Linux-Advocacy Digest #44, Volume #27 Mon, 12 Jun 00 21:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (mlw)
Re: Linux & Winmodem (John & Susie)
Re: SVGALib (Gary Hallock)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Marty)
Re: Linux & Winmodem (JEDIDIAH)
Re: SVGALib (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux & Winmodem (JEDIDIAH)
Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation (l)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Arthur)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Dave)
Re: Linux & Winmodem (John & Susie)
Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Arthur)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (tholenbot)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (tholenbot)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (tholenbot)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Bob Hauck)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Ross Marchant")
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (TholenBotPro)
Re: Linux & Winmodem (Secretly Cruel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:13:26 -0400
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Installation is not usability
or reliability.
Yes a user may find installing these particular devices easier, but the
fact that the OS hangs all the time, has to be rebooted constantly. The
first words out of the mouth of the help desk is to reboot.
Usability and reliability are far more important. For every example of
"easy" you can present, I can post examples of where installations screw
up the box and programs previously functioning correctly cease to do so.
If the only thing you can point out are installation issues, that's
great! 99% of users do not add devices to their computer and simply use
it as delivered or bring it back to the store to have the upgrade added.
When you can speak about a "usability" issue of a working system, I'd
like to hear it.
Tiberious wrote:
>
> Subject:
> Installing a printer, scanner and Fax program on a Win98SE
> system.
>
> Specifics: Canon FB630P scanner. Parallel port version.
> Canon BJC 4400 Printer.
> Software including Winfax and what ever came with the
> scanner and printer.
>
> Install printer with CDROM supplied. Nice CanoCraft programs and
> Greeting Card Designer included. Add's all kinds of menu options to the
> standard print menu so that resolution, paper size, diagnostics and so
> forth are easily accessible to the user.
>
> Install scanner, including Adobe Photoshop (Home version, almost the
> same as pro version) and Canocraft software plus a large selection of
> other software.
>
> Install Winfax. Surprise, surprise, it recognizes the printer and
> scanner and adds a fax option to all menus.
>
> Super easy.
>
> Try out all options and there are wizards to guide the user through all
> the operations of scanning/printing and faxing and most importantly ALL
> FUNCTIONS WORK TOGETHER, meaning you don't have to scan a printed
> document in order to fax it. You can just do it from the scanner menu.
>
> Linux on the other hand?
>
> 1. Doesn't support the scanner.
> 2. Barely supports the printer.
> 3.Gimp vs Adobe? Need I say more?
> 4. You are on your own trying to figure out how to make things work.
> Assuming of course you CAN make things work.
> Integration between programs like in the Windows world? You'll be
> lucky if the programs put an icon in the menus let alone work together.
>
> This person walked into Staples, presented a problem and walked away
> with a solution for $225.00 that was a breeze to install and worked from
> the getgo.
>
> Switch from Windows to Linux? Why?
>
> Why should someone take a step back in time to a half supported system?
>
> What advantage does the person above gain running Linux?
>
> I have yet to se a valid reason to do so except for cost, and running a
> desktop system kills that reason.
>
> Sorry but Linux loses again.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Have you noticed the way people's intelligence capabilities decline
sharply the minute they start waving guns around?
------------------------------
From: John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:14:52 -0400
Is this the best you can do, eradicate the evidence and ignore the rest?
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:41:03 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I used to read your postings with a 'this guy knows what he's doing'
> >attitude, of late I'm not so sure? What are you trying to say?
>
> Would you ever go into a car dealership giving the salesmen
> the impression that you have no clue about cars or negotiation?
>
> [deletia]
>
> --
>
> |||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:19:58 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SVGALib
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Another example of Linux lacking. You have to insert code in order to
> take a screen dump...Pitiful this Linux is...Pitiful indeed...
>
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:53:24 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
You are confused. The question was about SVGAlib. As usual, you don't
have a clue. For X, just click on:
K->Graphics->Snapshot
Gary
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:21:51 GMT
Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > See tinman, Tholen knows how your handle name should be presented
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > than you do. You really wanted to be known as Tinman, not tinman.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jumping into discussions again, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > Don't you know?
> > >
> > > Irrelevant.
> >
> > On the contrary, it's quite relevant to tinman's
>
> "tinman".
TholenBotPro.
> How rich!
Not at all, Chris.
> > entertainment.
>
> Entertainment is irrelevant.
Liar. Why else would you persist in posting for entertainment purposes if it
were not relevant?
> What you can prove is relevant.
I have proven your hypocrisy. Glad you agree that it is relevant.
> > > Meanwhile, you have predictably failed to answer the question.
> >
> > Incorrect. Meanwhile you have failed to locate my answer to your question.
> > How typical.
>
> I see that lacking a logical response, you're resorting to Bennett-esque
> illogical redirection arguments.
You are erroneously presupposing that I lack a logical response.
> How predictable.
How predictable that you would make another erroneous presupposition.
> > > > > > Can't argue with "logic" like that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > See what I mean?
> > >
> > > Non sequitur.
> >
> > See what I mean?
>
> No.
Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
> > > > > > You believe the ego of this guy?
> > > > >
> > > > > What you believe is irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > > Non sequitur, as I have made no mention about what I believe.
> > >
> > > Irrelevant.
> >
> > Glad you agree.
>
> Illogical.
See what I mean?
> > > > > What you can prove is relevant.
> > > >
> > > > Prove it, if you think you can.
> > >
> > > How ironic.
> >
> > See what I mean?
>
> Taking another stroll down Irrelevancy Lane, Marty?
You are erroneously presupposing a previous stroll down Irrelevancy Lane on my
part, when it was you, in fact, who had done said strolling. How ironic!
> --
> "You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
> -- Dave Tholen
Still having reading comprehension problems? I've already addressed this
issue.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:22:33 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:04:57 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Uhm... cars and computers, quite a price difference. Again - what is
>your point?
...not really. Both are rather complex and expensive bits of
technology where the ignorant buyer is quite likely to be
victimized by dishonest sales personel quite eager to take
advantage of that ignorance.
There are entire tomes and organizations dedicated to giving
the consumer more information about product than they might
have the time or ability to gather for themselves.
Ignorant purchasing also encourages the perpetuation of junk
in the marketplace that should rightfully be killed by the
"invisible hand" and would be if consumers weren't abdicating
their role as such.
>
>Please enlighten this poor stupid soul.
>
>
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:41:03 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >I used to read your postings with a 'this guy knows what he's doing'
>> >attitude, of late I'm not so sure? What are you trying to say?
>>
>> Would you ever go into a car dealership giving the salesmen
>> the impression that you have no clue about cars or negotiation?
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> --
>>
>> |||
>> / | \
>>
>> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:23:41 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SVGALib
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jun 2000 23:13:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 07 Jun 2000 23:08:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >>Do you ever speak english?
> >>
> >>The guy asked to do a screen dump?
> >
> > ...while using an app coded in some lowlevel console based
> > graphics rendering library, outside of X or any similar
> > enviroment.
>
> Explain this to me?
>
> If something is on the screen, why can it not be dumped?
>
> >>
> >>Some other guy suggested *.c code be inserted to perform it?
> >>
> >>What is so difficult here?
> >
> > You have no understanding of what's being discussed.
>
> I have to admit, maybe I don't.
>
> Explain this to me, I am always willing to learn.
>
> My perspective is:
>
> 1.He wants to do screen dump.
> 2. Code patched in is suggested.
> 3. Why do we need to patch anything?
>
> Translate for me please.
>
Boot up in DOS mode (not a DOS window). Now how do you take a screen dump?
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:25:02 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:14:52 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You have a very simplistic understanding of the situtation.
>Is this the best you can do, eradicate the evidence and ignore the rest?
>
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:41:03 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >I used to read your postings with a 'this guy knows what he's doing'
>> >attitude, of late I'm not so sure? What are you trying to say?
>>
>> Would you ever go into a car dealership giving the salesmen
>> the impression that you have no clue about cars or negotiation?
This is the crux of the matter free of excessive rambling
or any related tangents.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: l <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:36:40 -0500
Piers Bray wrote:
>
> Ahhh, good old Lilo (-:
> Failing that boot from a floppy into Dos and use "sys mbr" to
> repair the Master Boot Record to DOS specific then try the
> above step.
>> How do I remove LILO and replace with Bootman?
Piers, I think you meant "fdisk /mbr" to repair the boot
sector.
Lee
bullwinkle-at-zebra.net
--
21 Seti w/u, currently 34th in group BEOS
------------------------------
From: Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:25:06 -0700
Craig Kelley wrote:
> Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
> > > What I actually meant was _writing_ the mailbox file. If you are using
> > > Pine or ELM (the two standard Unix mailers), and you delete a message from
> > > a large mailbox, the system has to rewrite the whole mailbox to cover
> > > this, since Unix does not support indexed files. This is dog slow.
> > You are so full of it.. I just opened my bugtraq folder again using pine
> > on my U2. It had 1916msgs (10676115 byte file size).. deleted a message
> > and expunged it. The open process took a whole 2 seconds, and the
> > deletion took a whole 3 seconds!
> Terry is correct; the mbox format is horrible. It not only requires
> the agent to re-write the entire file, it uses a single lock for the
> whole file and uses
> From
> as a delimiter between messages.
mbox does have problems - the message file can occasionally become
corrupted, which thoroughly screws up mutt, elm or pine. It's easy
to fix with a text editor, but the locking/concurrency issues can
cause you to lose all the mail in the file if you're not careful.
OTOH, a lot of the world gets by with mbox format, and the load,
save, and delete times are in the range of a few seconds on a
decent system.
I've only looked at a few Windows mail clients, but they all use
either mbox or a similar single large file to hold messages, and
from what I've heard are all susceptible to the same problems.
The ones that use a text based format (Pegasus, Eudora) can be
fixed easily with a text editor and re-indexed. With the ones
that use a proprietary format (guess who) you're SOL from what
I've heard.
> Terry is incorrect, of course, in his assertion that UNIX doesn't
> support indexed files (records). There are several libraries which do
> this, that are source-compatible.
Yep.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: 12 Jun 2000 18:48:05 -0500
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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.
Sure it will. It can cache more data in memory. Database applications
come to mind here.
>
> 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
Yes, applications. The more memory you have the more applications you
can run (or load up larger data files) without swapping. Hence, the
more memory you have the faster it runs.
You were saying?
Dave
------------------------------
From: John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:52:58 -0400
Duck and cover, you are very good at this, perhaps I misjudged you!
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:14:52 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You have a very simplistic understanding of the situtation.
>
> >Is this the best you can do, eradicate the evidence and ignore the rest?
> >
> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:41:03 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >I used to read your postings with a 'this guy knows what he's doing'
> >> >attitude, of late I'm not so sure? What are you trying to say?
> >>
> >> Would you ever go into a car dealership giving the salesmen
> >> the impression that you have no clue about cars or negotiation?
>
> This is the crux of the matter free of excessive rambling
> or any related tangents.
>
> [deletia]
>
> --
>
> |||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:20:14 -0400
Jim Richardson wrote:
> >
> >First of all, English is not my native language. What does "anty up"
> >mean? I couldn't find it in Webster or Wordnet...
>
> Well, he misspelled it. Ante up is the phrase, and it is from poker,
> where an "Ante" is the money put in to be in the game in the first
> place. Don't know the etymology further than that. Ante up means basically
> "pay up", "put up or shut up", etc.
>
The word "ante" means "before" in Latin.
>
> --
> Jim Richardson
> Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
> WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
> Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:46:58 -0700
Craig Kelley wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> > >[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.
> Not that you had much control over the system you were using
> (probably), but Qmail does not use the awful mbox format; opting
> instead for a much more intelligent, indexed format.
Unfortunately if you want to use qmail all the way through,
you're limited in your choice of mail clients, as only a few
support Maildir format. We use qmail on the front end on the
mail server and access the mail server via POP from the
workstations or NFS from the DB server which automatically
reads and parses a portion of the mail.
qmail works great with procmail, and the combination gives
you easy access (via Perl, Python, etc.) for archiving
incoming and outgoing mail, sorting mail, filtering spam,
etc. qmail also has an outstanding reputation in regard
to security.
We've been running the same basic setup unchanged (except
for changing mail readers) for over two years at 25,000+
incoming messages per month and have never had a problem
and have never reconfigured since the original install.
Arthur
.
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:51:32 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> X-Face: &'`TcHchf{Dv=[je~bQVYl/3/UyvgwH.r{Vp"kPk_yV^%KhO3ZAfB,^[o@-d,
> i<87P$$Vh/Y8zPCSSunqSrl{%__y3k/g4/r2/VEUUlRbpn]`a6-3-3P9vSW=`A*]T^Oz
> uAe!\b#:+G,;/!^*a`/E'4i-0@#nV9#sW\BjGv#dq'ad0=W;kFd6uX',
Typical invective. I wonder how the Borg would react to this
information.
--
Prove that you're not a robot without emotions, if you think you can. On
what basis do you claim that you're not what I see?
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:52:46 -0400
In article <on%05.33437$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Which qualifies you for digestification.
Taking lessons from Joe "Master of Nonexistent Words" Malloy again,
Dave? How predictable.
--
Prove that you're not a robot without emotions, if you think you can. On
what basis do you claim that you're not what I see?
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:53:44 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> tholenbot
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ask Chris Pott, it's his balderdash garden.
> > >
> > > Typical incorrect illogic, laced with invective. How predictable,
> > > coming from you.
> >
> > Liar.
>
> Incorrect.
See what I mean?
> I wonder how the Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Local No.
> 246
> would react to the information that you're forging posts again, Eric.
Illogical.
--
Prove that you're not a robot without emotions, if you think you can. On
what basis do you claim that you're not what I see?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:00:19 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:51:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Totally lame....
Yes, responding to your own post using another name is totally lame.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: "Ross Marchant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:57:23 +1000
Try BeOS
Pedro Coto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:LGK05.558$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > a) Drive letters (all versions of Windows OT and NT, including Windows
> > 2000).
> > Pros: You got to be kidding.
> > Cons: They reaassign themselves at the slightest excuse; add a new
> > drive, and all bets are off as to which of your existing drive letter
> > assignments will stay the same.
> > Verdict: Stupid 1970s way of doing things that should be ashamed to be
> > still showing itself in the 21st century.
>
> First of all, drive letters under NT/2000 can be hand assigned, so
> whenever
> C:\ drive (normally system goes there) is correct, you can fix whatever
> letter
> trouble you have. Anyway, if you know what you do, you won't have any
> problem.
> Second, 1970s way of doing things applies for a lot of filesystems, Mac
> included.
>
> > Verdict: Incompletely thought-out idea. How come the Linux folks are so
> > focused on being so faithful to UNIX, when they could be *fixing* some
> > of those long-standing, well-known UNIX problems?
>
> Unix mount points are the best thing I've found around for filesystems.
> Why does
> Mac OS X Server base upon BSD ? :-)
>
> > Verdict: MacOS-style file specifications definitely seem to be the way
> > to go in the next computing millennium. Why are other systems still
> > using such primitive ways of doing things?
>
> Obviously, other OS designer are not as Mac lovers as you :) and try
> to do different things. Mac is awful at hardware, software, OS and prices.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:06:51 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
Prove it, if you think you can.
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > See tinman, Tholen knows how your handle name should be
> > > > > > > presented
> > > > > > > better
> > > > > > > than you do. You really wanted to be known as Tinman, not
> > > > > > > tinman.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jumping into discussions again, Marty?
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't you know?
> > > >
> > > > Irrelevant.
> > >
> > > On the contrary, it's quite relevant to tinman's
> >
> > "tinman".
>
> TholenBotPro.
More evidence of your lack of decent reading comprehension skills.
> > How rich!
>
> Not at all, Chris.
See what I mean?
> > > entertainment.
> >
> > Entertainment is irrelevant.
>
> Liar.
Incorrect.
> Why else would you persist in posting for entertainment purposes if it
> were not relevant?
Illogical, as I post to correct lies and FUD, Marty (little Stuyk). Your
infantile little entertainment game is irrelevant.
> > What you can prove is relevant.
>
> I have proven your hypocrisy. Glad you agree that it is relevant.
Taking lack of reading comprehension lessons from Eric "Master of Lack of
Reading Comprehension" Bennett again, Marty?
> > > > Meanwhile, you have predictably failed to answer the question.
> > >
> > > Incorrect. Meanwhile you have failed to locate my answer to your
> > > question.
> > > How typical.
> >
> > I see that lacking a logical response, you're resorting to Bennett-esque
> > illogical redirection arguments.
>
> You are erroneously presupposing that I lack a logical response.
Evidence, please.
> > How predictable.
>
> How predictable that you would make another erroneous presupposition.
Incorrect, and illogical. How typical.
> > > > > > > Can't argue with "logic" like that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Incorrect.
> > > > >
> > > > > See what I mean?
> > > >
> > > > Non sequitur.
> > >
> > > See what I mean?
> >
> > No.
>
> Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
See what I mean?
> > > > > > > You believe the ego of this guy?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What you believe is irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Non sequitur, as I have made no mention about what I believe.
> > > >
> > > > Irrelevant.
> > >
> > > Glad you agree.
> >
> > Illogical.
>
> See what I mean?
Illogical.
> > > > > > What you can prove is relevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Prove it, if you think you can.
> > > >
> > > > How ironic.
> > >
> > > See what I mean?
> >
> > Taking another stroll down Irrelevancy Lane, Marty?
>
> You are erroneously presupposing a previous stroll down Irrelevancy Lane on my
> part, when it was you, in fact, who had done said strolling.
Incorrect. How ironic.
> How ironic!
Glad you agree.
> > --
> > "You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
> > -- Dave Tholen
>
> Still having reading comprehension problems? I've already addressed this
> issue
More evidence of your lack of decent reading comprehension skills. How ironic.
--
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
-- Dave Tholen
------------------------------
From: Secretly Cruel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:06:59 -0400
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:02:42 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I can't tell you the number of times I have had to explain to a couple
>of my computer illiterate friends that you can't expect to load the
>Windows drivers for new hardware under Linux. They have dual boot
>machines, they go buy a new piece of hardware without even thinking
>about compatibility, and it works under Windows. Then they try loading
>the driver off of the CD in Linux and get pissed. They call me and I
>tell them the same thing I've told them a million times: Find out if it
>is supported under Linux before you buy it. Then they try to convince
>me that I need to use the CD that came with that particular piece of
>hardware to get it to work under Linux. I just can't make them
>understand that Windows drivers are not Linux drivers. These are the
>type of people that are equating no driver support to Linux being
>broken. Too bad, but stupidity is the basis of all life now. I don't
>see that changing any time soon either.
Been there, done that, got the tee shirt... :-)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
