Linux-Advocacy Digest #162, Volume #27 Sun, 18 Jun 00 02:13:14 EDT
Contents:
10 Linux "features" nobody cares about. (Tim Palmer)
Re: How many times, installation != usability. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are really waya
way OT ("Christopher Smith")
Re: How many times, installation != usability. (Gary Hallock)
Re: The Tholenbot (was: Microsoft invites Canada south) (tholenbot)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joseph)
Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies.... (Terry
Porter)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Gary Hallock)
Re: Thinking of running Linux? Read this first before you try.............
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 18:36:13 -0400
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 10 Linux "features" nobody cares about.
1. It scails down
Noboddy cares if Linxu can run on some geaks' obsolete 386 in 2MB of RAM. Windows runs
on todays
computer's, and the fact that it doesn't run on some obsoleat piece-of-shit computer
from 1991
doessn't mean shit.
2. It's multi-user
Linux ganes NOTHING over Windows by being multi-user. All that meens to me is that I
have to
remember a password just to be able to get into my own computer. Users want to get
their work
done, not waist time "logging in" screwing around with usernames and passwords that
can't
even be disaballed, and having to remember the "root password" every time somethign
goes
wrong. Those "other users" that UNIX is dessined to support through VT100 terminals
can get
the're own computer, and the "administrative identities" aka daemon, nobody, mail,
news, bin,
sys, and uucp, can all go to hell. It's not the '70s anymore.
3. It's "flexibbal" (in other words you can turn off the GUI)
And noboddy cares. Linux is just as useless without its GUI as Windows is. There is NO
REASON
to turn off the GUI, and NO REASON to turn off the desktop, and NO REASON to turn off
the
Window manager. These are all useless feetures, and Linux gains NOTHING over Widnos
for halvign
them. Yet Linux isn't flexibble enough to allow you to turn off the multi-user
"feature". Now
THAT would be a somewhat usefull feature.
4. You can logg in remotely
...creating the nead for the whole username-and-pasword system. And since it's a
feature that
only geeks need, the only "beneffit" for normal users is that they need a password
(see #2)
to keep hackers out, where they don't need one if they run Windows.
5. "X" Windows works over a network.
Another faeture that nobody ever uses. This doesn't make "X" Windows more usefull to
most
users. Windows still wins.
6. The CLI can multitask and network.
...which still doesn't make it any more usefull than DOS. Multitasking is only
usefull to normal
people in a GUI, which is why DOS doesn't do it.
7. It gives you "choice"
...betwean one crappy program and 50 others just like it. Most people's "choice" is
MS Windows
and the fine MS software that goes together with it. They would never give up all that
just to
run Linux and its shitty little beta-test apps except if they were tricked into it.
8. It's "free"
...but it costs lots and lots of time, a little time at first durring the
installation, and
then more and more time after the installation as one thing after annother goes wrong.
9. It's Open-Source
...but nobody want's to waste time fixing all the bugs it has when they can just run
Windos
like they've been doing and have world-class sofrware.
10. It's been ported to 16,000 different hardware plattforms that alreaddy shipped
with UNIX
to beagen with.
Yawn.
:
:post
The post command is unknown.
:exit
The exit command is unknown.
:close
The close command is unknown.
:quit
File modified since last complete write; write or use ! to override.
:save
The save command is unknown.
:s
No previous regular expression.
:Oh darnit!
The Oh command is unknown.
:?
No previous regular expression.
:quit
File modified since last complete write; write or use ! to override.
:!
Usage: [line [,line]] ! command.
:! quit
File modified since last write.
bash: quit: command not found
quit: exited with status 127
:?
No previous regular expression.
:DIE YOU PIECE OF LINSHIT!!!!!!
The DIE command is unknown.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:55:16 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Still waiting, Tim. Admit you are totally ignorant of Linux and S/390
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:51:14 -0400
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are
really waya way OT
"stan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Remember Australia produces 70% of it's own consumption and we're
> still being dictated to by the oil cartels.
It's even worse with LPG. We produce more LPG than we consume, yet our LPG
prices still rise ~30% (literally overnight) to bring them in line with the
rest of the world.
> Just my AUD $0.02 worth
Hmm, I wonder if opinions are GST exempt ? :D
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:47:52 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
>
> Okay. Maybe usefull to some UNIX nut who has to wright shell scripts all the time to
>add in
> all the missing features that are built rigte into Windows. We in the Windows world
>have no
> use for them, as our commputers work just fine without them.
>
That's your opinion,m which is worth nothing. I noticed you didn't comment on my
remarks about Linux
for S/390. Come, on Tim. Admit you have no idea what you are talking about. I'm
waiting .....
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 18:05:41 -0400
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Tholenbot (was: Microsoft invites Canada south)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl
Knechtel) wrote:
> tholenbot ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> : wrote:
> : > If it were a real, even only vaguely human, being, such as they may
> : > harbour not at Ann but at Cornell, he/she would have picked
> : > the intentional blooper which you may find in one of the [snip me]'s.
>
> : My last reply to you was generated using the Eliza clone that comes
> : with
> : Emacs.
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
How ironic. Taking logic lessons from Jacques "The Fisherman" Guy
again, Karl?
> : How predictable that you failed to recognize this fact,
>
> On what basis do you make this claim?
Self-evident.
> : as well as the fact that the nature of the replies in that last message
> : was a clear departure from my usual posting style.
>
> Illogical, as he is not "a regular" to Tholenbot threads, and therefore
> should not be expected to recognize your "usual posting style".
That's his problem, Karl.
> : This bot
>
> Which bot?
More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
> : picked up on your reference to Eliza and switched its botting
> : algorithms as a result, so either it's not really a bot or it's more
> : advanced than any bot its author has ever witnessed.
>
> On what basis do you claim to know what bots "its author has ever
> witnessed"?
Don't you know?
> : > Welcome back, Hasan B. Mutlu, glad to see you are risen from the
> : > grave!
>
> : Does it surprise you that a posting identity with "bot" in its name
> : would behave in a bot-like manner?
>
> Non sequitur.
Incorrect.
> How ironic.
What is "ironic", Karl?
> : > Are you still with AT&T?
>
> : You erroneously presuppose that I was ever "with" AT&T.
>
> Incorrect.
Balderdash.
> He presupposes that Hasan B. Mutlu was "with" AT&T.
> Reading comprehension problems again?
Illogical.
> : [Ed. Yes, I have considered writing a real Tholenbot.
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Unnecessary.
> : Several times in fact.
>
> Irrelevant.
On the contrary.
> : I have written a Bill Gates simulator,
>
> Irrelevant.
Incorrect.
> : but it just talks to you,
>
> Incorrect.
Prove it.
> : it doesn't reply. I've never found the time to tackle writing a real
> : Tholenbot.
>
> Balderdash. You would have had plenty of time had you not wasted it by
> tholenbotting the "old-fashioned" way. How embarrassing!
Irrelevant.
> : But hope springs eternal.]
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Self-evident.
> : --
> : Prove that it's just a flesh wound, if you think you can.
>
> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
Open your eyes.
--
Prove that it's just a flesh wound, if you think you can.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:55:22 -0400
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Gary Hallock wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What maiks you think that? Windows is everywhere. Version's of it run on home PC's
>and on large
>> corparate networks. The fastest sistem on the TPC/C list (the space shuttal) runs
>Windows 2000.
>> UNIX is used by a bunch of wining geeks on there old 386's (bycicals) because they
>do'nt think Bill
>> Gaits desserves the money they woud halve to spend on a computer that can run
>Windos.
>
>Really? Windows in everywhere? Not in my office. I have a 64-bit dual processor
>RS/6000 workstation
>running AIX 4.3. Next to it I have a Thinkpad running Linux. I run Lotus Notes on
>Linux on my Thinkpad
>and redirect the display to my workstation. There are about 1000 of these AIX boxes
>in my area. Then we
>have a 12-way S/390 G6 running Linux on VM/ESA. No Windows in sight.
>
>Gary
Ahhhh,
This sounds like heaven.
Can I go?
Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:38:40 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:24:47 GMT, Daniel Johnson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>There is no reason for MS to spend effort on this kind of thing-
>the people who are complaining are never, ever going to
>be satisfied with NT- because it isn't Unix.
Maybe, maybe not. What with the popularity of the Internet, lots of
users have found themselves having to use a Unix prompt for one thing
or another, typically quick edits to their web site. I know that I
used to get calls about "why does vi/emacs/pico keep scrolling a couple
of lines off the screen". Or "why doesn't highlighting work right", or
"why does less lose track of where it is"?
The answer was "use this working telnet program we've put on our ftp
site".
>> think that MS in all these years could have snagged the code if they
>> couldn't figure it out on their own.
>
>That would be illegal.
Only if it is under GPL. There are other free licenses.
>It seems to me the complaint keeps shifting around, almost
>as if someone around here doesn't actually know what's
>wrong with MS telnet...
No, it is that there is more than one complaint. Off the top of my
head, not having used the piece of junk in a while (I use PuTTY):
1. Tells the remote side it is ansi, when it isn't.
2. Doesn't tell the remote end the correct window size and can't
change window sizes.
3. Has bugs in handling highlighting (inverse video and such).
None of these are major. I would think that all would be pretty easy
to fix. But they are _really_ annoying, particularly when using
editors.
>Okay. But I seem to recall that Leslie was complain about
>how MS is forever implementing extensions to standards.
Saying you are an ansi emulator when you aren't isn't part of any
standard I can think of.
>> They could have designed their protocol so as to not require patches to
>> Apache for full functionality.
>This is heading for more boring conspiracy ranting, I can see it now.
So are you saying I'm lying? That there aren't really any problems
with the FP server extensions and it's all in my mind? That MS doesn't
tell ISP's that it'll all be great if they just put in IIS? What?
I can't _prove_ that they wanted to force ISP's to NT, but I was
running one at the time and I sure got that impression. I guess it was
just a coincidence that they did Frontpage the way they did, right at
the time they were putting on the hard sell to ISP's about switching to
NT.
After a while, explaining this kind of thing as an accident starts to
wear a little thin.
>After all, we all know that no MS product can ever succeed because
>the users *wanted* it. After all, no Linux product ever did... :P
The users did want FP, sure (well, until one of the numerous bugs ate
their site at least). The ISP's didn't, not the way MS configured it.
The FP server extensions have a history of severe security bugs,
problematic installation, and administrative headaches. And they
weren't really necessary in the first place if the thing had been
implemented a little differently.
But if you just put in IIS it'll all be great! Heaven forbid that they
should just sell the damn product and make it easy for ISP's to support
it on their existing systems. No, they had to resort to arm-twisting
via the ISP's customers.
I was there, and it pissed me off. A lot.
>They could have implemented enough of the Unix APIs to be
>useful, yes, but there is no reason to do that- they aren't selling
>a Unix.
Then let's not pretend that POSIX on NT is anything but a marketing
sham.
>If you write software to these APIs, you gain nothing from running
>it on NT.
No, but you do gain the ability to change platforms. Can't have that.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:58:50 -0400
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Chris Wenham wrote:
>
> Seán Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I totally reject your assertion that Microsoft bundled a browser only
> > to hurt Netscape.
>
> "only"? Okay, I can't argue with that. Perhaps they also bundled it
> to expand the pits-and-flats area of the CD so it would have more
> rainbow-shiney effects ;-)
Why not because MS's interpretation of the past appeal ruling would
support even your humor. The appeal MS refers to with confidence was a
2:1 decision where the dissenter said there has to be a threshold of
consumer benefit lest ANY alternative explanation for IE/Windows
integration protect MS from the law.
The DOJ responded to the appeal by MS using many of e-mails to show
intent and MS was unable to refute the e-mails credibly. Judge Jackson
used intent as a metric for the merits of IE integration. Courts can
asertain intention every day.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 21:41:01 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies....
Reply-To: No-Spam
On 14 Jun 2000 15:00:09 GMT, Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <8i6j1b$m23$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>David Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>: Talk to Earthlink, Worldnet, FreeWeb, AOL, Compuserv and see what they
>>: think of Linux.
>>
>>Just out of curiousity, Steve, do you have accounts on ALL of those ISP's
>>with which to troll this newsgroup?
>There are only a couple dozen people on the entire Net who are
>pissed off about Linux, and Steve/Mike is most of them.
>
>
Hahahahahaha
So well put, Mark!
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 day 14 hours 53 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 21:59:04 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Let us know when you have a mainframe in your living room.
>
> Better let your wife know first though :)
I suppose you just are not aware of the fact that you can get a P390 card that
plugs into your PC and supports the full S/390 instruction set. You can run
OS/390, VM/ESA and Linux on it.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 21:52:30 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thinking of running Linux? Read this first before you try.............
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok so you have had it with Microsoft and all the semi-legal tactics
> they have employed over the years.
Illegal, not semi-legal. Big difference.
> We all feel the same way and in fact there are more Microsoft
> supporters that want to see Microsoft split up than most would
> believe.
Because a stock split is always a "good thing"(tm).
> Putting all the legal jargon aside, we reach the question "so what
> about Linux?"
> Most of you have read about Linux and how it is a "free" alternative
> operating system that will compete with the likes of Windows and the
> monolith of Microsoft.
> To the Napster generation this sounds as good as free beer did to the
> 1967 anti-establishment generation.
Free dope, moron. My generation didn't drink "bud", we smoked it.
> Unfortunately the reality is that nothing is really free.
> Is your time worth something to you.
> If so, you will be spending a lot of it reading contradicting How-To's
> and convoluted Linux documentation.
Didn't have to read a single how-to to install this system.
> How about hardware support and applications support?
All my hardware is supported out-of-the-box with Caldera. It wasn't
supported by MSFT when I loaded NT on this system a few months ago.
> Take a casual walk through CompUSA and see how many Linux packages you
> find.
I've got five boxes of shrink-wrap Linux software I purchased locally.
And I live in a farm town with only one software store.
> Ask a sales rep about Linux and see what kind of answer you get. Ask
> your friends about Linux and see how many are running it.
Ask a sales rep about anything, and you're likely to get a stupid
uninformed answer. Not all of my friends run Linux, we've got one rebel
who's a FreeBSD freak.
> Ask your future college what laptop they want you to buy. Ask your
> future company what email system and what corporate platform they use.
Now you have a good point there. If your "future" college doesn't have
UNIX/Linux in their curriculum, my "present" employer won't even
interview you. Not even for a position in our Windows group. Our
e-mail system is non-Microsoft, and our "corporate platform" is
intentionally diverse.
> Windows is about standards.
Horseshit. Windows is about hijacking and lobotomizing standards.
> Linux is the wannabee on the block. Sure
> you get 500 applications included with your Linux CD. Do you really
> need 10 different editors? Five different compilers? 20 different
> utilities to enable your printer to print?
> 10 different dialup programs?
Ain't it neat? I actually get to pick the one I like the best, instead
of having some bozo from Redmond make that decision for me.
> Take an honest look and make a decision.
> How about data that won't work with anyone but another Linux user?
How about data that only works with Microsoft? Haven't you got this
completely bass-ackwards?
> Sure basic Excel and Word documents work, but do the sophisticated
> ones work?
Absolutely.
> Nope, and I speak from experience.
Goddamn teenagers think they know everything. Look kid, stay in school
but pick a backup career choice, like plumber or carpenter, so I don't
have to support your unemployable worthless ass with my taxes.
> Linux is truly not an option for most people.
> It is a joke of a system.
> Don't believe it? Try it for yourself at http://www.cheapbytes.com
> For $1.99 you can try any distro you wish and draw your own
> conclusions.
OK. So how much W2K can I get for $1.99?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
