Linux-Advocacy Digest #158, Volume #27 Sun, 18 Jun 00 02:13:14 EDT
Contents:
Re: What's wrong with StarOffice
Re: Thinking of reading anything by simon777 ? Read this first before you do .......
(Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Drestin Black")
Re: Number of Linux Users ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Tiberious)
Re: What UNIX is good for. (Gwizdak)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux Tast Test (Cihl)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Dave Vandervies)
Re: Thinking of reading anything by simon777 ? Read this first before you do
....... (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Cihl)
Re: Good Work Mozilla.. (OSguy)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Pete Goodwin)
Re: OT Aboriginal Lifespans was Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy (Cihl)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (tinman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:20:45 -0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's wrong with StarOffice
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If a person prefers WordPerfect Office 2000 that could be a partial solution
to the problem at hand; but what about the remaining X apps and the non X
apps that need or could benefit from Postscript and/or TrueType fonts? What
is more, why should someone have to change the software they are using just
to get support for these fonts when the support for PostScript fonts is
already on their host but possibly not activated, the situation could be the
same for the TrueType fonts.
It was Barbara's lamentation about the lack of support for these fonts by
Linux, that prompted my response. Although to be accurate, Linux has no
support for these fonts because other than the console mode screen fonts,
Linux is not concerned about fonts in any way. X and the applications that
run on Linux, may require or could benefit from these fonts, and in this
siutation the support is already there, it just has to be activates and of
course the fonts have to be installed. Aquiring the fonts is a different
matter, it is not a Linux problem or an X problem any more than it is a
Windows problem or a MacOS problem. You aqiure them by whatever legal means
you prefer and install them.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8i9d35$t76$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Or you can reach into your purse and buy WordPerfect Office 2000 for
> Linux; it has TrueType font support and at a whole helluva lot less
> drachmas than MSOffice.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:03:46 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: Thinking of reading anything by simon777 ? Read this first before you do
.......
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Terry Porter <No-Spam> wrote:
>Would you take advice from a Ford salesman, trying to convince you
>that Honda's were crap ?
>
>What if he didn't actually know anything about cars anyway ?
>
>How about if he was so ashamed of his real identity, being
>a total liar and bs artist, that every time you went to that
>particular car yard, he had changed his name ?
>
>This is simon777, otherwise known as "Steve/Heather/Amy/Keys88" etc.
>
>He has been posting here for 2 years, and its always the same Wintroll
>stuff, clever but untrue.
>
>Do yourself a favor if you're a lurker or a undecided Linux user :-
>
> ** kill file him **!
>
>If you do, you'll have a LOT less stuff to read, and will be able to get down
>to the nitty gritty, of good old Linux advocacy, without the lies.
>
>Is your time worth more than reading his lies ?
>
>Kind Regards
>Terry
Excellent advice, Terry!
Here's a longer, but no doubt still incomplete, list of the
Lying Coward's fake names:
Steve/Mike/Heather/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/Sewer Rat/
"S"/Sponge/Sarek/piddy/McSwain/pickle_pete/Ishmeal_hafizi/Amy/...
Most of his lies are about alleged hardware incompatibilities
of Linux, the worst being that it only works with PostScript
printers (which are usually more expensive). This is *totally
false*, but he keeps posting it over and over.
Below are links to the hardware compatibility lists [HCLs] of
two major Linux distributions. It's my understanding that
hardware that works with any distribution should work with
all of them (at least for distros using the same processor,
e.g., Intel), or can be made to work by updating the XFree86,
printer filters, etc., which are free and common to all of
them.
A distributor's HCL may only mention hardware that they them-
selves have tested, so to find out if Linux supports a parti-
cular item, one can search for it on several distributors'
HCLs, and can consider it supported (or supportable) on all
distributions if it appears on the HCL of any of them.
Caldera Systems, Inc. - OpenLinux eDesktop 2.4 Compatible Hardware
http://www.calderasystems.com/support/hardware/2.4/
Red Hat, Inc. Hardware Compatibility List for Intel/6.2
http://www.redhat.com/support/hardware/intel/62/rh6.2-hcl-i.ld.html
Here's the central modem compatibility list; click on
"BIG LIST":
Winmodems are not modems; Linux information page
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html
Here's the central database of printers and the ghostscript
and other drivers/filters that operate them under Linux and
other varieties of Unix:
Un*x printer compatibility database listing
http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht/printer_list.cgi
And here's one person's advice on how to select components
to create an inexpensive, reliable, high-speed Linux system:
Cheap /Linux/ Box -- compatible hardware
http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~comech/tools/CheapBox.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:53:32 -0400
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
and again, you say nothing and prove nothing and demonstrate nothing but
vile idiocy.
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8i92g3$apb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >> Youve misunderstood what that paragraph means, dresden, likely because
> >> youve never been involved with computer security to this degree.
> >>
> >> "Custom" does not mean the same thing as "specific". You need
"specific"
> >> hardware to gain a C2 certification for WinNT 4.0, but not "custom".
> >>
> >> In short, you're an idiot.
> >>
>
> > <SNIP completely fucking stupid shit>
>
> > abraxas you are moron, total died in the wool completely pathetic moron.
> > You've answer NOTHING, you've dodged around in syntax and words but
answer
> > nothing. You have no facts, you provide no documents, you don't even
pretend
> > to try to create lies to masquierade as facts. you can't even pretend to
be
> > smart you are so amazingly stupid.
>
> Wow, thats one hell of an argument you have there. Chock full o facts,
yep.
>
> > in short, you exist as something lower than a cumstain on some motel
> > sheet... go away.
>
> Theres some more of that fact-filled argument.
>
> > prove how a laptop cannot be C2 certified?
> > prove how plugging in a microphone into a C2 certified system
invalidates
> > the certification?
>
> And here we have the obligatory dresden posturing challenges, designed to
> divert attention from his own display of ignorance...
>
> Which somehow never seems to work.
>
>
>
>
> -----yttrx
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:28:34 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Number of Linux Users
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Hughes wrote:
> >
> > As the number of Linux users BOOMS to 0.3%. Is Linux taking over??!!
> >
> > http://websnapshot.mycomputer.com/systemos.html
> >
> > http://bbspot.com/News/2000/4/linux_distros.html
>
> Just you wait! In a few more years we'll have 0.4%! HA!
>
According to Netcraft, the WebSnapShot site is running Apache/1.3.6
PHP/3.0.14 on Linux. Rolling on the fscking floor laughing my arse off.
http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=websnapshot.mycomputer.com&Examine=W
ait..
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:58:01 -0400
From: Tiberious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
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:
1. The hardware is called crap. Hmmm that's an interesting comment from
a group of people that seem to like to extoll the virtues of running
linux on 486 machines.The hardware works fine under Windows and none of
it is Win* hardware. Of course there will always be some command line
nut who will conjure up some oddball application where he needs 200
scans re-scanned multiple times in succession. Command lines were made
just for yahoo's like that.
2.I'm called an idiot for not knowing how to manipulate files and data
types. Sure...... Maybe Linux users have to do that but under Windows
point and click and it works. Fax from your scanner program, links added
to menues, just general ease of use. No searching around to convert some
file to the correct format needed.
3. Semantic games are played on the word superior. Well in this case it
works great under Windows, and in fact I can walk into any computer
supermarket chain store and pick up virtually ANY piece of hardware or
software and assuming it is not for Mac, or one of the 10 odd pieces of
Linux garbage they actually stock, it will work under Windows.
4. Personal attacks. Ok that's fine, rats always attack when they are
cornered.
This same result would have been obtained with just about any
combination of hardware and software purchased from the local Compusa.
Heck Windows 98SE even had a selection for my dusty Proprinter II X24E
circa 1988. Mandrake didn't, although it had a fine selection of
DaisyWheel printers.
So the conclusion is that Linux is in trouble. It can't configure and
setup even the most simple form of off the shelf hardware and software.
Tell me, what do you have to compare to Winfax?
Sane?
You're kidding right?
Try the 2 side by side, current versions that is, because a typical
LinoTechnique is to quote problems with versions of Windows 5 years old.
Sorry but Linux loses yet again.
I'll be happy to walk into Staples or BestBuy or comp usa with a Linonut
any day and have them pick out their hardware (SCSI scanners or PS
printers $$$$, excepting the retired and now obsolete Lexmark Optra) and
include software. Install all on Win systems and Linux systems and have
independent 3rd party people test them and see which one costs less
overall and which one has more features and is superior and which one is
easier to install.
I can pick out my selections blindfolded.......
Linux WILL LOSE EVERY TIME except for possibly development tools. And we
all know Joe $ixpack develops applications between beers and
www.hustler.com.
Linux, an old joke, a current joke and the joke of the future.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 01:32:52 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gwizdak)
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 03:45:18 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You can barely do anything with graffics in UNIX.
>I take it you've never used Interleaf, Framemaker, Mentor Graphics,
>Cadence, Intergraph, or other such things, then.
>What do you think Mentor Graphics does? Cardboard boxes? :-)
I missed the original post, so this applies to the person you're
correcting.
I believe the special effects to the Matrix were done with FreeBSD
boxen.
>>or even a good LOGO interporator.
>Oh yeah, I want Win2K just to allow kids to program in LOGO!
Logo is LISP dialect developed by MIT.
The chance of a UNIX interpreter NOT existing is very low.
--
___ S. Gwizdak
<o-o> http://www.caughq.org/~wazm
[`-']
-"-"-
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:45:08 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:43:51 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote on 15 Jun 2000 17:49:50 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>[snip for brevity]
>
>>The funny thing about you UNIX people is that you alwais say that UNIX
>>is "easy" and then you come back and say you half to type some
>>cryptic-as-hell command to do something simpal.
>
>Unix is not easy. Unix is in fact quite difficult.
The simple is harder, however the complicated is at least possible.
[deletia]
--
...However it is easier to dumb down a general
interface than to add generality to a limited set of choices,...
-Leslie Mikes-
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:14:49 -0400
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Tast Test
aflinsch wrote:
>
> Cihl wrote:
> >
> > David Steinberg wrote:
> > >
> > > aflinsch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > : > Does this go for new versions, too? Or only older versions, like
> > > : > RH5.2, or something.
> > >
> > > : It goes for whatever they have in stock, in fact some of the older
> > > : distros might be yours for the cost of shipping.
> > >
> > > And they pretty much always have the current release of every distribution
> > > in stock.
> > >
> > > If you thought you actually have to pay more than $5 to get the most
> > > up-to-date version of a Free operating system, I guess this news is a
> > > pleasant surprise! :)
> > >
> > > (On the other hand, there are still obvious benefits to buying a distro
> > > with a manual and support.)
> > >
> > > --
> > > David Steinberg -o)
> > > Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
> >
> > Nah.. I was just curious. I have a cable modem so i just download and
> > try them all. My ISP (bART) is very happy with Linux-users, so they
> > don't care how many gigs of it i download. They are even willing to
> > set up BSMTP for you for a small fee.
>
> Wish I had that, cable & dsl don't quite make it out as far as I live.
> Directions to my house usually include the line "turn right when you
> run out of houses on the left"
They just installed the whole thing, fibre-optics 'n stuff, just 6
months ago in my home town. I was probably one of the first to get the
connection. In the beginning i was constantly getting around 500 Kb/s.
It's now dropping a little, though.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:12:05 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Vandervies)
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dave Vandervies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Dave Vandervies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> -Really awful implementation for people who don't like to point and
>> >> click - `Local User Files:Binary and Executable Files' vs.
>> >> `/usr/local/bin' - 'nuff said. This can be redone, but why bother when
>> >> it's already been done right in the Unix world?
>> >
>> >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 ;-)
Very well then; anybody using a German keyboard (and any other one
where '/' is a shifted character) can ignore one more of my arguments
in favor of the Unix way of doing things. :) (Either that or hack up
a shell that recognizes some unshifted character as a path separator,
but that could get ugly.)
dave
--
Dave Vandervies
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remember, amateurs built the Ark. It was experts that built the Titanic.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:28:21 -0400
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Thinking of reading anything by simon777 ? Read this first before
you do .......
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:41:06 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >James wrote:
> >>
> >> Please note that this newsgroup is intended for arguments FOR and AGAINST
> >> Linux. Steve often identifies real (as opposed to imaginary) shortcomings
> >> of Linux. Yes, perhaps he does have too many aliases, and perhaps he is
> >> wrong from time to time. But this newsgroup will be very boring if everyone
> >> just praises Linux. IMHO Linux has established itself as a server OS, but
> >> has many miles to go before it qualifies as a decent Desktop. Critics, like
> >> Steve, are there to point out these shortcomings.
> >> It is all about democracy - and calling a spade a spade!
> >>
> >> James
> >>
> >
> >I have no problem with someone actually bringing up a real problem with
> >Linux and discussing it rationally. My problem is with the guy (like
> >Simon/Steve/Mike/Whatshisfuckingnametoday) that comes in here screaming
> >at the top of his lungs (figure of speech) that Linux doesn't support
> >anything but Postscript printers or another made up bunch of lies. Then
>
> ...this is the bulk of the anti-Linux posts, with the rest
> being typically made up of people that can't even give any
> details when asked WHY is is that FOO is better than BAR
> (like Gimp vs. Photoshop).
>
> [deletia]
>
> --
> If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
> tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
> the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
>
I agree one hundred percent with this statement. I just wish that
Winvocates could see that this isn't always a bad thing (in fact, if you
know something I consider that a good thing).
|||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:21:27 -0400
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:47:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>
> >On 13 Jun 2000 14:02:55 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:57:13 +0200, Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>Tiberious wrote:
> >>> [CUT the entire crap]
> >>>
> >>>The fun part of you guys posts is that lately you're atacking Linux on its
> >>>lack of support for "home devices". This must mean that the server side of
> >>>things is allready won by Linux - i can only agree on that.
> >>>
> >>>Regarding end-user PC's its very simple... simply just aquire devices that
> >>>are supported by Linux..
> >>
> >>And you still cant get the hardwair to work together. Instead of being abal to
>scan something
> >>and have it go strate to the printer or FAX, you half to save it to fial and
>cibvert it to
> >>postscrit, and thats' just to print. FAX modems just don't work on UNIX.
> >
> > Sure they do. My Phoebe works just fine. As far as treating several
> > peripherals as if they were one virtual dedicated device, that's also
> > trivial.
>
> So why doesn't Linux?
> It can barely put an icon in a menu when you install a commercial program like
> Wordperfect.
>
Oh.. I never noticed, actually. I just do [ALT]-[F2] and type 'wp'.
It's much faster that way, anyway.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 16:37:57 -0400
From: OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Good Work Mozilla..
Cihl 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.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/release-notes/m16.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:35:13 -0400
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <qg3lksk0v339qv5bgscqmdbdvfqie0ukca@
4ax.com>:
>Pete the Linux camp did exactly the same thing about 2 months ago when
>someone posted that Windows Find was so much faster than find under
>Linux....
Is the URL still around? Anyone know what it is?
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:31:10 -0400
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT Aboriginal Lifespans was Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
On 06/16/2000 at 02:30 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (billy ball) said:
> two officers of equal grade and time in service: one is a Mustang or
> OCS, and the other is an Academy twit... the twit will 'knock' his ring
> on the table to indicate seniority..
I don't know how it works in the Army or Air Force, but even though I was
commissioned as a Regular Navy Ensign in February, my date of rank for
seniority (not pay purposes) purposes was the day the Academy graduated.
All ROTC regular officers had that date of rank and we were described by
Naval Regulations as ranking "with but behind" the Anapolis graduates. It
still works that way today.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:52:02 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:42:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:14:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 21:35:20 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:30:14 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:47:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 13 Jun 2000 14:02:55 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:57:13 +0200, Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>Tiberious wrote:
>>>>>>> [CUT the entire crap]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The fun part of you guys posts is that lately you're atacking Linux on its
>>>>>>>lack of support for "home devices". This must mean that the server side of
>>>>>>>things is allready won by Linux - i can only agree on that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Regarding end-user PC's its very simple... simply just aquire devices that
>>>>>>>are supported by Linux..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And you still cant get the hardwair to work together. Instead of being abal to
>scan something
>>>>>>and have it go strate to the printer or FAX, you half to save it to fial and
>cibvert it to
>>>>>>postscrit, and thats' just to print. FAX modems just don't work on UNIX.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure they do. My Phoebe works just fine. As far as treating several
>>>>> peripherals as if they were one virtual dedicated device, that's also
>>>>> trivial.
>>>>
>>>>So why doesn't Linux?
>>>
>>> Repeating lies won't make them any more true, regardless of
>>> how many times you repeat the lies.
>>
>>
>>But you still haven't answered the original question.
>>
>>So why doesn't Linux......?
>>>>It can barely put an icon in a menu when you install a commercial program like
>>>>Wordperfect.
>>>
>>> Neither can Windows, if you didn't manage to hire a reasonably
>>> intellegent student intern this quarter.
>>
>>Every Windows program that I have installed has put an icon either on
>>the desktop or in the Starup->program menu and that includes the
>>README and other information.
>
> That must get pretty cluttered after awhile.
You can easily erase or move them unlike Linux....
>>
>>Please provide me with an example of a current Windows program that
>>does not?
>
> Crystal Reports.
Never heard of it.
Some sort of Physic program or something?
>[deletia]
>>>>
>>>>So if it is so easy, again why does not Linux do it?
>>>
>>> scanimage -d /dev/scanner | lpr
>>
>>
>>Oh that's certainly something Joe Sixpack will remember..
>
> Then someone can encapsulate it in a button, menu or
> an entire pointless little shiny little applet.
No that's a demonstration of the ease of Windows and the archaicness
of Linux.
>>
>>You prove my point all the time....
>>
>>I prefer clicking on the icon that says "Scan image"
>
> That usually the way I do it as well. The expert interface
> does not negate the existence of the "morons-only" interface.
If both are indeed provided.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There are even some shiny happy gui tools that do the "scanner as fax
>>>>> machine or copier trick".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Sane is a bare bones abortion.
>>>
>>> How do the Windows variants "best it" exactly?
>>
>>
>>Try them and you will see. I have used both Linux deviants and Windows
>
> In other words: you have no idea.
No... I have used both SANE and Winfax and there is absolutely no
comparison.
Not even close.
Iter-program operability is only one area.
> You are just an uninformed ingoramus talking out of his ass.
>
>[deletia]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:24:17 -0400
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On 16 Jun 2000 11:39:04 +0300, Karri Kalpio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >...
> >> StarOffice is written in Java, eats a great deal of memory, and
> >...
> >
> >Is not.
>
> Believe it or not, it seems to be even more of a pig under Windows...
>
> --
> If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
> tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
> the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
> |||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
It could be Java, then. Windows really refuses to run Java the right
way, because it works on other platforms, too.
Java in Linux is actually quite fast. From my own experience, you do
have to watch your programming techniques a little. Some people create
ten different classes with AWT, Swing and JBCL to make a dialog that
counts to 10.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:20:27 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jim
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8ic9il$e65$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well I must say that I think that's a silly definition to use :). Like I
> > said before, where would a voice control system fit into this ?
> >
> > How about keyboard alternatives ?
>
> I think Rich (correct me, please, if I'm overstepping) would like us to
> be more specific, though to what purpose, I'm still unclear. Perhaps the
> following suggested list will stimulate thought:
>
> KUI keyboard
> CLI command line
> GUI graphics
> EUI eyeball
> VUI verbal
> NUI neural
> HUI handshake (literally, for wearable computer )
>
> Perhaps some of these could be "pure" interfaces (HUI, NUI?). Most of
> them would wind up being combined with others in a functional system.
>
You forgot a few:
FUI Forehead user interface, for when you bang your head on the computer.
(Windows95 is an FUI).
AUI Anal user interface, for systems which come up behind you in
(un)expected ways (Win3.x is an AUI).
PUI (I leave that one to your imagination.)
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
