsons)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (david
parsons)
Dinosaur Eat Blue Penguin? ("ax")
Which Flavour Is Best? ("Edward")
SV: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Rolf C Stadheim")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: A need for better installation programs (Tim Kelley)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Cihl")
Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect ("Bobby D. Bryant")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Split Dude!
Date: 2 May 2000 13:06:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
Whenever someone is compared to Hitler or the Nazis on USENET, the
*thread* loses. :^(
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A split?
Date: 2 May 2000 13:14:55 GMT
In article <vlXO4.73054$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> IN this regard Microsoft is a discredit to the United States and
>> is dragging the United States image down amongst other foreign powers.
>
> Then why other countries are saying "Leave it to the Americans to
> break up the most succesful company in their history"?
Because their investigative and legal process is even slower in this
regard? :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: 2 May 2000 13:00:13 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I find Qt much easier to learn than other toolkits, then perhaps
> there is a bunch of other people who find the same thing. This
> seems to work in KDE's favor as KDE uses the Qt toolkit. This might
> explain why KDE has left other desktop environments in the dust.
But not necessarily. There are people that would vigorously dispute
this for various reasons; they might disagree with some of the design
decisions made, or they may prefer L&Fs that are radically different,
or they might have a body of existing code that it is too much effort
to convert. They might just feel contrary, and that whenever there is
some movement going in one direction, they're against it. Whatever
"it" is. :^)
Let's face it, very few arguments in computing are settled beyond all
debate. They just get documented on alt.folklore.computing :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:17:00 GMT
Chris Hedley <8em8tr$ijn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
^
^ The term CPU often refers to the enclosure in which the actual processor
^ complex(es) reside...
That is a definition that was invented by people who first began using
computers that were of the desktop variety, without first understanding the
technology. It was obvious what they should call the monitor, keyboard, and
printer, but the big box was somewhat of a mystery. They knew it had something
to do with a CPU so that is the term they adopted for it.
; ...the chip, OTOH, is more properly referred to as a
^ microprocessor or logic array (depending on the system involved.)
I think you are going back to when the central processing unit was not a
microprocessor but was a system that was enclosed in a single case. If you
have several devices acting together as a central processing unit, and this
CPU is enclosed separately from the rest of the system, then their enclosure
could be referred to as a "CPU", but with most computer systems a large
variety of components are enclosed in the same housing so the term "CPU" is
very inappropriate.
^ Many people think otherwise, however, which is what I believe is
^ referred to as "small computer thinking." :)
Perhaps we're just losing sight of the history.
Damn! Why so many newsgroups in this thread? Send follow-ups to
<comp.os.linux.development.system>.
Frank
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:24:31 GMT
"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >And if the "brand name vendor" isn't willing to sell the PC without
Windows
> >who would you blame?
>
> Nader and IBM clearly placed that sort of blame at the feet of Microsoft.
Yet he went ahead a signed the contract with Microsoft. He was fully aware
that Windows95 is the only "game" in town and IBM would've been dead in the
water if they don't have that contract. Microsoft didn't need IBM to sell
their OS, which put IBM between the rock and the hard place.
>
> In a market where nearly every other component of the system is a matter
of
> choice: lack of choice in one particular area really stands out.
Was it lack of choice or lack of interest in other systems? The majority of
the end users wanted/wants Windows platform. Most of the OEMs were/are
catering for the most profitable segment of the market. Bring along another
OS, which is wanted by the majority of the end users and the end result
might surprise you. The OEMs would drop Microsoft in a hartbeat. Notice that
there is no requirement for quality, the demand what drives the market to a
certain extent.
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 28 Apr 2000 23:48:51 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Terry Porter <No-Spam> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:04:56 GMT, s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 25 Apr 2000 15:34:14 +0800, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Sure - I understand that you have given up because you are not technically
>>competent enough to debate in this forum.
>#Wintroll method number 3, personal sleights.
It's not a slur if it's true. You are wilfully ignorant to the
point where one has to wonder if you need to have a personal tutor
to help you button up your shirts in the morning.
There are plenty of Wintroll(tm)'s here, but you're doing a better
job than any of them (including the paranoic SeaDragon) at
portraying the Linux userbase as a crowd of illiterate morons. And
you couldn't dodge an embarrassing question if someone was
displaying the answer on a teleprompter.
____
david parsons \bi/ Unless, of course, you're being a paid anti-linux
\/ agitator, and then you'd be doing a *wonderful*
job.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 28 Apr 2000 23:51:55 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 25 Apr 2000 11:55:25 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>A serial console is not remote capability.
>>
>>What??? You mean all those years I used unix with modems
>>on serial ports I wan't really remote?
>
>Are you really new to computers or something? Modems on Unix machines
>are typically connected through terminal servers, not to the computer
>itself.
And here's the leading contender for the newby of the year award for
the year 2000.
____
david parsons \bi/ I'll stop laughing soon, really.
\/
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Dinosaur Eat Blue Penguin?
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 17:39:10 GMT
People are chatting about what the two new Microsoft Dinosaur will do. One
speculation I heard is that Windows' Dinosaur will buy out Corel to pick
fight with its twin Office Dinosaur. Is this just a speculation? Any
rationale behind it?
If Dinosaur likes to eat Penguin, why it choose PERFECTly DRAWn blue one
instead of the Red?
------------------------------
From: "Edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Which Flavour Is Best?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 12:47:16 GMT
Hello all,
Does anybody have a preference which flavour of Linux is best for a newbie
to use?
I hear the flavours from Caldera and Red Hat are the best to learn on and
from.
Regards,
Edward
------------------------------
From: "Rolf C Stadheim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SV: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 16:07:40 +0200
No, I completely disagree!
If it had not been for the "counter-attacks" from knowledgable Linux users
to this kind of posts, Linux beginners could over time actually believe this
FUD, and actually be discouraged from trying to implement different Linux
solutions.
Although to experienced Linux users as yourself (I presume) this FUD is
selv-evident, to potential Linux users it is not, and counter-FUD is
important in order to give confidence to new users in trying out Linux
(which is precisely the purpose of this newsgroup, isn't it?).
RCS
Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i
meldingsnyheter:jfyP4.5770$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Will everbody -please- stop answering this kind of posts? The longer the
> thread is, the more attention it attracts. Stop it! This is just a dumb
> Windows-user scared by eventually having to learn something new.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 14:35:18 GMT
So how about a specific answer to the question instead of dodging it
with Linux FUD.
How is a home network with internet sharing, a firewall and
printer/scanner sharing EASILY set up using Linux?
I told you how it is done under Windows. Click on internet connection
sharing under help. It's completely automatic and it works
Firewall?
ZoneAlarm a free program.
Double click on the icon and it sets itself up as a very good software
firewall.
Now again, how is that easily done under Linux?
On Tue, 02 May 2000 02:32:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
>venue it is a good choice.
>
>However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
>co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream fantasy
>of the Linux zealots.
>
>As an example I offer up the home networking problem. The reality, and
>it is a good one, is that home networking is becoming a big reality.
>Families with children are competing with each other for internet
>time, printers, scanners and so forth. Most new home construction
>includes pre-wired Cat 5 cable as an option.
>
>Anyway how is a home network with internet connection sharing, printer
>sharing, scanner sharing and firewall set up easily under Linux?
>
>Answer; it isn't.
>
>Oh sure you can play with Samba if you happen to not have a
>Win-printer and assuming you are able to figure out how to set it up
>it might work ok. You can play with ip masquerading and ip-chains and
>so forth, entering all kinds of crap in text files and so forth.
>That is of course assuming you know what to enter. How many times in
>the Linux help system do you see "ask your system administrator"
>mentioned?
>So who is the sys admin of a home network??
>
>Know how you do all of the above with Windows 98se or Win2k?
>Select internet connection sharing in help and the wizard does it all
>for you.
>
>Download ZoneAlarm for free and it works without a single amount of
>input required by the user to configure it.
>
>It simply asks you if you want a particular task to be allowed to take
>place (Realplayer accessing the internet as an example).
>
>Resource sharing?
>
>Place a check in the sharing box...That's it..Wizard does it for you
>when you select "How do I share my printer"
>
>That's the way it should be.
>
>I spent 3 weeks trying to get a network working under Linux and
>finally gave up. And another thing, the default set up is a real
>security risk even selecting Medium security under Mandrake. FTP,
>Telnet and other ports were wide open.
>
>Sorry Linux Zealots but you should read more of the the Linux
>install/set up groups to see how many folks have had it up to their
>ears with Linux and more will follow.
>
>Take off the rose colored glasses and look into the world of reality
>for a change. Linux is certainly improving, but it isn't even close to
>Windows.
>
>Windows is a much, much better choice.
>
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 08:34:58 -0500
mlw wrote:
> (Actual quotes from real Windows users)
>
> "Always save BEFORE you print."
> "I like to reboot my computer every morning so it doesn't crash."
> "Every time I reformat in Word, I quit and restart it, that way it
> doesn't crash."
> "Sometimes, if I can't log in, I just reboot and it's fixed."
> "After I make a CD, I have to reboot or the system will crash."
> "Whenever I play this game, I reboot because windows doesn't like it."
> "Oh, it does that all the time, just press reset."
> "After I quit the internet, I reboot because the computer usually stops
> working."
I had the misfortune of using Windows for about 6 years before discovering
Linux. During that period I developed an *extreme* paranoia about moving
the mouse while waiting for an operation to complete. The fear is so
ingrained that even after being Windows-free for a whole year I still catch
myself pausing to wait for things to finish, and I have to remind myself,
"It's OK. This is Linux. You can move the mouse while something is
happening, without any risk of losing all your work."
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A need for better installation programs
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 09:48:08 -0500
Mike wrote:
> The abuse she received from the local Linux community was befitting a witch
> trial. It just wasn't possible that anyone with more than two brain cells
> could possible have trouble installing the OS from heaven.
>
> It was disgusting, no matter which side you're on.
>
> A year later, what's changed? They're either Microsoft stooges or stupid?
>
> Why, given your attitude, would anyone ever want to install Linux?
>
> Does it _ever_ occur to _anyone_ here that _advocacy_ is something besides
> condescending ridicule?
>
> Are you _sure_ the publicity disaster was what the magazine wrote? Or was it
> what the Linux zealots said afterwards?
Blah. Every linux distribution comes with a manual. The manual
tells you how to install packages via GnoRPM or Kpackage. Both
of these programs are superior to the windows way of doing
things, which is flat out insane (install sheild).
What else do they want?
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Cihl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 14:55:51 GMT
"Rolf C Stadheim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
news:L6BP4.1655$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> No, I completely disagree!
>
> If it had not been for the "counter-attacks" from knowledgable Linux users
> to this kind of posts, Linux beginners could over time actually believe
this
> FUD, and actually be discouraged from trying to implement different Linux
> solutions.
>
> Although to experienced Linux users as yourself (I presume) this FUD is
> selv-evident, to potential Linux users it is not, and counter-FUD is
> important in order to give confidence to new users in trying out Linux
> (which is precisely the purpose of this newsgroup, isn't it?).
Yeah well, i don't think bashing other OS's is a very good way of promoting
your own OS under any circumstance. In the past i have been guilty of these
practices myself, and i think this isn't the way to go anymore.
I also think a fitting response (if any) to this kind of posting is to
refute any arguments or maybe apologize for any inconveniences.
I noticed in my own postings in the past, that if an argument by a basher is
relevant, this argument often deprecates within a few months.
For instance:
1) Not userfriendly
This is still partly the case, but with every new version of the known
distro's, userfriendliness gets better and better. Competition between Gnome
and KDE drive this effort, mostly, as i've seen recently.
2) Hardware support
The bashers often rant/rave about ISAPnP and USB in this case. As we can
see, these problems have been succesfully addressed with the latest
dev.kernels, and as soon as kernel 2.4 comes out, it will be solved in the
distro's as well. Now all we have to do is keep kicking the hardware
development sector in the nads until they start liking it. ;-)
BTW. Linux's HCL, compared to other alt.os's, is extremely long already
without much developer-support.
3) Availability of applications (top tier, that is)
Well, they still have a point here. Right now we mostly still have to rely
on Open Source-projects for our applications, and the full force of this
systems has only just kicked in. Let's see how Gnome and KDE will do with
their Office-like packages and desktops, shall we?
There are already some commercial apps available, but these never seem to be
as well maintained as their Windows-counterparts.
4) Lack of games
The same goes here as above. To make any OS a full success you cannot deny
having some kind of entertainment industry behind it. Windows would surely
haven't been this succesfull if there hadn't been so many of these fine
games available for it.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 08:40:36 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Word Perfect has its niche in the legal professions where it is
> still more popular than Word.
Yeah, I remember the news story from last year where some lawyers got chided by a judge
for submitting overlength briefs. It turned out that they had used Word, and Word
wasn't including footnotes in the word count.
Truly, the choice for professionals.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 08:42:33 -0500
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
> >>Ah, is this like the "till Lotus won't run" "factoid" as well ?
[...]
> > The phrase was: DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run.
> >
> > Considering how much of a bare metal hack any DOS app has to be,
> > that's not really hard...
>
> But apparently the tradition continues, if you noticed why there
> was a 2nd release of sp6 as sp6a for NT.
What was the problem? Did they forget to break Samba or something?
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
