Linux-Advocacy Digest #706, Volume #26 Fri, 26 May 00 19:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI? (Julius Apweiler)
Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI? (Julius Apweiler)
Re: Linux will never progress beyond geekdome (Julius Apweiler)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (David Steuber)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Marty)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ("Keith T Williams")
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ("Keith T Williams")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:07:19 +0200
From: Julius Apweiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 May 2000 03:33:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 25 May 2000 02:32:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >>And if it's not documented you are screwed...Typical Linoshit..Read
> >
> > That's true of things in general. My peeve for the week
> > is the ICL file format.
>
> I don't know what ICl is so I can't comment.
>
> >>this read that read everything to accomplish which would normally be
> >>an easy task.
> >
> > This is rather Odd considering that you would have to go
> > through the same sort of process to do the same sort of
> > thing under WinDOS.
>
> Nope.. Plugin the card and fire up the diskette that came with it.
> Chances are 99.9999 percent it will work under WIndows/Dos. Linux?
> Good luck....
99.9999? I could try to do some exact calculations, but certainly the
chances aren't that high for me, statistically. Call me stupid, but it
takes me longer to install the drivers for my ISDN card under Windows
than under Linux. A *lot* longer. Or that 48x CD-ROM drive I have
here... when it's plugged in and configures, Win98 gives a Blue Screen
with some cute error messages on startup. When I hit enter, I get a few
more, and each time I try to access the drive, I get another one. Linux:
I plug in the drive, boot up Linux, and use the drive. It's fast, has
great error correction and especially is very good at audio extraction.
OK, maybe the drive is crap because it doesn't work under Windoze - but
the point is, Linux can make good use of old or buggy hardware where
Windows can't.
OK, I've had some bad experiences under Linux too, especially on my
father's laptop (Compaq Presario 1230) - I just can't get the sound or
modem to work. But both of these are non-standard parts, and the modem
is a softmodem. It's not my fault if the vendor doesn't make a driver.
Though the soundcard might work if I knew how to set it up properly. And
it'd probably be autodetected if I used a distro with a more comfortable
installer than SuSE 6.3 with YaST1.
> Don't see Linux mentioned on the outside of the box do you?
No, because no one pays hardware manufacturers to put a Linux logo on
it.
====================
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?"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:15:16 +0200
From: Julius Apweiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI?
Thomas Phipps wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> [sniped]
>
> >Nope.. Plugin the card and fire up the diskette that came with it.
> >Chances are 99.9999 percent it will work under WIndows/Dos. Linux?
> >Good luck....
> >
> >Don't see Linux mentioned on the outside of the box do you?
>
> actualy it's more like 50% ... and then theres the problem if
> changed Cd-roms on a prioity{sp?} system and a the original
> floppy doesn't suport the cd-rom that you hafta use for installing
> windows{thank you for red hat then} I"ve actualy had more luck
> with linux finding cd-roms then any windows system I"ve seen to
> date...
Really? I haven't tried much with either system. Every one I've tried so
far worked fine with any CD-ROM I tried it with. Except the 48x drive
that I have in my PC at the moment that brings windows to its knees, but
I haven't tried installing win from that drive.
>
> and as for seeing linux on the box ... *picks up a random
> hardware box sitting around the house* ahh a D-link DFE-530TX+
> Nic listed in the comes compleate with list
> 1 10/100 PCI NIC
> 1 Wake-on-lan Cable {optional}
> 1 Driver Disk for Windows 3.11/95/98/NT3.51/NT4/DOS
> Packet Driver, Netware, NDIS, ODI
> _Linux_, and more!
Strange... I have a DFE-530TX and it doesn't say Linux on the box. The
thing does work under Linux, though. I just don't use it because I can't
get networking set up between my Linux box and my sister's Win98 system.
And before anyone tells me, see here, networking is easier under Windows
- it doesn't work there, either. But the Linux driver support for the
card is fine.
> and don't spot off that the card might say linux but it probley
> doesn't actualy work in linux ... I"m using it right now
> to connect to the internet {in linux sence it's the
> only Operating system in my house now}
Lucky you... my sister isn't ready for it yet (I think), my father has
it on his machine but he never uses it, and my mother's laptop doesn't
have enough RAM and hard disk, not to mention the lack of a CD drive.
>
> WhyteWolf
--
====================
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?"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:22:05 +0200
From: Julius Apweiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux will never progress beyond geekdome
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> "Joseph Kehoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >Average users are unable to install windows as well.
>
> What do you mean, "average users"?
75% of the people I know. Probably more.
====================
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 22:14:39 GMT
On Fri, 26 May 2000 15:04:32 -0700, Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 May 2000 14:28:43 -0700, Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [deletia]
>> >> Anyways, its basically over. We're here where we are at, I lose work in
>> >> Office whatever, deal with the crashes, get attacked by the latest
>> >> bug/virus/exploit, etc, watch my 'computing experience' hand me
>> >> 'illegal operation' notices and go home, have a beer, and hope Bill's
>> >> greed and thoughtlessness brings him his just reward, a sound
>> >> buggering by Janet Reno and pals.
>> >>
>> >> Ok, rant off, carry on with your 'advocacy'.
>> >>
>> >> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> >> Before you buy.
>> >
>> >So uninstall it (gasp). Despite what MS wants you to think, you can remove
>> >IE and use the onle Windows 3.1 file manager.
>>
>> What do you think that statement proves?
>>
>> It only supports his rant. You are either given the choice between
>> shovelware or a relatively crippled and ancient (abandoned) interface. It
>> also highlights the fact that interfaces in Windows aren't quite as seamless
>> as some would have you believe.
>>
>
>Eh? He was bitching that he is forced to use IE. Removing IE is not that hard. What
If removing IE requires removing any modern file manager than the
fellow rather has a point.
>you seem to be saying is that he cant remove IE cause then he would be forced to
>use somthing other then IE.
>
No, I am merely pointing out that winfile is no replacement for
the 'classic' version of explorer.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:00:00 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David T. Blake) writes:
' > Maybe the Harmony project will settle this last concern. That
' > all depends if Harmony is LGPL or GPL.
'
' LGPL. Anyone may link without fear. But the motivation for the
' project may be somewhat less with "open source" advocates
' rolling over and playing dead on the issue.
'
' http://www.yggdrasil.com/~harmony/
Last updated over a year ago. I see what you mean.
Ok, I think you may have won me over. Also, I must confess that I do
not like MOC. It strikes me as being evil macro hackery. For harmony
to be a compatible library, it must do MOC, or am I wrong?
This brings us full circle. The subject asks for ideas for a
university funded project for linux ( is the original poster still
watching this thread? ). I _like_ KDE. Qt is easy to use. Qt is
getting damn popular damn fast. Also, KDE is a huge project.
I should probably really look at GTK+/GTK--, but I've got this idea in
my mind that a GUI toolkit should be based on C++ from the outset
rather than using C++ wrappers, however good they may be, around a C
toolkit. I could be wrong in this opinion. Maybe a C toolkit is the
best way to go. But we already have Xlib... Yes, it is not a
'toolkit'. But it is what is ultimately being wrapped.
Therefor, my proposal for a university funded project for Linux is an
LGPL'd C++ application framework/toolkit for developing portable X
Windows applications. If the GUI components are kept seperate from
other support pieces, then the toolkit could perhaps also be used for
console applications. This toolkit should be comprehensive enough
that yet another windowmanager can be written and yet another desktop
environment can be written.
This application framework/toolkit should stick with the ANSI C++
coding standards and not introduce any macro hackery of any kind.
If possible, the GUI interfaces should be abstract enough so that the
framework/toolkit can be ported to other operating systems.
Applications that use the toolkit exclusively may then be ported to
those other environments with a simple recompile.
All the lessons learned from previous frameworks should be applied to
the new toolkit. The toolkit should take maximum advantage of the
ANSI C++ facilities where it makes sense to do so. This should have
the side effect of keeping the momentum on GCC going so that it can
reach full ANSI compliance.
I wonder how many people it would take to produce such a library
within one year?
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 22:59:37 GMT
Chris Wenham wrote:
>
> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I gotta say, I've never had a single problem you mention.
>
> But it doesn't mean they don't exist, nor can they be dismissed by
> saying "I never had trouble" - that can be misleading.
By the same token, claiming that the procedures are seriously flawed and
difficult to use based on a personal episode can be misleading.
> > > But I wish there was a more granular update mechanism.
> >
> > The last NT update I did (SP3 IIRC, back when I used to run that sort of
> > thing) was far worse as far as granularity was concerned. It was one whopping
> > xx MB EXE file.
>
> Then shame on Microsoft, and how does this excuse IBM?
I never claimed it did. I was attempting to think of comparable or better
procedures in this regard in place on other platforms and could not.
------------------------------
From: "Keith T Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:06:36 -0400
Office 97 Service Release 1 (SR-1)
Office 97 Service Release 1 (SR-1) is an update to Office 97 that makes it
easier for users of different versions of Office to share files with one
another. The Office 97 SR-1 Patch combines Office 97 product updates into
one consolidated download. Of particular interest to Office 97 users, Office
97 SR-1 includes the Microsoft Word 6.0/95 Binary Converter for Word 97,
which enables Word 97 users to save files in the Word 6.0/95 native file
format. Office 97 SR-1 also provides enhanced support for POP3 and SMTP
Internet e-mail in the OutlookT 97 messaging and collaboration client,
support for Intel's MMX technology, and various new viewers, converters, and
other enhancements and updates.
Office 97 SR-2 Overview
Office 97 Service Release 2 (SR-2) is a free update to Office 97 that
delivers product updates developed since the release of Office 97 Service
Release 1 (SR-1). For a complete list of product updates, read the Knowledge
Base article OFF97: List of Fixed Problems in Office 97 for Windows, SR-2.
"Arclight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 26 May 2000 15:14:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 26 May 2000 14:58:23 GMT, Arclight
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>On Thu, 25 May 2000 20:31:29 -0400, "Keith T Williams"
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>1. Microsoft office (at least 4.3 and 97) crashes frequently.
> >>
> >>I've used 4.3, 95 & 97 and they have never crashed on me.
> >>
> >>>2. Microsoft office is full of bugs (at least 4.3 and 97) that's why
they
> >>>issued (for 97) sr1 and sr2.
> >>
> >>What bugs would they be then?
> >>
> >>>3. Microsoft office 97 did not originally write Word 6/95 files, it
wrote
> >>>RTF files which it labeled as DOC files
> >>
> >>It does write word 95 files if you install the correct export filter.
> >>
> >>>4. After much yelling and screaming Microsoft issued a patch for
word 97
> >>>which allowed it to write real Word 6/95 "DOC" files. They also issued
a
> >>>patch for Word 6 which allowed it to read Word 97 files.
> >>
> >>There was a filter on the office 97 pro CD which allowed you to write
> >>real word 95 DOC files.
> >
> > ...that's great. Backwards compatibility is a 'Professional' feature.
>
> It might be somewhere on the standard edition CD, but since I don't
> have that I couldn't say.
>
> TTFN
> Arclight
>
> Web Site:
> http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: "Keith T Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:11:44 -0400
"Keith T Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:2nDX4.416$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Office 97 Service Release 1 (SR-1)
> Office 97 Service Release 1 (SR-1) is an update to Office 97 that makes it
> easier for users of different versions of Office to share files with one
> another. The Office 97 SR-1 Patch combines Office 97 product updates into
> one consolidated download. Of particular interest to Office 97 users,
Office
> 97 SR-1 includes the Microsoft Word 6.0/95 Binary Converter for Word 97,
> which enables Word 97 users to save files in the Word 6.0/95 native file
> format. Office 97 SR-1 also provides enhanced support for POP3 and SMTP
> Internet e-mail in the OutlookT 97 messaging and collaboration client,
> support for Intel's MMX technology, and various new viewers, converters,
and
> other enhancements and updates.
>
>
> Office 97 SR-2 Overview
> Office 97 Service Release 2 (SR-2) is a free update to Office 97 that
> delivers product updates developed since the release of Office 97 Service
> Release 1 (SR-1). For a complete list of product updates, read the
Knowledge
> Base article OFF97: List of Fixed Problems in Office 97 for Windows, SR-2.
sorry, this was supposed to be the link....
here it is:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q151/0/20.asp
> "Arclight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Fri, 26 May 2000 15:14:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Fri, 26 May 2000 14:58:23 GMT, Arclight
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>On Thu, 25 May 2000 20:31:29 -0400, "Keith T Williams"
> > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>1. Microsoft office (at least 4.3 and 97) crashes frequently.
> > >>
> > >>I've used 4.3, 95 & 97 and they have never crashed on me.
> > >>
> > >>>2. Microsoft office is full of bugs (at least 4.3 and 97) that's
why
> they
> > >>>issued (for 97) sr1 and sr2.
> > >>
> > >>What bugs would they be then?
> > >>
> > >>>3. Microsoft office 97 did not originally write Word 6/95 files,
it
> wrote
> > >>>RTF files which it labeled as DOC files
> > >>
> > >>It does write word 95 files if you install the correct export filter.
> > >>
> > >>>4. After much yelling and screaming Microsoft issued a patch for
> word 97
> > >>>which allowed it to write real Word 6/95 "DOC" files. They also
issued
> a
> > >>>patch for Word 6 which allowed it to read Word 97 files.
> > >>
> > >>There was a filter on the office 97 pro CD which allowed you to write
> > >>real word 95 DOC files.
> > >
> > > ...that's great. Backwards compatibility is a 'Professional' feature.
> >
> > It might be somewhere on the standard edition CD, but since I don't
> > have that I couldn't say.
> >
> > TTFN
> > Arclight
> >
> > Web Site:
> > http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
