Linux-Advocacy Digest #817, Volume #26 Thu, 1 Jun 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story" ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation ("Colin R.
Day")
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (Marty)
Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com (Marty)
Re: New User here, and I think Linux Stinks! (Angus Cameron)
Re: Bob's Law (Marty)
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691 (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:29:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Marc Schlensog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:31:03 +0200 <8h5m3q$90c$12$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> It's amazing how twisted the folks around here are. Linux is a stone
>> age system that quite frankly the public at large, at least in the
>> USA, has ignored and continues to ignore.
>Well, image, there is a civilization, that first appeared sometime in the
>stone age. It developed, grew stronger, got harder and tougher and
>more skilled as the time went by.
>On the other hand, you have a civilization, that appeared first a couple of
>thousand of years after the first one, that was trying to be sleek and swell
>and very popular. When they got to a certain point, they realized that they
>couldnīt develop any further. So they sorted out some people and
>sought for guys from other tribes, captured them put them in chains and
>created a whole new civ. With all the lacks and faults as the first one,
>except maybe, that it looks nicer and is more popular (but dumb as shit).
>What is the civilization, you would prefer?
>
>>
>> Think about it. Person goes into CompUSA with $100 and is confronted
>> with Windows for $89.00 and Linux for $29.00 or better yet for free.
>> Yet they go for Windows every time based on market share.
>>
>> They can't even GIVE LINUX AWAY!!!!
>
>There are several things, that count for an OS:
>The OS has to be secure
NT has some loopholes here. It's not clear, to me at least, how
dangerous those loopholes are (the oft-mentioned Melissa et al crop
of virii aren't of much account to a server, although stupid clients
(i.e., anyone thinking they'd got a Love Letter(tm) :-) ) might choke
Exchange).
>The OS has to have lots of applications
NT wins hands down here, although there is a lot to be said for
free Unix source code, especially for developers such as myself. :-)
>The OS has to be fast
NT is a bit of a pig.
>The OS has to have lots of applications
>The OS has to be robust
NT has some loopholes here. Win2k promises to be better.
>The OS has to have lots of applications
>The OS has to be secure
I think you said that one already.
>The OS has to have lots of applications
>The OS has to have lots of applications
>The OS has to have lots of applications
>
>>
>> Linux is for lusers. It best serves folks who like to fiddle and fuss
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Prove, please. Why is anyone, who uses Linux, run his apps,
> gets along just fine without troubleshooting (when it runs, it runs)
> a "luser", compared to those very "1337"-Windows(TM) users,
> who bitch about a crashing OS at least once a month (most of the
> time even more)?
I will note that a Linux RedHat 6.2 installation went more or less
flawlessly (the problems I did have were mostly because I don't
do installs for a living :-) ), and I now have a node at my right elbow
sitting happily running Linux, although the console text display isn't
horribly good for some reason. (But X works very well; turns out
so does Samba; NT can't tell the diff! :-) )
> Can you dipshit tell me this one? Can you just one fucking reason?
>> with their computers.
>> I stopped that routine 10 years ago.
>Yeah, you rely on a bunch of some incompetent, untrained "programmers",
>as almost everybody running Windows. We have seen the results a couple
>of days ago (still remember I-LOVE-YOU.TXT.vbs ???).
It's sad that this actually fooled people.... :-/
>>
>>
>> When the Linux zealots start listening to what REAL people want(hint
>> compilers and editor wars need not apply) maybe, just maybe they will
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Well, yes, for the regular user, they are pretty useless.
>> gain market share, until then forget it
>What is it, people want? An office suite? K-Office, Applixware, SOffice
>(yuck)
Well, that's why there's competition. :-)
>Games? Quake, Unreal, Civilization, <a hell lot more and even more to come>
>
>[Snippage]
>
>
>You dumbass should really start up your brain.
>(Or is there any sensible reason, why everybody should buy a Ford, just
>because Ford built the Model T? You can drive a Ford, or a Mercedes
>(when you are some sort of traditionalist) or any other brand, that fits
>your needs. Why doesnīt this apply in computer-biz?)
Why indeed?
I've heard good things about Linux, FreeBSD, and SGI hardware (IRIX,
on the other hand... :-) ); Solaris is robust and highly scalable;
HP-UX is getting better (8.x sucked, 9.x was OK, 10.x is definitely
an improvement); even good old Xenix wasn't horrible, just quirky.
And then there's NT. Admittedly, there are a lot of apps for NT.
But that's about it...
>
>
>Marc
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story"
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:32:55 GMT
On 1 Jun 2000 23:58:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>The Linux Story
>>===============
>>
>>The level of inconsistancy and mess we have with Linux today is incredible.
>
>So is the amount of griping you've been doing. But don't
>get insulted and stop reading -- I have some positive
>suggestions!
>
>>The command line
>>----------------
>>
>>This is where the geeks have had a field day. Most shells are
>>incomprehensible. Commands like 'ls', or 'cat', 'more' or 'less'. They make
>>sense once they've been described to you, but otherwise you're sunk.
>
>Note that names of Microsoft Windows programs like Excel,
>Powerpoint, Outlook, Quicken, etc., make even less sense.
>They aren't even abbreviations or terse descriptions.
Walk up to 100 people on Wall Street in NYC and say "Excel" what it
is? and see what they say.
Walk up to 100 people on Wall Street in NYC and say "cat, ls, more,
less" What are they? and see what they say.
>>I've never liked the UNIX command line, but then I'm a Digital DCL fan.
>
>Write a script that puts on the screen a nice help chart with
>lines like "change directory -- cd". Name it "help", so if
>people type "help" it will come up.
Sounds like Windows/DOS to me.
Dir /help tells you what dir is.
>Also, you can set up a bunch of shell aliases (presumably
>you know about those) that assign to programs names that
>you think describe them better. (Don't rename the actual
>programs -- that will screw up a lot of things.)
So they march to a different drummer than everyone else? Nope
standards are necessary. I type command.com on any Windows system and
it starts the shell. I install StarOffice under Linux and how do I
start it? Seems to be a FAQ in the setup groups. Pathetic if you ask
me.
>>Help
>>----
>>
>>Help is divided into many parts. There is the UNIX man style pages, the
>>old way of documenting commands with a page based text formatter. There are
>>no hyperlinks, and you have to know what command to look for.
>>
>>man -k is helpful but you still have to guess.
>>
>>The man pages have been converted to HTML format but still no hyperlinks.
>>
>>GUI help is variable at best. Samba displays one long text window with no
>>hyperlinks at all. Other apps do different things.
>>
>>There are also documents written in HTML and other scripts for the user to
>>read. There are so many of them it's difficult to know which are the
>>relevant ones to read.
>
>So, improve these help documents yourself! This does not
>require a rocket scientist, nor even a programmer. The simple
>HTML you're talking about can be written with a plain text
>editor (preferably using a couple of macros to insert the
>tag skeletons), or I'm sure there are plenty of HTML editors
>you can use. One of the main things the man pages need is
>lots more *examples*.
Why bother? Windows already has a linked help system that blows Linux
out of the water. That's the primary reason why there is so little
Windows documentation in print. You don't need it.
>>The GUI hotpotch
>>----------------
>>
>>Looking at KDE and the main menu, I see a load of applications. Some are X,
>>some are Gnome and some are KDE. Some are like nothing you've ever seen.
>>There names are the same as their command. Who the hell knows what 'kdesu'
>>really means? [Before you answer that, yes I know what it means, but is it
>>that obvious?] It's the same geeky style as applied to the shell prompt.
>>Rather than putting in English words describing what each command does,
>>you're left with names like 'Lothar' or 'Kppp'. If you're in the know, kppp
>>is network with a modem. Why not call it 'Network with a modem...'?
>
>I'll bet it's easy to make those menus much more descriptive,
>just by editing some ASCII text files. Do it!
Why isn't it correctly done as default? Seems pretty simple to me, yet
every single distribution I have ever used has put dead links in the
kde menues.
>>Overall
>>-------
>>
>>The whole look and feel of Linux is one of a mess. A whole bunch of things
>>thrown together without thought of consideration. Lots of interesting
>>ideas, but little consistancy.
>
>Ever hear what "the hobgoblin of small minds" is? 8^)
Ever hear about what a properly installed and well executed Operating
system can do?
Hint, it's not Linux.
>Look, you can fix everything you've objected to, with only
>the skills you already possess, and some hard work (which
>anyone else would have to do if *they* wanted to fix it).
Why should one have to work at it? This is proof of the fallacy of
Open Sores and free software. You pay with your time.
>Since these problems annoy you, *you* should fix them.
>Don't gripe, contribute -- that's the GNU/Linux/OSS way!
These gripes are FAQ, and you can check the Linux groups for proof.
They have not been fixed in 3 years and won't ever get fixed at the
current speed.
>When you've done it, try your set of fixes out on a few
>people. If they like it (and after you've done implementing
>the useful improvements they suggested that you hadn't
>thought of) then submit it to the public. Put it on a
>website and announce it here and in c.o.l.announce. If more
>people like it, then submit it to the Linux Documentation
>Project (and prepare to make more improvements that they
>and others suggest).
LDP is so into themselves that they can't see the forest for the
trees. If it were not so, these complains would have been fixed years
ago...Sorry..
>Do it (right) and be a hero to newbies!
This point is true, but again how much money is Pete's time worth?
Mine goes for $250/hour and I am certain there are others much higher.
>My own personal suggestion is to keep the traditional
>program names in the menus, help files, etc., since most
>users already know them, and they're used in scripts, etc.
>Just add descriptions, and aliases (which people can use
>or not, as they choose). And fix the help files; don't
>say you can't -- you wrote a very well organized article
>here! You're elected!
Good conclusion and I agree with you, but again I say why? When he can
get everything he wants and far more running another operating system?
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 20:43:37 -0400
ZnU wrote:
> In article <8h4anc$n3p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Who? What other operating systems could they had chosen from?
>
> It has been discussed extensively in this thread. IBM even could have
> written its own OS. Surely you don't think that was beyond its ability?
>
The problems were more legal than technical, as IBM was still worried about
the DOJ.
>
> --
> The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
> -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
>
> ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:47:10 GMT
EdWIN wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >EdWIN wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > EdWIN wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty
> >> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > >EdWIN wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> In article <1eb72ui.nmobhfvfxrinN%Fam.Traeger@t-
> online.de>,
> >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?
> =)
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >> >Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >> Edwin wrote:
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> >> > > >> >> > news:8gcd95$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.
> >> >
> >> > Typical pontification.
> >>
> >> Incorrect.
> >
> >Taking pontification lessons from Mike "Bullshit" Timbol?
>
> [Did Tholen ever use that one?
Don't you know?
> If not, you take a two point penalty for violation of the Tholenistic
> Rules of Engagement.]
You are erroneously presupposing that Tholen hasn't used that one. Witness
the Java 1.2 thread of 7 or 8 months ago in COOA. Search for "bullshit" in
articles written by Dave Tholen. You're sure to find some (whether or not you
enter "bullshit" as part of the search criteria).
> Tholen mode resumed:
Too bad "logic mode" was not "resumed". Of course, it would have had to been
initiated to begin with for this to transpire.
> Don't you know?
Irrelevant.
> >> > Taking pontification lessons from Eric "Incorrect"
> >> > Bennett?
> >>
> >> How ironic coming from Marty "Master of Pontification."
> >
> >Having attribution problems, Ho You?
>
> On what basis do you make this claim?
See above.
> >> > > >coming from the person who recently wrote:
> >> > > >"Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood."
> >> > >
> >> > > Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty
> >> >
> >> > Obviously not.
> >>
> >> Evidence, please.
> >
> >Obviously not.
>
> Incorrect.
See what I mean?
> >> > > (little boy)?
> >> >
> >> > Typical invective, the usual resort of one who lacks a
> >> > logical argument.
> >>
> >> Prove it, if you think you can.
> >
> >Self-evident.
>
> Typical pontification.
How ironic.
> No surprise there.
Your illogic is quite predictable.
> >> > > How typical.
> >> >
> >> > How ironic.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> >Simple: because your pronunciation of how typical my statement
> >was is quite typical on your part.
>
> Posting for entertainment purposes again?
Not at all, Edwin.
> How typical.
Not at all, Edwin.
> >> > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's
> >> > > Discussion Network *
> >> >
> >> > Yet another example of your pontification.
> >>
> >> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim.
> >
> >How ironic, coming from the person who just foisted yet another
> >pontification.
> >
> Classic invective,
Where?
> laced with irony.
Incorrect.
> Are you taking pontification lessons from Eric "Master of Pontification"
> Bennett again?
Don't you know? It's your pontification lessons from Eric "Master of
Pontification" Bennett again.
> How typical.
See what I mean?
> >> > > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in
> >> > > Usenet - Free!
> >> >
> >> > Where is your evidence? Why, nowhere to be seen!
> >>
> >> Open your eyes, Marty.
> >
> >Unnecessary.
>
> Ironic.
Balderdash.
> >> Are you taking inappropriate posting lessons from Eric "Olga
> >> and Horatio" Bennett again?
> >
> >Non sequitur.
>
> Incorrect.
Evidence, please.
> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
See above and below.
> Why, nowhere to be seen!
Liar. I see you have failed to see above and below. No surprise there.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:48:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 1 Jun 2000 13:21:44 GMT <8h5o18$16v9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8h42tu$22o8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>> And stop lying.
>
>
>> another lie?
>> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2560521,00.html
>
>> a year late, I'll bet W2K DataCenter is released before the official 2.4
>> release...
>
>The difference being, 2.4 will be done.
That's actually very debatable, although not in a bad way. :-)
Consider that 1.2 ended up at 13, if memory serves;
2.0 went all the way to 38 (37?),
and 2.2 is currently sitting at 15.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, although I for one would like
a slightly more elegant method of copying option settings from
'make menuconfig' or 'make xconfig' from one kernel tree to another.
(Most likely this is because I use /usr/src/linux as a symlink, as
opposed to merely overwriting what was there previously with a new
kernel version.) Granted, 'cp /usr/src/linux-2.2.x/.config /usr/src/linux'
followed by a 'make menuconfig' isn't too bad.
One obvious advantage with this "lack of doneness" is that, if a
serious bug does creep into 2.4.0, 2.4.1 will more likely than
not take care of it and everyone merely upgrades. :-)
(For those that don't like to build kernels, prebuilts don't take
that long to appear, either.)
And then there are the adventurous souls who will use 2.5.x.... :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:51:04 GMT
Marty wrote:
>
> rj friedman wrote:
> >
> > Someone has the effrontery to oppose you? Well, you'll show him,
> > won't you. Let's start off by playing the character assassination
> > card.
>
> How deliciously ironic. Have you read any of your own postings lately?
Well I can see I've proven my point. Thanks for the help.
rj friedman wrote:
>
> RATTY ... RAT ... RAT ... RAT ... blah ... RAT ... copy cat ... blah
------------------------------
From: Angus Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New User here, and I think Linux Stinks!
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 01:00:50 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (aka Steve, keyman, etc.) wrote:
>
> I tried Linux last week and I find it is poor substitute for Windows. First
> problem is it looks like crap.
> I have Matrox G-400 card with 32 meg and still
> fonts look boxy and fuzzy.
Hello Steve, still having that boxy font problem, eh? Why don't you
just stick with
your windows and leave us alone. I'd also suggest some therapy to help
you with your
multiple personality disfunction.
>
> Second problem is scanner no work.I try sane. I go IN-Sane reading
> documentation.
>
> I never read Windows documentation, why I need Linux doc?
>
> I have sound blaster live card, popular card I think? no?
>
> I no can find any features like environmental audio in driver. I can't use my
> digital out to connect to my minidisc player like I can with windows.
>
> I try Wordperfect which came with Linux CD. This program looks like shit and is
> so slow it is pathetic.
>
> In fact Linux itself is slow. file manager with kde is very slow. Gnome is no
> better, that is when I can keep gnome from crashing.
>
> Sorry people, but Linux is a no show. It just scuks and there is no other way of
> explaining it.
>
> I show my friends Linux and they say it sucks too.
> We all can't be wrong. To those of you thinking of trying Linux, don't, it
> sucks real bad.
>
> Please excuse my english..
No.
> Ishmeal
Whatever.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bob's Law
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:36:34 GMT
EdWIN wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bob Lyday wrote:
> >>
> >> EdWIN wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >> > > >>>>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
> >>
> >> Bob's Law invoked. Tholen mentioned. Thread is now
> officially dead.
> >
> >This thread is much like OS/2.
>
> Typical pontification.
More evidence of your reading comprehension problems. My explanation followed
that statement, hence it was not a pontification.
> >Declared as officially
>
> Illogical.
On what basis do you make this ridiculous claim?
> >dead by so many,
>
> How many is many?
Haven't you been paying attention? So many.
> >yet it keeps on going. :-)
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Witness your response and my further response to your response.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[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: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:37:28 GMT
Bob Hoye wrote [to Marty]:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Bob Hoye wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3dLY4.17449$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bob Hoye writes:
> > > >
> > > > >> Bob Hoye writes [to Eric Bennett]:
> > > >
> > > > >>> Don't you know? How ironic coming from the most prodigious Tholen
> > > > >>> emulator.
> > > >
> > > > >> What makes you think that Eric Bennett is emulating me at all?
> > > >
> > > > > Posting for entertainment purposes again, Tholen?
> > > >
> > > > Obviously not, Bob.
> > >
> > > Common sense makes a cameo appearance.
> >
> > Obviously not, Bob.
>
> Obviously.
Glad you agree.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
