Linux-Advocacy Digest #540, Volume #26 Tue, 16 May 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Here is the solution (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: If you don't like Linux then just leave! (Tim Kelley)
Re: Desktop use, office apps (Timothy J. Lee)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Mr Rupert)
Re: Linux lacks (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Paul 'Z' Ewande©")
Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks (Julius Apweiler)
Yet another backdoor in MS software (John Unekis)
Re: Linux lacks (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks (JEDIDIAH)
Microsoft finally gets the idea... almost (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: X Windows must DIE!!! (Johan Kullstam)
Re: You people are full of shit.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Never saw Linux die? Try this.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
What is a good Setup Maker for Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Desktop use, office apps (2:1)
Re: Here is the solution (Craig Kelley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: 16 May 2000 15:09:20 -0500
In article <8frtd2$u4l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Leslie, you have a completely valid point.
>
>However, given the richness of the Win32 API today, is there any application
>that you can think of that you couldn't do with today's Win32 API? I
>personally can not, given that you could even write a system level driver to
>do the stuff that the Win32 API can't (the DDK is also freely available for
>download on MS' site).
By 'application' I assume you mean any product that Microsoft themselves
could write. I don't think you can write a domain controller from
the existing specs. I don't think you can do client software that
is capable of the 'one signon' trick on NT by transparently handling
passwords for multiple services. I don't think Microsoft should
be able to pick and choose what products a competitor is allowed
to write that will interoperate correctly.
>Same valid point as above, but again, most of the Win32 API has been around
>for years. I believe there are some recent calls added for Windows 2000
>added functionality, but then again, if you used those, your app. wouldn't
>run on 95/98/NT.
Somewhere in recent history 'i/o completition ports' became the
preferred way to handle network events instead of the older async
i/o interface. Did MS release this API to others at the same
time the SQL server group got it? (I don't know enough about
this to discuss it intelligently, but an in-house project here
is using the API and had problems earlier - I think due to a
lack of documentation).
>Also, the beta of W2k was out more than a *year* before the official
>release, and MS released the SDK at the time the beta came out. So
>developers had more than a year to see the new additions to the API.
How many developers want to write programs that only run on W2k?
Of course MS can just quit supporting the others any time they
want, so it's fine for them. After they develop to the new
api they can just push the customers there. Nobody else can
consider that option.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: If you don't like Linux then just leave!
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:12:05 -0500
JoeX1029 wrote:
>
> All the WinTrolls complain about how hard it is, how cryptic etc... A
Most likely the "wintrolls" are really just one person, Steve,
Heather, Syphon, et. al. Then there is the comna crowd, which
answer all the trolls' crossposts.
Notice the same wintroll keeps talking about music production on
linux and how pathetic it is. how many people would try to use
linux for that at this point?
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy J. Lee)
Subject: Re: Desktop use, office apps
Date: 16 May 2000 20:12:45 GMT
Reply-To: see-signature-for-email-address---junk-not-welcome
"Raymond Swaim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Actually, when you stop and think about it, MS Office doesn't load that much
|more
|quickly than Staroffice or WordPerfect Office. MS Office keeps a portion of
|itself
|in your Startup folder so that it's already in RAM when you launch it.
|Remove the
|"Microsoft Office" file from your Startup folder and you'll see it take
|considerably
|longer to load.
But wouldn't that make booting or login faster since Microsoft Office
loading would no longer happen at that time?
--
========================================================================
Timothy J. Lee timlee@
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. netcom.com
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
------------------------------
From: Mr Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:08:22 -0500
"Seán Ó Donnchadha" wrote:
>
> Mr Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >
> >> >Actually, an inline HTML document sent with ActiveX controls will
> >> >auto-execute in Outlook Express upon view. No clicking required.
> >>
> >> Well, not exactly. When you're viewing HTML documents in Outlook,
> >> you're actually viewing them in IE. That being the case, the rules of
> >> IE apply to ActiveX controls. In other words, depending on your
> >> security settings, new controls may be summarily rejected, accepted
> >> only if signed and confirmed, accepted if confirmed, or blindly
> >> accepted. Controls that were already installed are assumed to be
> >> trusted.
> >
> >Kind of confusing, eh? In other words, AxtiveX most definitely
> >is able to auto-execute in Outlook with no clicking required!
> >
>
> Yes, if you deliberately override the default security settings.
>
> >
> >I thought I had already stated that...
> >
>
> Yes, but by leaving out relevant information, you deliberately made a
> misleading statement. By default, nothing in IE or Outlook executes
> automatically.
>
Now now Sean, you too are leaving out relevant information. Not all versions
of IE default to AxtiveX off. I believe IE3 and IE4 are wide open.
--
Mr Rupert
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: 16 May 2000 15:16:06 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Evan DiBiase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It has nothing to do with video games. You said that it was impossible to
>prove that there was something that could be done better on Windows than
>Linux. I gave you an example. Running Microsoft Word could be another
>example.
It runs perfectly under VMware with Linux as host, any flavor of
windows as guest, and displaying even on a remote Xwindow. Some
people are also running it under WINE.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande©" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 22:30:58 +0200
Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Tue, 16 May 2000 20:42:36 +0200, Paul 'Z' Ewande©
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> ><SNIP> A lot of stuff </SNIP>
> >
> >> >Still expecting Charlie's documented evidence.
> >> >
> >>
> >> AFAIK, Charlie never claimed to have any evidence. It's his own
> >> personal experience, and you haven't proven him wrong.
> >
> >No. He said that WinNT/2k is a blue screening mess that can't handle a
heavy
> >load. I don't recall him saying that it was his opinion or experience,
he,
> >IIRC, passed it as a fact.
>
> Go back and read his posts. He said it was his experience.
http://x38.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=623812631&CONTEXT=958508246.1730
936833&hitnum=10
Charlie wrote:
"Okay. Microsoft is a blue screening mess which can't handle a load.
IN FACT, the only time you can associate the word load and Microsoft
together is when you say 'PANTLOAD'. Because you'll have a pantload when
you found
out YOUR server just blue screened about 650 users during month end."
Draw your conclusions from there.
> >I said that some corporations disagree, and wether they have ties with
> >microsoft is irrelevant to me.
>
> Availability of server farms do *not* prove non-existance of BSOD's
I didn't say that there were no BSODs. I say that these corporations
believed that NT/2K can handle the load, hence, their use in their big/high
availability sites.
> within the farm. Finiancial ties to Microsoft give these companies
> reason to put up with BSOD's. So IMHO, those sites prove nothing.
Well, they apparently succesfully use WinNT/2K to host big/high availability
sites.
You are free to think otherwise.
Can we call it quits now ?
> Perry
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 22:26:49 +0200
From: Julius Apweiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
> > even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
> When Netscape crashes under Linux, I just have to restart Netscape.
> When IE crashes, I have to reboot. You call that progress?
You have to admit that Netscape isn't a great browser, though. But
Netscape 6 is just round the corner, and that should improve things
considerably.
> > 2. Email clients...Pine? Sendmail? Archaic kludges. If you want to
> > MANAGE and play with your email instead of read it Linux is for you.
> > You can sort catalog and score all that email on a bit by bit basis
> > under Linux. real great geek stuff. Reading email seems to be
> > secondary to playing with it.
>
> If you want to become infected with MELISSA or ILOVEYOU, sure Windoze is
> definitely superior.
Exactly.
> > 3. Multimedia...Run antique versions of Real Player and not be able to
> > run Real Juke box (no Linux version). Run cheap Winamp Clones that
> > suck.
>
> Does anyone out there know what he's talking about? I've got multimedia
> that shames Windoze.
For example Kmidi, which is a software synthesizer, meaning you get
high-end MIDI quality for free. FreeAmp is also very good. Or
Xanim/aKtion! (sorry for quoting mainly KDE tools, that's what I use) -
playing video in the background while doing something else, no problem
at all.
But I would like Winamp for Linux...
>
> > 4. Graphics... Gimp? Name says it all. Even the trial versions of
> > Adobe included with scanners are more powerful.
>
> What Adobe trial software? And I've got versions of Adobe stuff for
> Linux that is as good or better than the Windoze product.
Not to mention the fact that Gimp is professional quality. It supports
plug-ins, has lots of built-in featuers, supports scripting, and it's
open-source, so it's constantly improving.
> > 5. Internet? Call your favorite ISP and tell them you run Linux...
> > Make sure and listen to the laughter at the end of the phone....
>
> My ISP runs Linux exclusively. So does his competitor. The helpdesk is
> sorta not-too-bright(TM), but that's 'cause they mainly hafta deal with
> Windoze users.
And besides, I don't call my ISP on the phone, I enter their dial-up
number, my user name and password in my dial-up settings and go on the
net. Full stop.
> > 6. Supported printers? Damm better be a Postscript printer, linsux
> > seems to be the only folks using these printers these days....
> > Otherwise you will be burdened by some filter that a pimple faced geek
> > dreamed up that won't utilize 10 percent of your printers
> > capabilities.
>
> I've got two HP printers that give as good print quality as I could get
> with Windoze.
Even my old Deskjet 550C.
> > 7. Have a scanner? read the above. same thing applies....
>
> Did you by any chance dig your copy of Linux out of a dumpster behind
> Microsoft?
I have to admit that I couldn't get my scanner to work yet.... but then,
I haven't really tried.
> > 8. Networking....Want to get the whole family pissed off at you? Take
> > away their internet conection sharing, standard under Win98se, and try
> > and set up the same deal under Linux...
>
> You're an idiot. Linux is to networking what Microsoft is to tin cans
> and string.
I'd phrase that as "Linux is to Microsoft what networking is to tin cans
and string", but you're (probably) right - I haven't tried it yet, but
ask me again on Thursday this week, after I've bought some NICs.
> > Hint: Give up now, because others far more qualified than you have
> > already thrown in the towel.
>
> And others far more qualified than you have moved to Linux.
And I am far less 'qualified' than many here, and I have not thrown the
towel. I have used my intelligence and common sense, and it worked.
> > You'll be reading How-To's till the cows come home...Or your wife
> > leaves you, whichever occurs first.
>
> Actually, my wife is reading the how-to's. And we keep track of the
> cows in an Oracle database.
And I don't have a wife (being 16...)
> > 9. USB...Most devices barely, if at all, function.
>
> Sorta like Windoze.
No comment, haven't got any USB devices. But a friend recently told me
of his troubles with a USB webcam under Windows.
> > 10. Graphics...Take a look at the shitty font display of Netscrape
> > under Linux...Makes your eyes tear doesn't it.
>
> What shitty fonts? My display looks just fine right now, except that
> it's displaying the bovine defecation you posted.
Yes, looks perfectly OK.
> > That's only the surface. Linusx is a piece of garbage that needs to be
> > exposed for the crap that it is...
>
> Yeah, well you ain't the one to expose it. Shit, you can't even spell
> Linsux correctly. What a fscking moron. Windoze material you are.
> > WANT TO RUN OUTDATED TEXT APPLICATIONS? TRY LINUX!!!!
>
> Who's outdated? Who else's operating system still boots a ten-year-old
> text-based OS before loading a window manager? Doh!
And what's bad about text applications? Using command-lines and shell
scripts makes a lot of things possible that aren't so easy in a
graphical-only environment. I admit I wouldn't want to work without any
graphical environment, but scripts can automate a lot of annoying,
tedious tasks.
> > Ever Wonder why there are very few 1.x version Linux applications?
>
> No. Ever wonder why all Microsoft software isn't labeled "beta" as it
> should be?
Mmhmm... considering most 0.x Linux software is a lot more stable than
Microsoft stuff.
====================
Julius Dominik Apweiler
----
Owner of Julius' Web Site: http://www.geocities.com/jule-apweiler/ ,
----
Inventor of the Creatures Christmas Calendar:
http://www.geocities.com/jule-apweiler/calendar
----
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
ICQ: 21129422 , no authorization required.
----
Sent from SuSE Linux 6.3
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and
Gates?"
------------------------------
From: John Unekis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Yet another backdoor in MS software
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:46:19 -0400
For those of you who don't believe in "backdoors" in windows,
here's another one for you to explain away...
Right on the heels of the "Love bug", which took advantage of the swiss cheese
security of Windows
to cripple Micr*soft based email systems at thousands of companies, there is a
new Backdoor reported
in Micr*soft software.
CNN is reporting that javascripts opened with Internet Expl*rer can read
"cookie" files stored on your
workstation and supply your passwords and credit card information to hackers.
Apparently, from the contents of the news story, this backdoor into your
private information may have been
deliberately installed by Micr*soft to allow information on your buying habits
and tastes to be collected
and sold to vendors.
As of the time of the report Micr*soft had not provided a fix for the bug.
The safest solution would, of course, be to permanently replace your windows
software with Linux, which has not been
succeptible to these viruses and hacks.
Second safest would be to replace IE with Netscape.
At the very least, you should disable javascripts and cookies when using IE.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:36:18 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 16:03:02 -0400, Evan DiBiase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 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.
>
>It's not any sort of a misrepresentation. If I said, "3D stuff for my G400"
>instead of "DRI support for my G400," I can see how you might be able to
It's leaving out the not entirely obvious bit about DRI not
being your only option for the G400. In this particular
instance there was a wintroll just waiting to draw the worst
possible conclusion.
>make this claim. I was simply pointing out a specific thing that I can do
>better in Windows as opposed to Linux.
>
>Quake III, I guess, would be the specific example.
Mebbe, mebbe not.
There certainly seem to be some people successfully gaming
with utah-glx. People are successfully using it for Heavy
Gear II.
[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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:37:21 GMT
On Tue, 16 May 2000 22:26:49 +0200, Julius Apweiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > 1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
>> > even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
>> When Netscape crashes under Linux, I just have to restart Netscape.
>> When IE crashes, I have to reboot. You call that progress?
>
>You have to admit that Netscape isn't a great browser, though. But
Neither is IE.
[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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Microsoft finally gets the idea... almost
Date: 16 May 2000 20:44:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The have been quite a few threads about the proper action on executable
content in email, as a result of the ILOVEYOU worm. What we (the *nix
advocates) have been saying all along is that the Outlook's behaviour
(launch executable content from the mail client) posed serious security
risks, as proven by the impact of the ILOVEYOU worm. We also stated that
this is nothing new, these risks have been warned for since rfc1341.
Still Erik Funkenbusch felt the need to "relativate" (sorry, English is
not my native tongue) the behaviour as not being Windows specific and
not being unnatural (<E3HS4.610$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) and
Christopher Smith downright justifies this behaviour
(<8fi72b$u2e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>).
Still, it seems that Microsoft has finally seen the light on this one.
They are patching Outlook to not launch executable content anymore (see
http://www.officeupdate.microsoft.com/2000/articles/out2ksecarticle.htm).
I think this is a wonderful decision and I sincerely hope that other
mail clients will soon follow (Pegasus, Eudora etc). The pity is that
they are overdoing it a lot. Not only will you be prevented to launch a
dangerous attachment, you are completely rejected access to it. You
don't have to be a psychology guru to understand that this will be
considered a major hindrance and thus not be installed by many Outlook
users. This might well mean that we get back to square 1.
I think people should be able to /view/ executable content (as far as it
is viewable) from the mail client, but not launch it from there. They
should also be able to save the attachment and still lanch it from a
shell. Another possibility would be to make it launchable within a
sandbox, but that poses quite a few challenges IMO.
I do not think that the *nix system should be copied per se, but it has
been a proven system up to now. Use a systemwide "mailcap" with very
sensible defaults, and let the user expand this with his own .mailcap.
This way, only users who know what they do will be able to lauch email
content, and I think maybe 1 out of 1000 will choose to do so.
My EUR 0.02
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
... then you wish to copulate?
-- Seven of Nine, stardate 51186.2
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: X Windows must DIE!!!
Date: 16 May 2000 16:25:25 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> I R A Darth Aggie <no-courtesy-copies-please> wrote:
> >On Tue, 16 May 2000 01:44:54 GMT,
> >Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >+ i have done that, but i am still not satisfied. how many 19 or 20
> >+ pixel high, unscaled, monospaced fonts with a full complement of
> >+ normal, bold, slanted and bold/slant variants are there? none as far
> >+ as i can tell.
> >
> >Well, on my system, you've got a choice of Courier (Adobe), Courier
> >(Bitstream) and lucidatypwriter.
>
> He said he didn't want scaled fonts, although I don't understand
> why. The postscript and truetype fonts are going to be scaled
> unless you convert them.
the reason i do not want scaled fonts is that they generally suffer
from severe raster damage. diagonal lines do not look like lines but
instead resemble sawblades or lightning bolts. i don't want a crappy
looking font.
--
johan kullstam l72t00052
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: You people are full of shit....
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 22:33:02 +0300
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 15 May 2000, Darren Winsper wrote:
> On Mon, 15 May 2000 11:52:33 GMT, David Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > used framebuffer with
> > SVGALIB applications,
>
> I avoid SVGALIB like the plague.IIRC, it needs to be root, which
> would explain a lot of things.
>
> > nasty played with TV card or the so ?
Actually, while I type this I'm watching tv using bttv and svgalib on my
second monitor, while running on other VCs vga_ohhell, zgv and dvisvga,
and switching between them freely. Needless to say, my system did not
crash since I upgraded to svgalib-1.9.4 (which is pre-pre-alpha code).
In addition, all svgalib programs run as normal user (not suid root).
--
Matan Ziv-Av [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Never saw Linux die? Try this....
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 22:39:40 +0300
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 15 May 2000 2 wrote:
> Try running SVGATextMode from X.
> Write an SVGALib forgram that disables VC switching, goes in to raw
> keyboard access then have a stupid bug that leads to an infinite loop
Been there, done that, many times. alt-sysrq-r returns keyboard to raw
mode, and then ctrl-c and type blindly sudo textmode.
Or if the programs catches ctrl-c, replace ctrl-c with alt-sysrq-k, and
then login blindly and restore textmode.
> Do something nasty to the VGA card (I've no idea what i did) that seems
> to make it never release the bus (or something wierd).
Or fix your cpu with a 5 Kg hammer. What has that got to do with linux? If
a video card (or any other card) locks the pci bus, then Linux, or even
the CPU itself gets no chance to fix anything.
--
Matan Ziv-Av [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: What is a good Setup Maker for Linux?
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:40:33 GMT
I can't find any good one so far. Can anyone recommend a good one. It
doesn't have to be fancy like InstallShield, as long as it can ask the
user for options and copy the files to their appropriate locations.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Desktop use, office apps
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:50:33 +0100
"R. Christopher Harshman" wrote:
>
> StarOffice
> Far too slow to load. We're using just the applications (launching
> `soffice staroffice.private:starwriter` for instance, to use just the
> word-processor without the desktop). Even on the fastest of our
> workstations, a Celeron 466 with a brand-new UDMA/66 hard drive, it
> takes almost a minute to load. Once loaded, it's more or less
> responsive enough to use, but the users we've had test the configuration
> have universally complained about the wait.
I find SO a bit slow to load, but I'm only running on an ageing P133,
and it takes the same time to load as you're on your celery computers.
Does anyone know of anything that might make disk IO run really slowly
on a linux system?
> I'm continually frustrated by Linux on the desktop, in all honesty. Not
> just the fit-and-finish user interface elements that are being worked on
> by the various projects (GNOME, Eazel, etc). But the speed of the OS.
> Launching Netscape Communicator takes much longer under Linux than it
> does under Windows, on the same box. Ditto for office applications.
Again, I have not had the same problem. The machine I'm using here
(happens to be a PIII something running NT (don't have a go at me, I'm
doing everything off a Sun via a windows X server)) also loads netscape
slowly. On the lower end machines (486sx33/8Meg), linux/X loads
Communicator 4.7, under windows, it won't load.
It seems that you have a problem with slow disk access on these
machines. Have you checked the motherboard or disk controller against
the compatibility list?
> For all the vaunted speed of Linux (running in command line mode), when
> you saddle it with X and ask it to do the things Windows users do daily,
> it doesn't seem to be able to keep up. This is my experience from my
> personal workstation (PIII-450, 160MB RAM, UDMA/66 drives) down to the
> lowest configuration still in use in our labs (Compaq Prolinea 466,
> 486DX2/66, 32MB RAM, 420MB IDE drives - they run Windows 95a nimbly, but
> Linux with X is painfully slow).
I'm sorry to say this, but I have *never* seen a 486 run Win95 nimbly,
but Linux/X on the other hand runs much faster. I will admit that Xfree
can be painfully slow without acceleration (especially compared to
RiscOS), but it is usually easy to disable those things if they cause a
problem. Good culprits are opaque window dragging and having jumpscroll
turned off on xterms.
On old machines, without H/W graphics acceleration, this can make a real
difference.
What sort of things do you do daily on the computers?
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
because
of all the fish in the atmosphere?
-The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 16 May 2000 14:47:44 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > That's just it, there aren't hundreds of examples of undocumented
> API's
> > > that
> > > > > MS's applications use (which is the subject, not just undocumented
> > > API's).
> > > >
> > > > So Corel knew how to use the IIS Office extensions at the same time as
> > > > Microsoft did?
> > >
> > > Which IIS Office extensions might those be?
> >
> > Nevermind. You obviously don't want to have a discussion.
>
> Oh, so because I ask you to corroborate your statements, suddenly I don't
> want to have a discussion.
You *honestly* don't know about Office 2000 IIS server extensions? I
find that very hard to believe.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
