Linux-Advocacy Digest #77, Volume #27 Wed, 14 Jun 00 16:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: IE for Linux (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (Jim)
Re: iMacs With iTitude (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are really waya
way OT ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Craig Kelley)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (James Lee)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (JEDIDIAH)
Is there a backdoor in DFSG-free software (was: What else is hidden in MS code???)
(Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies.... (Craig
Kelley)
Re: BSOD in the airport (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box (Peter Wayner)
Re: BSOD in the airport (Peter Wayner)
Re: Boring (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: IE for Linux
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:07:07 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029) writes:
> I don't think it will come out for Linux but hey, it could happen.
> As reported on slashdot though, it is coming out for FreeBSD
Where does _Microsoft_ say that they're developing IE for FreeBSD?
If they release it for FreeBSD, but not Linux, then they are
hipocrites. (well, duh....)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: 14 Jun 2000 15:12:23 EDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > They are like you in that they were so sure they understood what
> > was possible and so they "knew" nothing better could come along.
> >
>
> So what you're saying is that I shouldn't be an absolitist. That I
> should be like you and think that there is NOTHING a GUI cant do.
I think you've got it!
What makes you think a GUI is any less extensible than a CLI (note: I
didn't say as _easy_ to extend)?
Conversely, there is nothing that a command line can't do, provided
you're willing to provide some GUI features in some of it's apps.
Generally, the extra effort that goes into programming the GUI pays off
in convenience for every day use. Sort of the next level (or two or
three) beyond coding up batch files or control strings to do repetitive
stuff.
The best possible of all (current) worlds is, IMHO, a combination of the
two: a _good_ GUI on an OS with either powerful scripting or a full CLI
capability. Sound anything like OS X?
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: iMacs With iTitude
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:10:59 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper) writes:
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:10:20 +1200, Lawrence DčOliveiro
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is what I mean. UNIX has been around so long that people have given
> > up trying to even think about fixing its fundamental flaws. And they
> > wonder why new users are so put off by it all, and why Linux is
> > completely failing to make any headway on the desktop...
>
> That's complete bullshit. Linux is gaining market share at an
> increadible rate.
>
> > Under UNIX, the mount point is part of the file path, remember. Consider
> > a CD-ROM called "My Photos", with a file on it called "Fred the Cat". On
> > a UNIX system, you might or might not be able to use the pathname
> > "/cdrom/Fred the Cat". And what if you have both a CD-ROM and a
> > CD-writer drive attached (as I do), and you put the CD in the latter?
>
> /mnt/cdrw and /mnt/cdrom. At least that's how it would work on this
> guy's system. Oh, and it would likely be /mnt/cdrom/Fred\ The\ Cat.
>
> There is also nothing stopping you from using /cdrom and /cdrw.
>
> > What's the standard mount point for that? On a Mac, you could use the
> > pathname string "My Photos:Fred the Cat", and have that work on *any*
> > Mac, no matter what drives they've got attached.
>
> What if the Mac has two "My Photos" CDs/hard disks etc?
Now, now Darren. Don't confuse the poor Mac users.
The second disk would be called "My Photos (2)" if memory serves (my
last "Mac" was a PowerBase 180), and your AppleScript would fail
miserably.
It's a good thing darwin (UNIX) is coming to fix the situation. ;)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are
really waya way OT
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 05:15:14 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8i8hf6$hc8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard A Crane) writes:
>
> >As for the comment about Australian housing and food costs I
> >add that it varies quite a bit throughtout Australia - viz
> >Bob Germer's complaint about the price of petrol - I wonder
> >what he'd think of Aus Dollars $1.50 per litre (and yes I
> >have seen these prices in Australia - and if you didn't like
> >it well the next servo was only 640Kms away so I guess you
> >could buy it there!)
>
> Now, let's *also* point out that many people around here are currently
> very concerned because petrol hovers in the A$0.80 to A$0.85 per
> litre range in the capital cities --- which is, after all, where the
> vast majority of Australians live.
And it just got a little more interesting here in Queensland, where we are
*supposed* to have an 8c/litre subsidy from the State Government (so our
fuel is always the cheapest). However, fuel prices here have been observed
to be only about 1 - 2c/litre cheaper than other States, and the Government
issued a "please explain" to the oil companies. This has been followed up
with a scrapping of the 8c/litre fuel subsidy and reduction in registration
costs of $150 (for city owners) and $180 (for country owners). It's an
absolute crock.
Sure, if you live in the middle of Brisbane, only cover 5000km/year and
drive a 4 cylinder shopping trolly it's great for you, but the people who
live way out in the country, for whom a 100km trip is just a "nip up the
road", and whose cars already cost >$100 to fill are going to get *raped*
with increased fuel prices.
The reduction in registration costs is the germ of a good idea, but it needs
to be dependent on how far you travel per year to be fair.
> I don't doubt that you can find some servo out woop-woop, in the middle
> of the outback, that will charge exorbitant prices --- but then, you also
> have to consider their turnover and their transport costs.
>
> Now, *Germany* has recently jumped the US$1/litre mark, everywhere. *That*
> makes you think twice about buying that gas-guzzling "SUV", especially
since
> the rego cost also depends on the car's fuel consumption....
Now that's a damn fine idea. If nothing else it'd stop the "urban warriors"
from buying their enormous gas-guzzling, inefficient,
hazard-to-every-other-road-user four wheel drives that never go more offroad
than when they turn into the driveway. (In case you can't tell, I hate four
wheel drives/SUVs).
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:15:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2:1) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I'm guessing here, but I assume POVRay is a CPU bound process and does
>little in the way of system calls. If this is the case, then it is the
>compiler, not linux that is at fault. If it is important ot you then go
>and buy a commercial compiler for linux, if it has better benchmarks.
But, silly boy, Linux is built with (gasp) the GNU C compiler, the one I
did my benchmarks with. That says that Linux might run a bit faster if the
compiler were a bit better.
>The other thing may be that you have loads of processess running in the
>background.
>ps aux
>and
>kill -9
>should sort that out ;-)
Ah I see, I must kill all extraneous daemons, that sounds like a recipe for
disaster. Shall I kill the NULL process? 8)
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:15:08 -0600
Tiberious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So I post a true account of an installation of some hardware and
> software, and how it is so superior under Windows than under Linux, if
> it can even be done under Linux and this is the result:
[snip, sniff, sniff, I'm cryin' here buddy]
> Linux, an old joke, a current joke and the joke of the future.
Yeah, and only we get the punchline.
Go away.
I use NT, Windows 9x and Linux -- you're simply an astroturfer who
hates Linux and cannot accept the fact that Windows has the same and
different problems.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:17:35 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The LinoNuts won't hear the difference. They are so used to running
>with shit hardware and software that they accept it as normal....
>
>They should try running a game with full audio support and hear the
>difference some time....
Yep, 3D sound on four speakers certainly is amazing to listen to. In Unreal
Tournament, hearing a rocket blast past you is something else!
Pete
------------------------------
From: James Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: 14 Jun 2000 19:20:19 GMT
In comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All this doesn't deny the possibility of user error and the extremely
> ungraceful recovery that would then be necessary.
That is not an error. Some people do want to do that.
In Unix, you can mount a directory over an existing directory
and mask the directory under it. Some people want that
functionality. Others doesn't. So what do you do?
> Here's a hint: any time you have to justify a system's (any system's)
> behaviour with something like: "well the user will just have to avoid
> that" there's something wrong with the system.
You want to tie the machine down to the dumbest level?
Sure, it can be done.
$ kill 12345
kill not allowed for user.
***but I want it****
sorry!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:21:55 GMT
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:08:50 -0700, Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:18:49 -0700, Alan Baker
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In article <8i88mv$hjn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Lee
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>wrote:
[deletia]
>>>All this doesn't deny the possibility of user error and the extremely
>>>ungraceful recovery that would then be necessary.
>>>
>>>Here's a hint: any time you have to justify a system's (any system's)
>>>behaviour with something like: "well the user will just have to avoid
>>>that" there's something wrong with the system.
>>
>> Normally, the features inherent in the system should prevent
>> such a "disaster" from ever happening. As far as doing stupid
>> things as the SuperUser: no system does or ever should prevent
>> that sort of thing.
>>
>> Some tools are powerful by design and by necessity and should
>> be treated accordingly.
>>
>> Plus, that "disaster scenario" can actually be put to good use.
>>
>> Besides, what's so 'ungraceful' about merely moving those files
>> back. You make it sound like end users never mistakenly put files
>> in the wrong place with other interfaces and infastructure.
>
>
>Into a place where they can no longer be found (as is the case once the
>mount point is reattached)?
If the mount point is that transient then it shouldn't be any
problem to cleanup those files once that filesystem is down again.
...that's assuming of course that the user in question didn't just
get an access violation to begin with.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Is there a backdoor in DFSG-free software (was: What else is hidden in MS
code???)
Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:32:53 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We've moved this to private e-mail - I think it best we continue there.
All details will be handled there, as you probably noticed in my reply.
>Meanwhile, tell me, can you find a backdoor in ANY Microsoft product? ANY.
>Not a key named suspeciously, not a reversed text string. A backdoor as you
>defined it yourself:
>"That you will have to find some code that is clearly there for one
>purpose and one purpose only: to allow access (or get info) without the
>user knowing it and where the user would likely not agree if he knew.
>The "ShoppingCart" perlscript that mailed info of the machine where it
>was being installed on, to the writer of the script, had a clear case of
>a backdoor. *That's* what we're talking about."
I personally couldn't say, because I do not run MS software at all. All
I can refer to is hearsay.
As I understand it, when you install IE4 or IE5, you get a feature
called "Active Setup". Supposedly this enables remote installation or
deinstallation of software and it seems that when this software has been
digitally signed by Microsoft, the installation happens without the
consent of the user (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0004.html).
This does look like a backdoor as I described above unless it has been
documented properly to have this behaviour.
Also, I have heard stories that the Win9x registration used to pass more
information to Microsoft as the user knew to passing, like the GUID of
the machine. If this is true, it would be a clear-cut case of a
backdoor.
Caveat emptor: I haven't verified these myself, it is just hearsay and
prone to be incorrect.
>Do you think you could find such a thing in ANY MS software? Just curious to
>your reply. the subject of this tread DOES read: "what else is hiddin in MS
>code?" afterall. Are we remotely on topic yet?
I did not set the subject title, so maybe we were offtopic. I adjusted
the subject line now. Satisfied?
Bottomline is, I really don't care if there's a backdoor in MS software
or not, as I personally don't use it. All I say is that the very nature
of a backdoor makes that it stands out clearly in the source code,
unlike e.g. a simple security flaw or other kind of bug. That's why I
cannot imagine that a backdoor will go unnoticed very long in Free [*]
software. This is one of the reasons why I choose Free software where
possible.
[*] Free as in DFSG-free
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
The Wright Bothers weren't the first to fly. They were just the
first not to crash.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies....
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:21:31 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> So exactly how is Linux going to unseat the already 90 or more percent
> of home/SOHO/desktop users from Windows and entice them into running
> Linux?
[snip: Windows has a monopoly, so it is infallible]
The problem with this argument is that it is self-fufilling.
1) A monopoly has a majority of the software/hardware
2) People choose a system based on the available software/hardware
3) Go to #1
If you buy into #2, then your choice is made for you. If, however,
you have even a tiny spirit of adventure, then there are multitude of
options available.
We're really sick of you coming into COLA and complaining that Linux
isn't a monopoly. Perhaps you could better spend your time making
Linux into a monopoly or use Windows or whatever it is that you do for
fun.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: BSOD in the airport
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:26:28 -0600
Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you are in the New Orleans airport, take a look at this column in
> concourse C that is supposed to have schedule information or something.
> It has a monitor with the Windows BSOD. It was blue-screened when I was
> leaving for Paris, and when I came back to New Orleans, I made a special
> trip before picking up my luggage to check, and it was *still*
> blue-screened.
>
> What an advert for M$
Last year at *COMDEX* in Las Vegas, about an eighth of the monitors
had the NT BSOD. A couple years ago, 2600 got a snapshot of the MGM
grand's huge video monitor with the '95 BSOD on it during defcon.
I'm sure it was buggy hardware... :)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:28:59 GMT
On 14 Jun 2000 14:16:04 EDT, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>
>> Lets review that history. After 15 years of relative stagnation
>> in GUI interfaces, they have still yet to completely replace the
>> previous paradigm in terms of functionality.
>>
>> Much of this seems to be due less to the inherent potential of the
>> GUI and more the tendency of GUI boosters to run away from CLI's
>> screaming.
>
>Nah. It's just that we're lazy bastards and GUI's get the job done with
>much less effort.
That rather depends on what you're doing.
Quite often, the GUI can be more work and more time consuming.
Not all of us want to babysit our computers, even those of us
that have been using GUI's for 10 or 15 years.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:33:37 GMT
On 14 Jun 2000 15:12:23 EDT, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > They are like you in that they were so sure they understood what
>> > was possible and so they "knew" nothing better could come along.
>> >
>>
>> So what you're saying is that I shouldn't be an absolitist. That I
>> should be like you and think that there is NOTHING a GUI cant do.
>
>I think you've got it!
>
>What makes you think a GUI is any less extensible than a CLI (note: I
>didn't say as _easy_ to extend)?
...the examples we've had on hand.
Many are quite limiting and require extra work be done by
the end user because the application developer didn't quite
design the interface well enough. Unfortunately, GUI's are
typically restricted to what things the original developer
thought of.
>
>Conversely, there is nothing that a command line can't do, provided
>you're willing to provide some GUI features in some of it's apps.
>
>Generally, the extra effort that goes into programming the GUI pays off
>in convenience for every day use. Sort of the next level (or two or
...assuming that effort was infact taken. Otherwise, in everyday
use GUI's quite quickly lose their luster and become royal pains
in the ass, being more overhead than they are worth.
>three) beyond coding up batch files or control strings to do repetitive
>stuff.
>
>The best possible of all (current) worlds is, IMHO, a combination of the
>two: a _good_ GUI on an OS with either powerful scripting or a full CLI
>capability. Sound anything like OS X?
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:42:02 GMT
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:58:34 -0700, Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:15:52 -0700, Alan Baker
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer
>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >Pascal Haakmat wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>[deletia]
>>>>
>>>>So tell me o' enlightened one. What GUI concept allows for multi level
>>>>piping?
>>>
>>>I don't know, but I _do_ know that before there was a GUI people like
>>>you were convinced that nothing could improve _any_ aspect of computing
>>>with a CLI. Even after the Mac came out, people like you were telling
>>>everyone how GUIs were for wimps, etc.
>>>
>>>All I'm saying is that making broad statements about what can or can't
>>>be done with a computer is a pretty silly exercise given the history of
>>>them to this point.
>>
>> Lets review that history. After 15 years of relative stagnation
>> in GUI interfaces, they have still yet to completely replace the
>> previous paradigm in terms of functionality.
>
>And the CLI had a run of, what, 20 years before that?
>
>>
>> Much of this seems to be due less to the inherent potential of the
>> GUI and more the tendency of GUI boosters to run away from CLI's
>> screaming.
>
>I don't run away from them. <G> And that's not what we've been talking
>about. These kinds of things (advances in paradigms for computer usage)
>tend to take big leaps and before such a leap, people have a lot of
>trouble envisioning one taking place. This is the mistake in your
>thinking that I'm trying to point out.
The only problem with that is that the "GUI leap" hasn't quite
eliminated the usefulness of the CLI. Infact, I'm one of those
odd sorts that have moved over the years FROM gui's BACK to
CLIs for the enhanced flexiblity, efficiency and automation.
[deletia]
>>>>"rm -R *.tmp" how long would that take to do in a GUI?
>>>
>>>How about a text entry box at the top of the window which lets you type
>>>in *.tmp followed by the keyboard shortcut for delete? How about an
>>>option to sort by filename in reverse order (the filename in reverse
>>>that is) so that the window sorts "*.tmp" as "pmt.*" then clicking on
>>>the first and shift-clicking on the last?
>>>
>>>That's two right off the cuff.
>>
>> The former may or may not be implemented in practice, the latter
>> likely won't scale well.
>
>Maybe, maybe not. But these were only two off the cuff suggestions by
>someone who is only marginally interested in seeking ways to enhance the
>human-computer interface. And the former has already been implemented in
>MT-Newswatcher 3.0 for finding groups in the Full Groups list.
That's fine for ONE app. That leaves all the rest lacking,
especially the default user shell.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Peter Wayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux advocate trapped inside a Windows Box
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:43:30 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I dunno.. Go ahead and hammer me if you think I'm crazy, but at least
> tell me why.
You're not crazy. But I think you overestimate the comforts of the Windows
world. I was de-installing software on my Windows box and I got some crazy
warning about the removal of a DLL file. Windows told me that I probably
should remove it because no other program is registered as using it, but
you never can tell. Lots of stuff sucks in the Windows world too. You've
just spent more time there so you're more comfortable.
But there's also plenty of open source software available for Windows.
(You can even port it.) You can enjoy the spirit of the GNU code until
you find a printer driver for your Linux box.
--
-=-=-=-
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: BSOD in the airport
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:45:49 GMT
Mikey wrote:
>
> If you are in the New Orleans airport, take a look at this column in
> concourse C that is supposed to have schedule information or something.
> It has a monitor with the Windows BSOD. It was blue-screened when I was
> leaving for Paris, and when I came back to New Orleans, I made a special
> trip before picking up my luggage to check, and it was *still*
> blue-screened.
On the other hand, I was driving down the NJ turnpike. One of the reststops
had terminals for checking the Web. It was just a browser, but the cursor
was definitely X. Needless to say, there was no BSOD.
--
-=-=-=-
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] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Boring
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:57:56 GMT
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 00:06:07 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Nobody is interested in Linux, nobody that I speak with anyway.
>
Sorry to burst your bubble but when was the last time you actually
spoke to another human being face to face?? Your "social life" over
the Internet doesn't count.
Perry
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
