Linux-Advocacy Digest #533, Volume #26 Tue, 16 May 00 11:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (John Poltorak)
Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault?
Re: Here is the solution (Chris Wenham)
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (The Cat)
Re: Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2 (JEDIDIAH)
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (The Cat)
Re: Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2 (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux lacks (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Erik Fuckingliar Strikes Again (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Linux lacks (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux lacks (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux lacks (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Here is the solution (Bob Hauck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault?
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:02:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/000516-000003.html
>
> So, only after two really really bad viruses, Microsoft is going to
> "innovate" by adding features that are so common sense, that a U.S.
> congressman, not even known for technical savvy, suggested in a
hearing.
>
> Duh!
>
> Break up Microsoft, now!!!!
>
> P.S. I would use the word "ubiquitous" as opposed to "popular" when
> describing "Lookout." Popular has a common meaning of being well
liked.
>
> --
> 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"
>
Perhaps MS should stop hiring only geeks with inflated egos for
their project management team and add a few congressmen... or at least
someone who can read RFC's.
Let's see, one reason Corporate America doesn't like open source
is that they can't hold anyone responsible for a bug in the code.
Here's an example of MS ignoring the wisdom painfully gained by 20
years of networking and wasting millions of Corporate America's
dollars. So far, the only one being held responsible is some teenager
and his girlfriend. Looks like management will have to come up with
another excuse for embracing MS. How about, 'they offered me a really
good kickback?'
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: 16 May 2000 14:19:08 GMT
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Roger wrote:
: >
: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 22:32:49 GMT, someone claiming to be Charlie Ebert
: > wrote:
: >
: > >There's only one thing worse than getting your information from a
: > >windows advocacy newsgroup
: > >and that's getting it from the Microsoft web site!
: > >
: > >W2K hasn't been out long enought for anybody to publish good test
: > >results on dependability.
: > >All we know for sure as of now is it's now twice as slow as linux.
: > >
: > >That's all we know for SURE.
: >
: > Nope. All we know for sure is Charlie doesn't like MS, and all his
: > posts boil down to that simple fact.
: I used to for about 10 years folks.
Anecdotal nonsense. It has nothing to do with your claims.
: I've changed my opinion about the situtation concerning MS.
This means nothing, in the context of your arguments.
: I was there to report the first security problems they've had!
Again, this is meaningless.
: And I waited the 10 years to see them NEVER fix the simplist of
: security concerns.
Please list these security concerns in detail.
That means, that I don't want to see any "gee, sonny, if you don't know,
then you need to grow up" baloney that you've resorted to so often.
: IT's become obvious to me that Microsoft intends to have 3rd parties
: fix their crap. And those 3rd parties are not intimate enough with
: the OS to be able to do it.
*sigh* I guess HP and all those OEMs who've been turning out perfectly
secure and usable WindowsNT systems are just clueless, right? As opposed
to you... a person who has given us undeniable proof of his "L33TN355".
The only thing that you've proven to anyone in any newsgroups you've been
posting in, is that you know how to whine.
: The cluster which is Microsoft has been getting looser over time.
: You could drive a truck thru the idea's they've simply forgotten.
This is merely more anecdotal rambling. Do you ever have _ANY_ facts to
present. Do you even know what a fact is?
: It's a stinking mess.
The only thing that's a stinking mess, is your constant barrage of moronic
posts. Either post something interesting, or something worth debating.
You have yet to do either one of these two things.
You've presented _ZERO_ technical explanations why you think (if we are to
call it that) as you do. You've presented absolutely nothing in the way
of descriptions of what you think is wrong with WindowsNT.
As I said in another thread, it's obvious that you're just some wanker who
has tasted a UNIX-like OS for the first time, and now, for some odd
reason, you believe that you know something that everyone else does not.
Please, either post something worth reading, or don't post at all.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Poltorak)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: 16 May 2000 14:04:14 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Poltorak)
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> Adams Klaus-Georg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > [...]
>> > >
>> > > Name a single non-consumable product that you can jump to a competor
>> without
>> > > a significant cost.
>> >
>> > You can exchange any NFS Server for any other for starters. Same with
>> > SMTP Servers, same with DNS Servers. And until recently, any Kerberos
>> > server.
>>
>> We're talking about complete products here. Such as moving from one OS to
>> another OS.
>
>Are NFS and DNS now part of an operating system?
Well according to Microsoft, a browser is part of the OS, so why not ?
--
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:37:51 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 13:47:34 GMT, Robert L. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Break up Microsoft, now!!!!
>>
>
>No! If they break up, they will get twice the money. 100$ for a plain OS,
>100$ for the software that come with it. And it won't be backward
>compatible.
MS software has *never* been backward compatible except in the most
mediocre way. You're expected to replace your copy of office, etc.
anytime you upgrade the OS if you don't want it to be a complete dog.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:51:13 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Milton) writes:
> On Mon, 15 May 2000 15:47:48 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy
>
> Chris Wenham wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >> Just interested in knowing what you think an OS/2 user should be moving
> >> on _to_ if it's not Windows.
> >
> > I advocate pencil, paper and slide rule for the crushing majority of
> > computer users.
>
> I heartily disagree!
>
> Crayons or maybe, even *fingerpaints* would be the most suitable tool
> for the typical average user.
I wasn't joking.
I expect them to _graduate_ to computers.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: The Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:52:27 GMT
Actually i don't think there is a version of Real jukebox for Linux.
Real Player yes but not the jukebox.
The rest is just garbage.....
On Tue, 16 May 2000 04:46:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TheCat (Steve)
"Agent under Wine and powered by Mandrake 7.0"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:54:27 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 01:43:38 GMT, Brad Wardell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Brad Wardell wrote:
[deletia]
>> > * Mostly open source software available, OS itself is open source making
>it
>> > great to truly make it work like you want it to.
>> > * Far more options to control how it looks, feels, behaves, etc. than
>other
>> > OSes.
>> It's also generally much easier and quicker to install.
>
>Than what? Red Hat was a huge pain to install, for instance.
That's a tad vague considering that you can just tell it to
do a canned install and have at it. Many of the 'quirks' one
would have to deal with with a Redhat install are simply the
same PC issues WinDOS will subject you to.
[deletia]
>> I don't like netscape much, but I have found the StarOffice browser much
>> more stable. It actually seems to work quite well.
>>
>
>No disagreement here but we are comparing this to other OSes and this is
>definitely not something in linux's favor.
Not really. IE isn't quite as hot as it's proponents make it out
to be. Even the PC Shill rags have concurred on this point. IE
is only marginally better sometimes in some things.
What is far more interesting (on any platform) is Opera.
>
>> > * Too many rough edges requiring the user to go to a cryptic text base
>UI to
>> > do things (setting up VNC, a DNS, or a mail server tends to be a huge
>pain
>> > in the butt for "newbies" compared to a nice slick GUI implementation on
>> > OS/2, BeOS, Windows, etc.).
>>
>> It depends if you consider editing a text file difficult. The aparent
>> inability of ordinary people to edit text files seems to occur more
>> often if they have been used to GUI tools before. Total newbies who have
>> to learn everything from scratch don't seem to mind nearly as much (in
>> my experience).
>
>Well, it comes down to how you value your time. I choose not to learn how
>to fix my car, I take it in because my time is better spent on other things.
Then you take it into a mechanic. Otherwise, you learn the
physical steps involved in modifying the system.
>To most people, computers are just a tool. Expecting people to muck around
>with text configuration files takes away from productivity since it requires
>a much steeper learning curve to get going.
This is disputable. It is the fact that such an interface is
'different' that is more of a problem than the actual details
of the interface.
[deletia]
>> > * Overall lack of polish (WM's tend to have various graphic anamalies
>such
>> > as title bar text going over the buttons and other harmless but
>tell-tale
>> > signs of lack of attention to detail)
>
>> I use Fvwm, WindowMaker and (very rarely) twm. I haven't noticed any of
>> these problems.
>>
Ditto. I've been using WM constantly since around version 0.11
and haven't seen anything like that...
[deletia]
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: The Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:56:37 GMT
Sorry Donn it's not me. I have been true to my word and actually have
been using Linux more and more as of late.
Besides, in my trolling days I think I did a much better job...
On Tue, 16 May 2000 04:22:49 -0400, Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Tue, 16 May 2000, Syphon wrote:
>
>> Why do you want to punish yourself and run an operating system that
>> doesn't take full advantage of your current hardware?
>>
>> Why run some Mickey Mouse system like Linsux?
>>
>> Run Win2k or Win98SE and take charge of the full capabilities of your
>> hardware instead of using 1/10th of it's capability.
>
>No way, SteveO. Damn, Windows 98 is the one that sucks the life out of
>your PC, dude. I don't run Linux, but it would seem as though the
>multi-tasking would be much better than that of Win98. Plus, if
>configured properly, Linux is much more robust. Windows 98 is too much of
>a virus cesspool. Also, with Linux, you can actually format a floppy
>without locking yourself out of your damned system.
>
>Then, there's the DLL Hell you have to endure with Windoze. I don't run
>Linux BTW, I run FreeBSD. With FreeBSD, I've got this kewl splash screen
>that comes up while it is booting. It's like the Windows 98 logo screen,
>but it has the Daemon (Chuckie) standing in the morning sun with a
>pitchfork. It's pretty nice, but I kind of miss those kernel probe
>messages at boot time.
>
>So, just wondering - does Linux have such a splash screen? I'm not sure,
>but I think it may have made my system unstable at one point. It doesn't
>use X, but rather direct vesa/vga graphics. I usually don't reboot much
>to see the splash screen anyways, so I don't see what the point
>is. Still, there's nothing like a nice big picture of Chuckie to greet
>me when I boot up my machine. (Sure beats seeing that stupid Windows 98
>logo.)
>
>
>- Donn
TheCat (Steve)
"Agent under Wine and powered by Mandrake 7.0"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:56:01 GMT
On 16 May 2000 00:12:51 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <eJ1U4.33$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Brad Wardell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> It's also generally much easier and quicker to install.
>>
>>Than what? Red Hat was a huge pain to install, for instance.
>
>Which release? And why?
My first guess would be that his hardware wasn't compatible.
However, whining about 'incompatible hardware' (while installing
an AltOS) would likely not be dramatic enough for him.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:59:12 GMT
On Mon, 15 May 2000 19:53:18 -0400, Evan DiBiase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Mon, 15 May 2000 23:22:06 GMT, Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Evan, these people are a crazy bunch of radicals. They believe that
>> >less is better, hence your somewhat dismal support of video. They lie
>> >and lie by omission over and over again all in the name of Linux. The
>>
>> This is a perfect example.
>>
>> You're leaving out Utah-GLX.
>
>Uh, except I said "DRI," not GLX. I've tried GLX, and it was just OK. When I
That is, indeed a misrepresentation by only including those
bits of information that suit your point of view.
>tried it, it had some major problems with Quake III Arena, for example.
>
>I'm not trying to be an asshole here, I just want to shut ol' Charlie up --
>he's making crazy claims as usual that _someone_ has to refute.
I wouldn't merely take your word for it either.
>
>> >truth is Linux sucks, it has always sucked but now that it is
>> >challenging Windows it's suck factor is out in the open for all to
>> >see.
>> >
>> >Try it for yourself and see how much it sucks. You are not alone. Many
>> >have tried Linux and dumped it in the garbage where it belongs.
>>
>> That should be true of anything.
>
>Indeed.
>
>-Evan
>
>
>
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Erik Fuckingliar Strikes Again
Date: 16 May 2000 14:53:09 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tinman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, you're free to judge, but what I have in mind isn't simple name
> calling--he needs a moniker with flare, something special. Simple name
> calling won't cut it.
I keep reading his name as "Bob Gerbil". Obviously I need more sleep.
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] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:03:30 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 13:15:19 GMT, ax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Linux will never be broken up by a judge.
>
>Linux will be broken up by its own power fragmentation.
...neglecting the fact that nearly anything that could be
added to Linux to cause that fragmentation is exploitable
by everyone else too (unlike openlook or motif).
>
>> Linux will never go bankrupt.
>
>But companies can.
>Some Linux companies already go close to broke.
So? The whole multi-headed beast goes on. Just because emachines
goes bell up, or perhaps Dell, that won't cause the automatic
destruction of the platform. This is quite different from an Atari
or Apple.
>
>> Linux will never cause the people to mistrust them.
>
>Never? The trust comes from users' own experience
>and expectations.
I agree that this was a bit of a stretch.
The better parallel would be to DOS, which probably caused
plenty of distrust but still was able to linger around long
enough to remedy that distrust (at least in terms of PR).
>
>> Linux on the other hand is more of a religion than a corporation.
>
>No wonder.
>
>> How are we ever going to get ahead of that huge penguin over there!
>> Every step he takes is shaking the ground!
>
>Those lazy sitting penguins cannot move a "step" with fat belly.
You would be surprised how quickly some liquid-fat
creatures can move...
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:04:56 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 07:51:19 GMT, David Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So far, you haven't given us any reason to think you've actually even used
>> ext2.
>
> ???????
A little slander doesn't an end user make...
...especially when it sounds like recycled FUD.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:06:27 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 07:56:23 GMT, David Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Bullocks. IE5 has as much a tendency to tank as does Netscape on
>> NT or Linux.
>
> When I talk, I've tested. IE5 has not ever frozen at my Windows 2000
I run both side by side on a daily basis. Sometimes, Opera is
even in the mix.
>box. My Netscape under GNU/Linux has been freezing since 3.0 every
>day (Java and Javascript, even sometimes without them). That is a fact.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:05:58 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 02:00:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>This is an _extremely_ close minded view as you do not consider any
>systems besides Unix, Mac, and Windows. Did you even know that (GASP!)
>other systems actually exist?
Actually, yes I do know that. VMS is so far from the right solution for a
home user that it never entered my mind. Similarly, I would not recommend
MVS or TOPS-20 or VxWorks for the home or small business user.
>The best OS for an OS/2 user to move to is VMS. Point by point:
You have _got_ to be kidding. If you really believe that VMS is the right
system for someone coming from OS/2, then you are a lunatic.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
