Linux-Advocacy Digest #143, Volume #27 Sat, 17 Jun 00 17:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Dave Vandervies)
Re: How many times, installation != usability. (david parsons)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (I R A Darth Aggie)
Re: Microsoft Sucks and your sanity... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (tinman)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is so stable... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Processing data is bad! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Good Work Mozilla.. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
("Marc Schlensog")
Re: How many times, installation != usability. ("Marc Schlensog")
Re: Linux is awesome! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (Craig Kelley)
Re: Software (Jens =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pr=FCfer?=)
Re: Linux....The Cold Hard Truth.... (Alan Boyd)
Re: Linux is so stable... ("QCC")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: Processing data is bad! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Vandervies)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: 17 Jun 2000 17:30:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:11:04 +0200...
>...and Lars Trdger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >Don't you have filename-completion?
>> >
>> > It's still easier to type
>> > /u<tab>/lo<tab>/bi<tab>
>> > than
>> > :Lo<tab>:Bin<tab>
>> > because it doesn't require shifted characters or path separators.
>>
>> It does on a german keyboard ;-)
>
>Don't tell me you actually type slashes in your shell! In 9 of 10
>cases hitting <tab> throws in the slash if needed.
My shell usually throws in the slash, but (partly because of the way I
organize stuff) I often have short enough names that it's easier to
type `foo/' than `fo<tab>' or have `foo.tar.gz' and `foo/' in the same
directory (in which case the shell completes to `foo'), so having to
use the shift key for my path separator would still be a pain.
dave
--
Dave Vandervies
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Plan your future! Make God laugh!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Date: 17 Jun 2000 10:24:06 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mingus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>As long as they don't need to open the case. Users want to install
>printers, scanners and any USB devices (as if Linux supports them)
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here, but I believe
the answer is "yes, it does."
____
david parsons \bi/ SuSE 6.4, I think.
\/
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 18:25:33 GMT
In article <8ig2k4$2dk2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Paul 'Z' EwandeĐ"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > >
> > > End users have no need "to futz around trying to learn the clunky
> > > OS",
> > > there
> > > are trained/experienced people for that.
> >
> > Oh, I see.
> >
> > So end users don't have to learn how to use Windows? They just have
> > trained people do all their computer work for them?
>
> Nope. They use the apps, period. Launching an app, doing what has to be
> done, saving your work, and shutting down the computer seem as easy to do
> on
> both the Macintosh or on Windows. What they need to be trained on is how
> to
> work on a particular app, not the intricacies of the OS.
Wrong. They also have to learn file managemnet, at the very least.
>
> That's why they are here for, not to fool around with their 'puters.
Then how do you explain the fact that Mac users have such dramatically
higher productivity level?
>
> Trained people perform the maintenance of the boxes [setting up,
> installing/replacing hardware/software and such practices].
>
> > No wonder TCO is so bac on Windows. ;-)
>
> Where I work, there are guys who are paid on _both_ Windows _and_ MacOS
> to
> take care of things such as setting up and tending to the boxes.
>
> I'm not convinced that it's an outrageously rare practice. Of course,
> your
> mileage may, and probably will, vary. :)
All of which is irrelevant.
You stated that end users don't have to learn to use Windows. That's
absurd.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Darth Aggie)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Date: 17 Jun 2000 18:50:24 GMT
Reply-To: no-courtesy-copies-please
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 06:59:46 GMT,
James Stafford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ it. If Linux wasn't here I would be using my Mac more.
<stage whisper>You could run linux on your mac...</stage whisper>
...presuming, of course, that it is capable of doing so.
James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft Sucks and your sanity...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:36:26 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jacques Guy) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The difference, is that the
>Windows kernel rebuild is done between closed doors, away from our
>prying eyes, and that we shall never know what precisely has been
>rebuilt, nor how. Oh, yes, and that we have to pay for it through the
>nose. Or is it the noose?
This is true of all commercial OS's. If you consider something that costs
less than a pony paying through the nose... well, you can't even afford to
buy a PC!
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 15:39:13 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 19:42:52 GMT, John Bode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >> And sure, I-Appliances will have their place, but they'll never
> >> replace computers. Neither will the PS2. You ever try web-surfing at
> >> 800x600 with a gamepad?
> >>
> >
> >I agree, the technology isn't there yet. And yes, I do remember the
> >hype about thin clients. Hell, I remember the hype about the "paperless
> >office" (judging by our recycle bins, I'd say that was a bust). I'm not
> >thinking in terms of a thin client as such. What I envision will still
> >have its own internal storage and software, but will be tailored to a
> >specific purpose.
> >
> >The general purpose desktop box won't go away completely, but I do think
> >that it will be less prominent in many people's lives as dedicated
> >information appliances become more common. People who just want email
> >and Web access and games can now get it without needing a PC.
> >
> >I don't see the PS2 as the future of surfing per se, but I think it
> >represents a major step in the evolution of this kind of appliance.
> >
> >I freely admit that my crystal ball is very hazy, and I may just be
> >misinterpreting some random patterns.
>
> I see the future as thin clients using technology like Microsoft
> Terminal Server. With a fast network (100BT, but soon gigabit
> ethernet will be affordable) it becomes more and more difficult, for
> non-games, to tell a difference between local and remote access. When
> gigabit (or perhaps one step beyond that) gets here, I doubt most
> people will be able to tell the difference. For the office
> environment, that makes for a very easily controlled but very powerful
> setup.
You're right about the central administration advantages, but the problem
there is getting enough umph in the server and the network near the server
to service those clients.
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:41:24 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron Kulkis) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Given that it is based on the programming methodology of the
>most-ported operating system ever (Unix), and that source
>code is easily ported back and forth between Unix and Linux,
>and that most EDUCATED people have a need for a Unix-like
>operating system, then for what reason do you expect Linux
>to die out?
I'm an EDUCATED person and I have no real need for Linux (although I do run
a system as a Samba file server, but that's it).
Most of the work that I do that pays is on Windows. With pay I couldn't
afford to buy the things I want, the house I live in, the new car etc. etc.
>Most big-name universities do project development on Unix, not
>Losedows. For that reason alone, the best-educated in the field
>of computing all have VERY strong reason to put Linux on their
>own computer while still underclassmen.
Most big name Universities here in the UK are underfunded. Something that
costs nothing must be very attractive. Also, most Universities here in the
UK usually teach on platforms that don't exist in the world of commerce.
Whilst industrialists have been yelling for the right skills, Universities
are frequently out of touch.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is so stable...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:43:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Schlensog) wrote in
<8ig5ni$pav$13$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> You were never civil in the first place. You quickly fell to calling
>> "you shithead liar".
>So he was military, then?
>I guess itīs civilized, right? DUH!!!!
I said 'civil' not 'civilian'. As you say, DUH!!!
Does Linux make you incapable of reading?
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:50:11 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mlw) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Standard Windows draw function:
>application --> <GDI> --> <display driver>
>
>A simplified Terminal Server draw function:
>application --> <GDI> -->terminal server --> <network> --> terminal
>client --> <GDI> --> <display driver>
[ship]
>Standard X draw function:
>application --> <toolkit> --> <X Server>
By your definition, the X system is implicitly _slower_ than standard
Windows as there are several layers to get through.
My experience of MOTIF was the multiple layers - let me see if I can get
this right:
X
Xt
Xw
Motif
I remember the 'gadget' object being added as it used less resources than a
'widget'.
Now we have KDE:
X
Qt
KDE
Now compare this with WIN32
Windows 9x Windows 2000
WIN32 API WIN32 API
Thunking layer Native API
It just seems to me X has more to get through. Also it runs as a _user_
mode application. I see in XFree86 it is now a _kernel_ mode application
just like Windows to get the _speed_. Fascinating!
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jun 2000 13:48:57 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:35:09 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Cihl wrote:
> >>
> >> Try the CLI at the highest resolution your monitor can handle. It
> >> looks really cool.
> >
> >Unfortunately, I can't get SVGATextMode to give me anything better than
> >80x50, all I get are fuzzy streaky unsynced lines all over the place.
> >
> >Oh, well
>
> Sounds like par for the course.
Of course Windows can't even do this.....
--
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: Good Work Mozilla..
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jun 2000 13:53:18 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
> It was the Fri, 16 Jun 2000 16:29:24 GMT...
> ...and Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > OSguy wrote:
> > >
> > > Mozilla is going to have a nice product when it is ready.
> > > The Speed of the M16 Browser is the fastest I've seen yet,
> > > and certainly makes IE look sick.
> >
> > You know of a changelog from the toppa your head? I don't feel like
> > searching today.
>
> Does anyone know why the Mozilla CVS is so frigging slow? My checkout
> attempts always get stuck after a couple hundred files updated.
Too many people CVS-ing it.
They should package the source as well.
--
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: "Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:19:07 +0200
John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Snip]
> The NT 3.x is quite similar in design to Linux/XF4 if you look at it.
> Wonder how long it takes them to move X into the kernel to improve
> speed? ;-)
I hope this never will!
>
> >[deletia]
[Snip]
> The 386 was out, but the target platform was the 286. Windows 3.x
> just introduced 386 enhanced mode which provided most of the things
> standard mode did with a few extra bonuses.
Wasnīt there Win/386 or what it was called?
[Snip]
> Yep. MS is about the best at the moment for BINARY compatibility.
> Try loading a 2.0 kernel module on a 2.4 kernel. Boom.
I guess, thatīd be comparable with loading a WinNT driver in Win98
or W2K. Nevertheless you are still able to run just the same binary
under 2.0 as well as 2.4. Recompiled, you can even run it under
Linux/Alpha or SUN or whatever.
[Snip]
Marc
------------------------------
From: "Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:52:21 +0200
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Snip]
> That's why NT has no representatives on the 500 top supercomputers
> list (even before the OS/390 port) and Linux does. Besides, it doesn't
> matter HOW Linux scales past NT if it does.
Unfortunatly that ainīt true anymore. I read in the cīt (a german computer-
magazine) that there are 2 NT-clusters among the top 500.
Pitiful, isnīt it?
Who is Tim Palmer, BTW?
Either itīs a 5-year-old, having no clue, what heīs talking about,
or he actually used *nix-systems and is just trying to make fun
of us. Tim, would you enlighten us?
Marc
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awesome!
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jun 2000 14:14:36 -0600
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Not at all, it's the attachments and embedded scripts, graphics and
> > other nice things that Linux office suites fail to translate properly.
> >
> > Example, in my company we use a lot of Web based education, usually
> > via Lotus Notes but also under Netscape. Forgetting about Notes, Linux
> > fall flat on it's face when trying to run these simulations using
> > Netscape.
> >
> > My company has gone so far as to ban all non Windows applications and
> > generated memo's and we were a long time OS/2 supporter up until last
> > year.
> >
> > You Linonuts just don't get it. The rest of the world is marching to a
> > completely different band and running Linux puts the entire concerto
> > out of sync.
>
> And why are you forgetting about Notes. I run Notes on Linux and can
> view attachments without a problem. I'm afraid you just don't get it.
> There is a lot more to the world than MS. Try to suggest running a
> simulation of an S/390 machine design on Wiindows where I work. You
> will get laughed out of the building.
You're wasting your breath.
Someone who calls the users of another operating system "nuts",
obviously has deeper 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: Why X is better than Terminal Server
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jun 2000 14:18:57 -0600
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The only people who seem to dislike X, are those that don't know X. Yes,
> it is not as fast as it could be, but it is pretty fast. Accelerated
> versions of X are quite fast.
[snip]
You forgot the best reason: Client Access Licenses
--
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: Jens =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pr=FCfer?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Software
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:21:56 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Yea sure.....You go on and believe that one.
>
> Problem is the public is ignoring Linux.
>
> .3 percent of market share.
>
> How is that explained?
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 21:44:53 GMT, Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Hi Simon,
Actually I don't give a fuck about what you or "the public" think when
it comes to my computer. I tried different OS and I liked Linux the
best. Even though I probably repeat old arguments:
- it doesn't cost a penny (I am a student)
- it keeps my data safe (I am a student writing papers which get me my
grades)
- it has lots of excellent scientific tools, all open source as well
(Why pay thousands of $, if you can get better performance for
free?)
- it is a very nice environment for programming C/C++
- it has Civ CTP and Quake III Arena ...
This is why I personally think it is the best choice for Students all
over the world.
It does not mean it is the best for everybody. It simply means choice. I
don't care what other systems my fellow students or anybody else is
using. My personal oppinion is, linux causes much less grief. It sure
was a lot easier to install and runs a lot more stable on my PC.
Cheers
Jens
--
WYSIWYG is a step backwards. Human labor is used to do that which the
computer
can do better.
Andrew S. Tanenbaum
------------------------------
From: Alan Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux....The Cold Hard Truth....
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 15:40:41 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'd say this eithe reveals a whole lot about the kind of people who fill
> out those questionaires, or the people who evaluate the answers.
Or those people who fabricate the entire survey.
--
"I don't believe in anti-anything. A man has to have a
program; you have to be *for* something, otherwise you
will never get anywhere." -- Harry S Truman
------------------------------
From: "QCC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED](remove-this-last-bit-to-reply)>
Subject: Re: Linux is so stable...
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:50:15 +0100
Peter,
I have seen the name Goodwin on many a computer related site.... Simon,
Phil.... all Goodwins, hell there is even one on QVC when they do the small
office./home office spot, he's their tech guru...and there was a Goodwin who
used to write code on the Spectrum, QL and Amiga and contribute to
magazines....
any relation?
Chris
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Schlensog) wrote in
> <8ig5ni$pav$13$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >> You were never civil in the first place. You quickly fell to calling
> >> "you shithead liar".
> >So he was military, then?
> >I guess itīs civilized, right? DUH!!!!
>
> I said 'civil' not 'civilian'. As you say, DUH!!!
>
> Does Linux make you incapable of reading?
>
> Pete
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 20:54:05 GMT
"Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:RqD25.5338$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:3az25.3816$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > /me screams and clutches at eyes...
> > >
> > > I had no idea it was _this_ bad... I just assumed it would do the
> > > semi-sensible thing and have C, D, E, etc as partitions 1, 2, 3 on
> > > IDE0/Master, then F, G, H as 1, 2, 3 on 0/Slave, and then follow in a
> > > logical manner with 1/Master and 1/Slave. Silly me... :)
> > >
> > > I'm not even going to ask about SCSI, Firewire, Zip/Jazz or the other
> > > multitude of storage formats... ;)
> > >
> > The rules are simple, Primaries first no matter what, extended
partition
> > and then removable media drives, excluding Floppies. What so hard
about
> > that??? My real question is why would anyone need more that ONE
Primary
> > partition, other than for Dual booting? Which 95%+ of users never
do...
> >
> >
> I think a lot of it is that most people DON'T REALIZE they can partition
a
> drive WITHOUT a primary partition.
>
If they don't know they can't partition a drive without a primary partition,
then they shouldn't be playing around with the program! I have't used the
program in awhile so I can't comment on the options that it gives you. I
have know people to screw up and delete a partition, and then they ask me
to help them. It happened twice, in the last year or so...
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 06:58:44 +1000
"Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ABJ25.3969$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> My real question is why do we Windows users have to put up with the old,
> outdated, kludgey and quite honestly crap system of identifying volumes by
> drive letter that Windows STILL uses? Legacy apps be damned, the longer
it's
> left the way it is, the harder it will be to switch to a vaguely more
modern
> system.
Because when you move up to NT or Win2k and can set the drive letters
yourself, it becomes just like the Mac system, albeit with only one letter
volume names.
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 20:59:06 GMT
"Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ABJ25.3969$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:RqD25.5338$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:3az25.3816$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > /me screams and clutches at eyes...
> > >
> > > I had no idea it was _this_ bad... I just assumed it would do the
> > > semi-sensible thing and have C, D, E, etc as partitions 1, 2, 3 on
> > > IDE0/Master, then F, G, H as 1, 2, 3 on 0/Slave, and then follow in a
> > > logical manner with 1/Master and 1/Slave. Silly me... :)
> > >
> > > I'm not even going to ask about SCSI, Firewire, Zip/Jazz or the other
> > > multitude of storage formats... ;)
> > >
> > The rules are simple, Primaries first no matter what, extended
partition
> > and then removable media drives, excluding Floppies. What so hard
about
> > that??? My real question is why would anyone need more that ONE
Primary
> > partition, other than for Dual booting? Which 95%+ of users never
do...
>
> My real question is why do we Windows users have to put up with the old,
> outdated, kludgey and quite honestly crap system of identifying volumes by
> drive letter that Windows STILL uses? Legacy apps be damned, the longer
it's
> left the way it is, the harder it will be to switch to a vaguely more
modern
> system.
>
I wasn't commenting on the outdated system that Windows uses, I was
commenting on the rules that govern were the drive letters were placed. I
do agree with you, I wish MS would change the system they use. Whats
interesting, I have needed to think of which LETTER a program was on in
along time. I just look at the icon for each HD and I know the program is
on Voyager or Pioneer, I do wish I could use those names as pointers to the
programs instead of letters.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:08:28 GMT
There is a reason why the rest of the world has moved mostly to GUI.
On 17 Jun 2000 13:48:57 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:35:09 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Cihl wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Try the CLI at the highest resolution your monitor can handle. It
>> >> looks really cool.
>> >
>> >Unfortunately, I can't get SVGATextMode to give me anything better than
>> >80x50, all I get are fuzzy streaky unsynced lines all over the place.
>> >
>> >Oh, well
>>
>> Sounds like par for the course.
>
>Of course Windows can't even do this.....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
