Linux-Advocacy Digest #38, Volume #27 Mon, 12 Jun 00 13:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Windows Message Glossary (Nico Coetzee)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box (Secretly Cruel)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Leonardo")
Re: Digestification a la Tholen ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451708.7^-.0375 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (Cihl)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (Peter Wayner)
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence (Peter Wayner)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Coherency (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box (JEDIDIAH)
Re: No need to take sides (JEDIDIAH)
Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story" (Tom)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (2:1)
Boring ("Jorge Cueto")
Re: vote on MS split-up (JEDIDIAH)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:49:37 +0200
From: Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Windows Message Glossary
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============55723323ED2B1EAB5BE74D66
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This was a good one from za.hunour (Original Title: -= PC Message Glossary =-)
--
==============
The following signature was created automatically under Linux:
.
Live within your income, even if you have to borrow to do so.
-- Josh Billings
==============55723323ED2B1EAB5BE74D66
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (-= Zomola =-)
Subject: -= PC Message Glossary =-
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: "i am a free man"
Newsgroups: za.humour,alt.tasteless.jokes,alt.tasteless.humor,aus.jokes
X-Trace:
+4UIu4Ou0PQkqeoje5MKbN7+XbQQ8/TRAir/hHrGSnzpfsBXq6PIxj3vblXvEVX8OAF0imFWdQXh!kF6wBYgm3TMGY5ysAhMUiWuMPxAMMfG2JZ+Nv/V27Ougkif4N+9SVg+dQZeFsQ2yR0fmSQ==
X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:18:23 GMT
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:18:23 GMT
Path:
news1.mweb.co.za!iafrica.com!feeder.is.co.za!infeed.is.co.za!howland.erols.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!paloalto-snr1.gtei.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Xref: news1.mweb.co.za za.humour:23304 alt.tasteless.jokes:350962 aus.jokes:75097
===============================================================
ZOMOLA's FUNNY STUFF -=- http://www.humorplein.nl/allerlei.html
===============================================================
PC MESSAGE GLOSSARY
It says: "Press Any Key"
It means: "Press any key you like but I'm not moving."
It says: "Press A Key"(This one's a programmers joke.)
It means: Nothing happens unless you press the "A" key.
It says: "Fatal Error. Please contact technical support quoting
error no. 1A4-2546512430E"
It means: "... where you will be kept on hold for 30 minutes,
only to be told that it's a hardware problem."
It says: "Installing program to C:\<Directory>...."
It means: "... And I'll also be writing a few files into
c:\windows and c:\windows\system where you'll NEVER
find them."
It says: "Please insert disk 7"
It means: "Because I know darn well there are only 6 disks."
It says: "Not enough memory"
It means: "I don't CARE if you've got 128MB of RAM,
I want to use the bit below 640K."
It says: "Cannot read from drive D:...."
It means: "...however, if you put the CD in right side up..."
It says: "Please Wait...."
It means: "...indefinitely."
It says: "Directory does not exist...."
It means: "....any more. Whoops."
It says: "The application caused an error. Choose Ignore or Close."
It means: "....Makes no difference to me, you're still not getting
your work back."
=====================================================================
Zomola's Website : http://www.humorplein.nl
!! Funstuff: http://www.humorplein.nl/allerlei.html !!
Containing: Funny Pictures, Animated Gifs, Funny MP3's (*),
Funny MPG's, Funny Executables, Joke Box + 1700 Jokes!
=========================================================
-= ZOMOLA's JOKE BOX (C) -=- ZOMOLA's JOKE BOX (C) =-
=========================================================
--
|Fidonet: -= Zomola =- 2:280/1126.33
|Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==============55723323ED2B1EAB5BE74D66==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: 12 Jun 2000 09:13:38 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> The action of "deleting" it --- no time at all (all it does is to mark it
>>> as deleted in memory). Writing it back will take quite some time, but then
>>> again, that's *why* you don't actually have to do that. Every now and
>>> again, I "resynchronize" my mailbox (i.e. make it write it back), usually
>>> just before I go to bed --- so why would I care how long it takes.
>
>I have many not so fond memories of being at a public terminal, needing to
>log out to get to class, but being stuck waiting or ELM to exit because
>it takes so long to write the mailbox back. Unless you only read mail on
>your own computer, the slowness of deleting a message is most definitely
>very relevant.
You do realize that you don't have to store all of your messages
in one folder, don't you? If you are reading new mail and dispose
of it as you go (delete or save to the appropriate archived folder)
you don't have to write the mailbox back at all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Secretly Cruel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:27:39 -0400
On 12 Jun 2000 01:09:14 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
Porter) wrote:
>>You're exactly right. For the average user, Linux is not ready for
>>prime time just yet. I'm pretty new at all this myself, having bought
>>Redhat 5.2 several years ago.
>Really ?
>Considering Redhat was producing 4.2 in 1997, which was only 3 years ago
>I find this a little innacurate.
I purchased 5.2 at Software Etc. in July of 98. Unless the cash
register receipt is wrong. :-)
>> It was cryptic and confusing, and I gave
>>up on it after a while.
>My experience was totally different, in 1997 I installed Redhat4.2 first time
>it ran my soundcard, printer, videocard, everything.
>I was on the net in 20 Minutes, its STILL running here, *right now* as I type
>this.
>
>My 17 year old son, just installed RedHat6.2, today. KDE, etc. He did it all
>himself, including HDD partition with 2 hard disks. He installed it using
>a single boot floppy on his machine, and the RedHat CD in my machine, using
>our in house network.
>
>He's NEVER installed Linux before, and I did not help him in any way, I was too
>busy chatting to a lady on IRC :)
>
>He added WindowMaker to the XDM menu, and selected all the packages himself,
>and it was done in about 4 hrs. Not bad for a first time, and a 17 year old.
To someone who had never even HEARD of Linux or seen it in action, 5.2
was very intimidating. The difference between it and 6.2, which I
currently run, was like night and day.
------------------------------
From: "Leonardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:06:03 +0300
Just turn it around...
There's not a single thing that NT4 does better than W2K!
And you also get the ultimate gaming OS :-)
--L
"Jorge Cueto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:an215.1066$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I'm confused as to who is saying what, but I agree with the person who
> says
> > Windows has improved in performance with each new release. I've run
3.1,
> > 95, 95B, 98, 98SE, and W2K thus far. I can honestly <100%> say that 2K
is
> > better than 98SE is better than 98, is better than 95...... One
exception
> > to this is 3.1 3.1 was faster than everything above. The only problem
is
> > it is 16-bit only and can't do shit but sit there. I have despised MS
for
> > years but now I have some respect for the NT dept. 2000 blew me out of
> the
> > water when I installed it. I have been utterly impressed with it's
> > performance, reliability, and stability over anything I've ever used
> before.
> > I'd appreciate people stop trashing 2000 until they have used it for 3
> > months. 9x is shit and always will be, trash it. But at least give 2K
an
> > honest try before you dump on it. MS has done something right for
once.
> > The damn thing works.
>
> What does 2K have that NT (I use Pro and workstation) not ? Weren't the
> 2K
> goals multimedia, PnP and DirectX ? Well, multimedia is okay, PnP too, but
> DirectX (the most important to home user to be able to play besides doing
> some
> work) sucks ... most cards need manufacturer drivers (uncertified) to work
> at
> full power, and even so, most games can't run (at least in here), so, why
to
> switch
> from NT WK + SP6 to 2K as a workstation ? NT runs even better some things
> like Office.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Digestification a la Tholen
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:40:02 -0400
> For $DEITY's sake, stop `digesting' each other and advocate something
> useful!
Alas, when Tholen started the farcical digestification process lo these many
years ago, many of us ignored them. As time went on, though, we found it
was the only way to talk at him (or past him), since he delared that anyone
who likes to post *should* be digestified.[1] Note how Tholen's alienated
anyone interested in a sincere and mature argument with him, how all he can
do is antagonize people who disagree with him. Maybe you should put
anything with the word "digest" in the subject line in a killfile and be
spared!
Joe
[1] In a current thread, no less, you will find this witless exchange from
Tholen:
***
> I have adapted to your native mode
> for the purposes of my entertainment.
Which qualifies you for digestification.
***
--
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 2451708.7^-.0375
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:40:08 -0400
Today's tholen indigestification. Note how he tries to blame me for his
misunderstanding of what I wrote. He clearly claims that I lie, which is
quite ironic. Yes, he's too embarrassed to admit that he, in fact, did not
reciprocate on my offer. Typical obfuscation, typical lies, typical Tholen.
--
"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: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:10:34 GMT
2:1 wrote:
>
> > It think it would be a good idea to send this message to the NG's the
> > newbies come often, like alt.os.linux. It really is no good in
> > c.o.l.a., only "advocates" for the various systems come here.
>
> This sounds liek advocacy (ish) to me.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
>
> http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
Yeah, it *is* advocacy. But advocacy is best exercised in non-advocacy
environments, if you catch my drift. Nobody is in here but advocates.
------------------------------
From: Peter Wayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:47:32 GMT
Nico Coetzee wrote:
> I don't know if I'm just lucky or what but I have installed about 12
> Linux Workstations the last two weeks. The Package: RedHat 6.2. I had
> *no* hardware problems. Some of the PC's still give trouble under NT -
> especially the Packard Bells (which seems to be designed only with Win9x
> in mind). But even they have no problems.
>
> At home I have the same thing. I don't even bother anymore to check the
> Hardware Specs. The RedHat installer does everything. The only thing
> that takes a while is to pick and choose all the packages you want -
> because there is so many.
>
> So far I can install an average Linux Workstation quicker then a NT
> Workstation (basic OS plus a Office Suite)
>
> The hardware I used was anything from a P166 to PII333 and AMD K6-3.
>
> So... Am I just lucky or what is this about hardware?
>
> O, before I forget - if you want to reply negatively - just keep in mind
> that these are *training* PC's and therefor don't need DVD and all these
> fancy stuff. In fact, I still don't understand why people use
> SoundBlaster Live except if they are in the music industry. I just
> coupled my ESS card to my hi-fi and I think I have pretty good sound.
>
> What is the rest of the groups feeling? Is Linux finally winning with
> hardware?
I had some problem with some network cards that were supposedly
supported. But that was with 6.1. It's still much better than the days
of 5.*.
But it's still dangerous. Many people try to shove Linux on old PCs
that are sitting around. This is a great use for the PCs but it's a bit
of a challenge for the installer program. One journalist complained
about an installation failure recently.
Has anyone been to an install-fest recently?
--
-=-=-=-
Peter Wayner-- Turn to http://wwww.wayner.org/books/ffa/
for info on _Free for All_, a book about the open source/free
software movement. It will be published in July by HarperBusiness.
------------------------------
From: Peter Wayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:49:48 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As most computer professionals know, "open source" software has a
> reputation for being extremely unreliable, buggy, and prone to constant
> failure. Of course, since the source code is available, one need only
> look at it to see how devastatingly bad it is. Sourceforge has a
> service where programmers are allowed to share their work with others.
> One such contribution is the following, which allows an fgets-like
> function to read from a file descriptor:
.snip
>
>
> These, of course, are just code snippets. But one really has to wonder -
> if the Linux community cannot get trivial functions to work properly,
> reliably, and efficiently, how can we possibly expect them to get the
> complex things right? Indeed, Mozilla, which is very possibly the
> slowest computer program ever created, was probably written by a whole
> army of open source zealots who would use 6 expensive function calls
> per character in a large input stream to reverse a file. Linux crashes
> so much because code like the first quoted function is all over the
> kernel. The rest of the apps are prone to constant failure because of
> their own miscellaneous failings. Obviously, as these examples show,
> the community is not to be trusted to produce the best software.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Oh, I'm sure there's garbage in proprietary code too. It's not a
question of whether Open Source programmers make mistakes.
It's a question of whether they, as a group, make less mistakes
than the folks in big, proprietary companies.
--
-=-=-=-
Peter Wayner-- Turn to http://wwww.wayner.org/books/ffa/
for info on _Free for All_, a book about the open source/free
software movement. It will be published in July by HarperBusiness.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:59:06 GMT
On 10 Jun 2000 10:45:06 -0500, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Did I say it *needed that? No, it's just what I have. I think the
>minimum for Server is 128 megs, 64 megs for Win2000 Pro.
>
>It just runs faster (as *any* real OS will) with more memory.
Bullshit. There's a point when no pages are swapped and everything is
resident. Adding more memory won't have the slightest effect.
Unless the OS is such a pig that it needs more than 128MB in use.
Those of us who don't use mickysoft operating systems know of this concept
of having memory left over for APPLICATIONS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
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: 12 Jun 2000 11:04:30 -0500
In article <g%w05.3807$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Daniel Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>> >I've used Window's telnet. It's pretty limited, but it is servicable.
>>
>> No, it's broken. The VT100 emulator breaks (among other things) the "talk"
>> client and the telnet implementation cannot negotiate window size.
>
>Hmm. You mean tcp/ip window size or display window size?
>
>vt100's don't have any way to talk about their display size; it is
>fixed at 80x25. Later DEC terminals do, but vt100s are pretty primitive.
>
>The TCP/IP window should be handled in the TCP/IP stack, not the
>telnet client. Or so I'd expect.
TCP/IP is a connection protocol that delivers a byte stream. The
display window size negotiation is part of the telnet protocol
and most (non-microsoft) versions allow on-the fly resizing
which most unix character-mode screen apps understand. For
example, if you drag a window larger while in a remote vi session,
it will redraw the screen with the new correct number of lines.
It is not in Microsoft's interest to make it easy for you
to use unix systems, and their telnet certainly doesn't.
I suppose that you will continue to draw a different conclusion
from mine about the relationship between those two facts, but
it is not something they could just accidentally have overlooked.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Coherency
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:09:44 GMT
On 12 Jun 2000 06:34:47 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Fri, 02 Jun 2000 08:20:16 GMT, Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Have nothing to say against GNU/Linux, just liked to improve it if
>>>possible. What would you think about a kind of standarization about
>>>for example places and formats for icons, for pixmaps, and the so used
>>
>> There's no need for a standard. Just set a path. As far as there
>> being no 'standard' icon format, I think this is a GOOD THING.
>
>Of coarse. Why shoud KDE be abal to read GNOME's icons?
How did it get into your head that KDE couldn't? It seems that
you're just blindly applying the absurd practices to Windows to
Unix.
>
>> You don't need to be restricted to a corporate standard and various
>> image formats have all the needed information supported.
>>
...which is why the notion of a Unix *ico format is assinine.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:12:17 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:40:04 +0200, Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>
>The hardware I used was anything from a P166 to PII333 and AMD K6-3.
>
>So... Am I just lucky or what is this about hardware?
>
>O, before I forget - if you want to reply negatively - just keep in mind
>that these are *training* PC's and therefor don't need DVD and all these
>fancy stuff. In fact, I still don't understand why people use
>SoundBlaster Live except if they are in the music industry. I just
>coupled my ESS card to my hi-fi and I think I have pretty good sound.
...a SB16 is certainly sufficient to expose the distortions
in an mp3 encoded at 128K (vs. 192K) despite some claiming
that you need more "expensive" hardware to detect such
"subtle differences in sound quality".
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:14:24 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:27:39 -0400, Secretly Cruel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 12 Jun 2000 01:09:14 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>Porter) wrote:
[deletia]
>>He's NEVER installed Linux before, and I did not help him in any way, I was too
>>busy chatting to a lady on IRC :)
>>
>>He added WindowMaker to the XDM menu, and selected all the packages himself,
>>and it was done in about 4 hrs. Not bad for a first time, and a 17 year old.
>
>To someone who had never even HEARD of Linux or seen it in action, 5.2
>was very intimidating. The difference between it and 6.2, which I
>currently run, was like night and day.
..."night and day" in this instance being EYE CANDY.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: No need to take sides
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:18:08 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 03:11:28 GMT, Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>: On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 20:13:26 +0100, Robert Moir
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: >
>: >"Matt Templeton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>: >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>: >> Matt Chiglinsky wrote:
>: >>
>: >> > It's only a computer.
>: >> >
>: >> > That's all I have to say.
>: >>
>: >> You're right, it is only a computer. But I want _MY_ computer to do
>what
>: >> _I_ want the way _I_ want it to. I can do this with Linux but NOT with
>: >> MS software,.
>: >
>: >Then go ahead and do it, and stop missing his point...
>:
>: His point is inane.
>:
>: We are forced on a daily basis to content with a vast array
>: of product either as an element of our work or as an element
>: of our recreation. Being forced to use SHIT that we would not
>: otherwise put up with is actually quite relevant to one's
>: life.
>
>Forced might be a little too strong of a word. Man in black theory again?
One does not require a "conspiracy" for this situation. Simple
market dynamics and the requirement to either "bend over and say
ahh" or just "do without" is sufficient enough to consitute
"forced".
Use the Robber Baron's product or "become Amish" is no choice at all.
>
>:
>: Sometimes, it can even be quite relevant to your safety either
>: physically or merely your livelihood and standard of living.
>
>How so?
You really can't be that dull.
[deletia]
I certainly hope that no one lets you around a system of any
consequence.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story"
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:10:44 GMT
In article <8hj7jg$2av8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote:
> Keep in mind that you don't have to do it all yourself, nor
> does it have to be in C. A quick search for gimp plugins
> finds this page with dozens of other links:
>
> http://www.nuclecu.unam.mx/~federico/gimp/links.html
That's good and impressive, and I will have to download all these
plugins and try them out.
But I'm trying to find a good "natural media" tool like Painter but for
Linux. That would make my day... :-)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:20:33 +0100
>
> Yeah, it *is* advocacy. But advocacy is best exercised in non-advocacy
> environments, if you catch my drift. Nobody is in here but advocates...
... trolls and flamers.
-Ed
--
The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
------------------------------
From: "Jorge Cueto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Boring
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:22:50 GMT
This newsgroup is starting to be bored ... I guess GNU/Linux has finally
won and Windows advocates can't just debate anymore :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: vote on MS split-up
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:25:52 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 07:38:07 -0400, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>David Steuber wrote:
>>
>> Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> ' History and Microsft have proven the market cannot kill M$, even when
>> ' the market is more innovative.
>>
>> "Yeah? Well history is about to change."
>> Marty McFly, "Back To The Future" 1985
>>
>> Linux is within a couple years of being a major threat to Microsoft
>> where it hurts the most: on the desktop.
>>
>> Look at KDE2. It is coming along very nicely.
>>
>> Look at Gnome. They have a mission of being better than KDE.
>>
>> KDE has the mission of being the BEST desktop, period. Two free
>> desktop environments of high quality competing on merit. Best of all,
>> you can use either of them or some other desktop and window manager
>> and still run your favorite Linux applications. Not only that, they
>> compile and run on *BSD.
>>
>> The compiler is getting better. Friendlier development tools are
>> getting better. Office type software ( KOffice, StarOffice,
>> AplixWare) is getting better.
>>
>> The application barrier to entry is ready to fall. The hardware
>> barrier will be next.
>>
>> Sure, Microsoft will be around for a long, long time. But their star
>> is already fading. See how many DSL providers support Windows 2000.
>> Java is not dead yet and shows signs of rising back up.
>>
>> I've heard that Apple is basing its next major OS on BSD. Why they
>> didn't go with NextStep is beyond me. But my guess is that Apple will
>> be able to finance a real OS from their iMac sales. It will be a Un*x
>> under the skin. That skin will look like MacOS in terms of look and
>> feel. Probably with some enhancements. If Apple does the smart thing
>> and supports GCC and contributes to it so that free software can be
>> compiled and run on the Mac, then Apple will start to thrive again.
>>
>> In five years, Microsoft won't be the company they were five years
>> ago. I don't know where Apple will be. They actually have to produce
>> their new OS.
>>
>
>All of this progress is possible at the moment because M$ has stopped a
None of that is in Microsoft's control. What is relevant to
Microsoft's sphere of influence is applications availability
and 3rd party hardware support as well as OEM bundling of
alternate OSes.
>lot of it's backroom bullying.... and only becasue of the harsh and
>intense spotlight it finds itself in. If there were no government
>action... things would a lot differnet today.
Microsoft has no ability to prevent a "better desktop" from
being developed. What they can sabotage is it's adoption.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
