Linux-Advocacy Digest #770, Volume #26 Tue, 30 May 00 16:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691 (tholenbot)
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 innovations)
(nohow)
Re: democracy? (Mark Wilden)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (nohow)
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (EdWIN)
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (EdWIN)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Serban-Mihai Popescu)
Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example (aleander)
Re: Neologism of the day (herodotus)
Re: The Linux Fortress (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Linux Fortress (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Corel lusing with Linux also. (David Steinberg)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451694.364^-.00000000000012 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451695.363^-.0000000000000000011 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: An honest attempt (Jim Richardson)
Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially. (Jim Richardson)
Re: Newsgroup for Gnome? (Jim Richardson)
Re: democracy? ("Andrew N. McGuire")
Re: democracy? (Robert J Carter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example
Date: 30 May 2000 12:02:48 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Windows doesn't even provide the service the code accessed
incorrectly on *bsd and Linux.
>The Windows version seems to not be affected.
>
>
>On Tue, 30 May 2000 03:25:41 GMT, "none" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> What do you expect?
>>>
>>> With Linux:
>>>
>>> "You get what you don't pay for"
>>>
>>
>>Haha! What a dumbass! Who's talking about Linux?
>>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example
Date: 30 May 2000 12:00:19 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> well, only the linux version was affect, not the windows version...
>
>Yeah, but most people use the Windows version in conjunction with
>Outlook...
>
>I'll say it for everyone else: Open Source isn't perfect.
Try it this way: NO code is perfect, or at least there is
never any reason to assume that it is.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 13:13:58 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Hoye
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Hoye
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Don't you know?
> >
> > Don't I know what, Bob?
> >
> Argument by repetition?
Obviously not. If you had decent reading comprehension skills, you
would have recognized that fact.
> How typical.
Incorrect.
> > > How ironic coming from the most prodigious Tholen
> > > emulator.
> >
> > What is allegedly "ironic"?
>
> Try opening your eyes, tholenbot.
Illogical.
> >
> > > Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> >
> > How ironic.
>
> Reading comprehesion makes a cameo appearance in tholenbot's replies.
Of what relevance is this remark?
--
On what basis do you claim "this is the end, my only friend, the end"?
------------------------------
From: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
innovations)
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:19:08 -0700
On Tue, 30 May 2000 10:33:58 +0200, Paul 'Z' Ewande©
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
><SNIP> Some stuff / newsgroups </SNIP>
>
>> Microsoft's Windows 2000 is the slowest operating system known to
>> mankind.
>>
>> No-one can challenge this statement.
>
>Sure. Now, could you please, explain away this:
>
>http://www.tpc.org/new_result/ttperf.idc
>
>Here I see Win2K kicking some UNIX' behind and taking names. Cheaper too,
>BTW.
Try http://www.objectwatch.com/issue_27.htm
------------------------------
From: Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 18:18:29 +0100
"Andrew N. McGuire" wrote:
>
> + However, my point was that this issue is simply not important enough for
> + most people to worry about strict accuracy. And why should they? The
> + rollover to 2000 is much more interesting to them.
>
> I suppose, I for the life of me do not see why though.
Here's the thing. To me and to most people, the year 2000 is a really
big deal. 2001 doesn't even come close (except to rabid Kubrick fans).
There aren't many of us who haven't watched our car's odometer roll over
another 10,000 miles. It's fun. And only a tiny fraction of the people
who've ever walked the earth have ever seen a new x000 pop up on their
calendars. A new x001 is about as meaningful to us as a new x943.
This is why they (and I, frankly) ignore the 'fact' that the new
millenium (by the arithmetic definition) doesn't start until 2001. It
wouldn't be _fun_ not to recognise 2000 as a much more important thing.
And limiting fun is not an intelligent thing to do, no matter how
logical it may be. :)
> + I did, although I compiled sound card support as a module.
>
> There are alternative drivers, also if your kernel supports module
> loading, you should have just been able to compile the module, I
> believe.
Compile the module, compile the kernel. It really amounts to the same
thing in the context we were speaking.
>It depends, there are many people who will swear up and down that
> it (Windows) is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I'll have to take your word for it, since I haven't met any. My mom, for
example, thinks Windows is 'fine' (when I asked her), but she'd never
say it was the best OS around, since she's never used another one.
> My point is that if people only 'stick to what they know' and do
> no investigation on their own as to what is actually best, then
> they should not complain if they do not get the best.
They should complain if it makes them happier (I'm a big believer in
happiness as the greatest good, if you haven't gathered). Especially if
that takes less effort than becoming a 'computer person' which most
people don't have time for.
> + with Windows, not from the number of people who think Windows is 'the
> + best OS ever', as you averred.
>
> But you put forth the argument that that is all they know, and wish
> to know of nothing else. You can't have it both ways.
I'm not sure what two ways you mean. I will agree that most Windows
users think Windows is 'fine', 'OK', and meets their current needs in
the way, say, their car does. I disagreed that they think it's the best
OS on earth. I just can't imagine a real person saying that.
> + If it were _proven_ to be better, yes. There are other issues involved
> + than the technical quality of the OS, such as the availability of
> + software and help.
>
> True, however if you have ever called _any_ major companies support
> lines, you know how bad it is..
Oh yeah. I didn't mean the companies themselves. I was thinking more
along the lines of the "Dummies" books, and their neighbor Fred.
(Hmmm...not sure that helps my case! :)
> I do not think individuals are idiots, I think the conglomeration of
> them is idiotic. There is a difference, a definite tendency towards
> 'mob mentality' in many cases. People, left to their own devices are
> on average, quite intelligent. People in a crowd, well that is another
> matter.
I'm not sure what the original statement about 'idiots' really was, or
if you even said it. I thought it implied that the average person was
indeed an idiot.
------------------------------
From: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:29:38 -0700
On Tue, 30 May 2000 10:35:37 GMT, "Daniel Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"nohow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Mon, 29 May 2000 18:29:06 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[snip]
>> >> MS has increased prices.
>> >
>> >Not on consumer windows in the last 5 years.
>>
>> Retail or OEM? At the retail level Windows 98 is more expensive than
>> Windows 3.1 at least it is here in Canada. At OEM level you wouldn't
>> know what they charge their customers now or then.
>
>I think Erik is limiting it to 5 years to avoid Win 3.
How? In May 1995 Win 3 was for sale at the retail level.
>
>And the *current* price of Win3 is probably not relevant; if that is lower
>it is probably because MS cut prices on that version. It is getting a bit
>long in the tooth, after all.
>
IIRC MS stopped selling Win 3 at the retail level in 1997.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:27:58 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>EdWIN wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
wrote:
>> >Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Edwin wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > [snip]>
>> >> > > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
>> >> >
>> >> > According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially
>> >> > dead. Move along folks. No thread to see here.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> And how is this "law" enforced? What happens if I keep
>> >> posting to this thread?
>> >
>> >Like all who oppose Microsoft, you will be send to a camp.
>>
>> Spelling Camp. ;)
>
>How ironic,
Incorrect.
>coming from the person who recently wrote:
>"Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood."
Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)?
How typical.
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:30:07 -0700
In article <amg39.REMOVE-THIS-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, WickedDyno
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>EdWIN wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
wrote:
>>> >Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Edwin wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> >> > news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >> > [snip]>
>>> >> > > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially
>>> >> > dead. Move along folks. No thread to see here.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> And how is this "law" enforced? What happens if I keep
>>> >> posting to this thread?
>>> >
>>> >Like all who oppose Microsoft, you will be send to a camp.
>>>
>>> Spelling Camp. ;)
>>
>>How ironic,
>
>Typical invective.
Incorrect.
>> coming from the person
>
>You erroneously presuppose the existence of "the person".
Prove it, if you think you can.
>> who recently wrote:
>>"Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood."
>
>And where is the mispelling?
Don't you know?
> Why, nowhere to be seen!
Incorrect.
>--
>| Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
>| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
>| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
>| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
>
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: Serban-Mihai Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 17:50:40 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have the same exact printer and it works perfectly under Windows 98.
Good for you! Some other guys with Win98 don't have your luck.
> Maybe you should try it under a reasonably current version of Windows. Or maybe
However, the drivers ARE specified to be designed for Win95 too (the
ones on the installation CD as well as the newest ones available for
download from Lexmark). And b.t.w. who in his right mind would want to
switch from win95 to win98 if not forced (e.g. USB support)?
> I should try it under a 5 year old version of Linux.
Yeah, you should. It'll work just OK.
Serban
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (aleander)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example
Date: 30 May 2000 17:49:55 GMT
Dnia 30 May 2000 12:00:19 -0500 niejaki
Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wypstrykal:
>Try it this way: NO code is perfect, or at least there is
>never any reason to assume that it is.
Hey! I've got perfect code...
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
printf("Hello world!\n");
return 0;
}
Simple but functional... perfect...
--
-*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Aleksander K. Modzelewski |
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GCS/MU d- s++:--- a--- C++++ UL++++ P--- L+++ |
| N++ w--- PGP+ PS+++ PE++ Y+ 5++ tv-- b++ DI+ G++ e* h+ r- !y |
-*-Linux ID: #142003-------Finger for public PGP key------PHONE-0-48-3607754-*-
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Neologism of the day
From: herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:55:04 -0700
shains adj. (derived from the vulgar epithet "shit for brains")
ineffective, used esp. in a business setting to describe IT
managers who replace FileMaker with Access
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 18:53:08 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Ahlstrom) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Wide-open disk access, for one.
File and printer services have to be installed for that one to even get off
the ground, and I'm not sure you can access C$ shares that easily.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 18:57:23 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote in <8h0hkj$8u8$1
@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>> Why not do it for free?
>
>Because I don't want to, of course.
>
>I have two modes of operation.
>
>a) I work for free on things I want to do, because I can.
>b) I work for a pay on things I don't want to do, because those who
> want them (say, you) can't do it themselves.
>
>It's the good side of being smart and knowing how to do things.
Evil chuckle. It won't be long...
>Sometimes I get paid for things I want to do, but that's another
>story.
I always get paid for things I want to do. Funny, took me a while to find
this job!
>> Whyever not?
>
>I gave the reasons above. It's an awfully insecure thing, and it
>breaks the "multiuserness" of the system. It is not a good thing.
OK, I understand the security issues, and if they were some how address, my
question still stands: why not?
>> Surely you would want to add ease of use features or is that a
>> no-no?
>
>I won't dignify such a stupid and disrespectful question with a specific
>answer.
Stupid and disrespectful? How do you come by that conclusion? If somehow
security issues could be addressed, why is it a stupid a disrespectful
question?
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: Corel lusing with Linux also.
Date: 30 May 2000 19:00:41 GMT
Sam E. Trenholme ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: >LinuxCare goes under.
: >Redhat can't figure out what it wants to do in the Linux world.
: >IBM dumps Linux shares.
: >And now Corel, betting all their chips on Linux, posts a loss.
: Simon,
: I wonder why it is that you come here hating Linux with such a passion.
: I don't know what problems you are having in your personal life, and
: they are quite frankly none of my business, but I don't think you will
: resolve those problems by repeatably posting the same kind of flamebait
: in this forum.
More troubling than his apparent hatred of Linux is Steve's multiple
personality condition. Steve manages to get something working that he
couldn't, and he starts posting praise, claiming Linux is finally getting
it right. Then, presumably, he has trouble getting something else
working, and he re-appears with a new name, dumping loads of the exact
same, tired anti-Linux propaganda.
Though at first, I was just annoyed by Steve's behviour, I am now
genuinely concerned for his state of mental health.
Steve, please seek professional help.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451694.364^-.00000000000012
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 15:06:18 -0400
A tiresome old digest for Tholen:
[gadzooks! Still nothing!]
Thanks!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451695.363^-.0000000000000000011
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 15:06:35 -0400
As expected, Tholen "ran away" from various issues, such the chance he
invented or the "use" I get from uselessnet (he can't grok someone calling
his beloved "uselessnet"!) or his writing problems (such as his oldie but
goodie, "Lots of companies trim employess to cut costs" and others) or what
an "astrological" figure is. Today's digest of everything of value Tholen
has to offer:
[sorry -- nothing of value!]
Thanks for reading!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: An honest attempt
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 22:40:06 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 24 May 2000 20:05:27 GMT,
Pete Goodwin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in <8g1vb6$ahj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>If you are running the desktop as root, you should see a 'drakconf'
>>icon which gives you a big push-button menu of 11 configuration
>>choices, one of which is linuxconf. Clicking it should give you
>>the GUI linxuconf. If you are running as a user and su to root
>>in an xterm, you'll have to be sure that you have given yourself
>>permission (xhost + if you don't mind being open) to connect
>>and make sure that DISPLAY is set right after the su.
>
>I'm running as root. I get an xterm with a text version of linuxconf.
>
>Pete
1) Is DISPLAY set to your display?
2) Is xhost (or xauth if that's what you are using) allowing you to connect?
--
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.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially.
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 23:33:06 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 29 May 2000 18:12:37 -0400,
Drestin Black, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>I figured it was news to everyone - linux users hate OS/2 as well but don't
>bother chasing it cause even they knew it was dead already...
I am a linux user, I don't hate OS/2, I have no feelings one way or the
other about it. So your broad generalization is again, shown to be flawed.
--
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)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup for Gnome?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 23:53:44 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 29 May 2000 22:43:00 GMT,
loser, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
>Richardson) wrote:
><snip>
>>
>> Um, pan? it's available as part of helix gnome, I highly recommend it if
>> you like the gui newsreader thing.
>>
>I wasn't asking about newsreaders! ?? Anyways, I'm already using pan.
>
Doh!
I mean, I knew that, just testing...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Andrew N. McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 14:39:34 -0500
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Mark Wilden wrote:
+ "Andrew N. McGuire" wrote:
+ >
+ > + However, my point was that this issue is simply not important enough for
+ > + most people to worry about strict accuracy. And why should they? The
+ > + rollover to 2000 is much more interesting to them.
+ >
+ > I suppose, I for the life of me do not see why though.
[ snip ]
+ This is why they (and I, frankly) ignore the 'fact' that the new
+ millenium (by the arithmetic definition) doesn't start until 2001. It
+ wouldn't be _fun_ not to recognise 2000 as a much more important thing.
+ And limiting fun is not an intelligent thing to do, no matter how
+ logical it may be. :)
[ snip ]
+ >It depends, there are many people who will swear up and down that
+ > it (Windows) is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
+
+ I'll have to take your word for it, since I haven't met any. My mom, for
+ example, thinks Windows is 'fine' (when I asked her), but she'd never
+ say it was the best OS around, since she's never used another one.
Well I have met people who claim just that... If you ever read any
of the threads at say Slashdot ( there are others ), you will see
those who purport their OS (not just Windows, but including Windows)
to be 'the best'. I am sure you have heard it. 'Linux drools and
Windows rules' and vice versa. What I am saying is that many of these
zealots (not meant in a negative manner) do little if any research,
and present bare arguments to support their claim.
+ > My point is that if people only 'stick to what they know' and do
+ > no investigation on their own as to what is actually best, then
+ > they should not complain if they do not get the best.
+
+ They should complain if it makes them happier (I'm a big believer in
+ happiness as the greatest good, if you haven't gathered). Especially if
+ that takes less effort than becoming a 'computer person' which most
+ people don't have time for.
Well for me, satisfying my curiosity makes me happy, to each his own
I suppose. I just can't see 'blissful ignorance' as being a good thing.
Point and counterpoint, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree
on this.
+ > + with Windows, not from the number of people who think Windows is 'the
+ > + best OS ever', as you averred.
+ >
+ > But you put forth the argument that that is all they know, and wish
+ > to know of nothing else. You can't have it both ways.
+
+ I'm not sure what two ways you mean. I will agree that most Windows
+ users think Windows is 'fine', 'OK', and meets their current needs in
+ the way, say, their car does. I disagreed that they think it's the best
+ OS on earth. I just can't imagine a real person saying that.
See above.
+ > + If it were _proven_ to be better, yes. There are other issues involved
+ > + than the technical quality of the OS, such as the availability of
+ > + software and help.
+ >
+ > True, however if you have ever called _any_ major companies support
+ > lines, you know how bad it is..
+
+ Oh yeah. I didn't mean the companies themselves. I was thinking more
+ along the lines of the "Dummies" books, and their neighbor Fred.
+ (Hmmm...not sure that helps my case! :)
Well as for Linux, there is a plethora of documentation out there.
For Windows there is not as much needed, as much of Windows was
designed to be intuitive. However there are still many publications
pertaining to the use and management of Windows. I would have to say
that Mac OS (not so bad) , the BSD's, and BeOS are probably some of the
most underdocumented OSen I have come across. Not their fault, there
are just not the resources.
+ > I do not think individuals are idiots, I think the conglomeration of
+ > them is idiotic. There is a difference, a definite tendency towards
+ > 'mob mentality' in many cases. People, left to their own devices are
+ > on average, quite intelligent. People in a crowd, well that is another
+ > matter.
+
+ I'm not sure what the original statement about 'idiots' really was, or
+ if you even said it. I thought it implied that the average person was
+ indeed an idiot.
Nope, I wasn't the person who said that all people are idiots...
I just pointed out some examples of what the person who stated
that meant. I do however believe that in _most_ cases a person
will behave more intelligently when left to his own devices, rather
than when involved in a crowd. As I siad before, indivuduals on
average are quit intellingent, but it has been my observation
( and I do beleive there are studies which document this, although
I can't point to any specific study now ) that much of that intellegence
is lost in a crowd. I believe the term has been dubbed 'mob mentality'
( not by me ).
Regards,
anm
--
/*-------------------------------------------------------.
| Andrew N. McGuire |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
`-------------------------------------------------------*/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert J Carter)
Subject: Re: democracy?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 19:48:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Andrew N. McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As I siad before, indivuduals on average are quit intellingent,
Actually, no. By definition, individuals are on average NOT quite
intelligent, but of average intelligence.
--
Robert J Carter at Oghma dot on dot ca
Use My initials to reach me via e-mail
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
