Linux-Advocacy Digest #372, Volume #27 Tue, 27 Jun 00 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Gary Hallock)
Re: OS's ... (Michael Marion)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Re: 10 Linux "features" nobody cares about. (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Microsoft and General Stupidity (sandrews)
Re: How fast is your text? (Gary Hallock)
Re: How fast is your text? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Microsoft .NET: A Platform for the Next Generation Internet (Gary Hallock)
Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Re: Linux is junk (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux is junk
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Michael Marion)
Re: Linux is junk
Re: Linux is junk
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ("Shock Boy")
Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)
Re: Windows98
Re: How fast is your text? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:16:26 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Linux (+KDE or +Gnome) is nothing like Windows. Windows I can expect
> > > things to work together. Linux doesn't even do that! I tried drag
> and
> > > drop between KDE's Window Manager and KDE's Explorer - blimey! -
> doesn't
> > > work! And that's just one of the holes I've found so far.
> > >
> >
> > If you mean dragging from kfm to the desktop, it works just fine for
> the
> > rest of us. You seem to have all sorts of problems that no one else
> does.
>
> You obviously did not _read_ what I said. I dragged from KDE explorer to
> Kfm. It does not work. That (if you read it) is _not_ the same as kfm to
> the desktop.
>
> --
> ---
> Pete
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Actually you said "I tried drag and drop between KDE's Window Manager and
KDE's Explorer". Perhaps you could enlighten me. What is KDE
explorer? I assumed you meant the KDE equivalent of Windows explorer.
But that would be kfm. And what do you mean by Window manager? What
exactly are you trying to do?
Gary
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS's ...
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:18:02 GMT
Pedro Iglesias wrote:
> You do not need to offend people. I said Linux had done a good way too, why
> do you just hear what you want ?
Actually I had just noted that you came onto the scene posting a bunch
of pro-windows posts (which in COLA is just asking for trouble, as is
posting pro linux in COMNA) at about the same time that Tim Palmer
seemed to vanish. Today I see that Tim is back, and you're still making
posts.. so I was wrong with my guess that the person playing "Tim" is
still at it.. and you seem to be a real person. Sorry.
BTW, I'm not trying to insult Tim Palmer either. Read some of his
posts.. it's clear he's deliberately doing misspellings and such to
pretend to look as illiterate as possible. I find it hard to believe
that anyone who's that illiterate could work at a decent enough job to
afford a computer. If it's not someone doing it deliberately, then I
feel deeply for anyone that has to work with him every day.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
Adolescence is a surreal world: kids who don helmets and practice
banging into
one another for hours each week are deemed healthy and wholesome, even
heroic.
Geeks are branded strange and anti-social for building and participating
in one
of the world's truly revolutionary new cultures - the Internet and the
World
Wide Web. -- Jon Katz / Slashdot.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:17:31 GMT
On 27 Jun 2000 17:52:29 GMT, Henry Blaskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In talk.politics.libertarian Darren Winsper
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Do you even understand how business works? Microsoft said, if you
>>> want our product at a discount, you have to agree to sell a copy
>>> with every machine you sell. You are free to buy it at full price,
>>> or you can get it at a discount with conditions. My grocery store
>>> does a similar thing to me all the time, but you don't hear anyone
>>> running around crying "monopoly".
>
>> Does your grocery store have 90% of the grocery market?
>
>Yes, they have 90% of the "large grocery stores within 4 miles of
>my house" market. Any other questions, or would you like to
>address the point?
Mebbe you should move out of the styx instead.
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 10 Linux "features" nobody cares about.
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:12:18 GMT
In article <8ja6je$r4p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) wrote:
> In article <8j18ht$2vi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In fact, nearly all of Microsoft's "Innovations" were blatently
> > lifted from the UNIX and Linux playbooks.
> [...]
> > Multiple windows (which softees dispised until the release of
> > Windows 3.0),
> [...]
>
> Actually, multiple windows were available in Windows 2.0. Of course,
> that sucked for separate reasons (no apps, slow, ugly and clunky
> interface, etc.) so much that it was a veritable galactic-class black
> hole next to the sucking-mighty-mountain-ranges-through-a-straw
> suckiness of Windows 3.0...
As I said, "softees" despised Windows 286, Windows 386, and Windows 2.0,
and literally "played" with Windows 3.0 (since most of their
ill-behaved, TSR infested applications wouldn't run under Windows 3.0).
Of course, by the time Windows 2.0 came out, X11 was in release 3,
Sun's SunView was being ported to X11, and Microsoft was frantically
trying to cut a deal with HP for the Motif look and feel used in
Windows 3.1. I don't remember who was suing whom, but Xerox had
given the X11 Consortium a bunch of GPL and Open Source software
aimed at messing up Apple and Microsoft. That was back in 1989.
> The fact that it was a descendent of IBMs CUA stuff was much more
> apparent then though. The "letz kloan da Mac"-type things were mostly
> later additions (and those sucked the worst in 3.0 too.)
>
> Donal.
> --
> Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you
didn't
> realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
> -- Jeffrey Hobbs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 90 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:17:42 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft and General Stupidity
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:38:33 -0400, sandrews
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Jeff Szarka is a prime example!
>
> Once again... I admit I might have judged Linux users to harshly and
> something comes along to reinforce my initial opinion.
How do you know I am a Linux user?
I think your predigest is showing.
--
--
"This company has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down.
If the problem persists, contact your vendor or appeal to a higher
court."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:21:28 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How fast is your text?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> And how many Windows users are concerned with text?
>
Apparently Pete Goodwin whose lame attempt at proving Windows was faster than
Linux consisted of writing a few million lines of text to a file. That is what
started all of this. You should really keep up.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: How fast is your text?
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:23:25 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Tue, 27 Jun 2000 17:45:51 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>And how many Windows users are concerned with text?
This is true, which is one reason I said it was in fact
a contrived benchmark.
However, all users should be concerned with text, althought not
necesarily console text. Text, in all its glory (including
fonts, colors, boldness, italics/oblique, and underline),
is the lifeblood of a document, in most cases.
It would be of interest to see if Windows rendering of a test
text document would be faster or slower than X rendering
of the same, or similar document, and whether the Windows
one is prettier (as is claimed by many Winvocates, and not
without reason -- the X fonts range from merely useful to
downright ugly, at least on Netscape).
I'll have to set up a more complicated test case using raw
windows (both X and Windows). One simple one would be, say,
50,000 renditions of a single test page.
Another possibility, similar to Perl, would be Tcl/TK.
Tcl is a very dumb language, and TK is the very smart
widget system that goes with it; versions exist on both
Windows and Unix. Another possibility is Perl/TK.
[my stuff snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:23:22 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft .NET: A Platform for the Next Generation Internet
Tim Palmer wrote:
> http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/jun00/06-22stevebf2k.asp
Amazing. Tim Palmer finally posted and append without spelling errors!
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:24:03 GMT
On 27 Jun 2000 17:04:51 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:21:18 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:04:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>One example...Big deal..
>>>
>>>I'd rather have decent looking video and sound and be able to use ANY
>>>scanner, ANY printer, ANY modem and virtually ANY device my little
>>>heart desires, under Win98 without looking at HCL lists like I have to
>>
>> Except you don't need to use "ANY" scanner. Unless you are more
>> of a moron than we think you are then you don't pick your hardware
>> at random anyways. Even under "it runs everything", some options
>> are better than others. The overhead of that complexity is no less
>> than needing to deal with the question of compatibility.
>
>I'd rather go into a computer store, pick up the first kind of what I need that I
>see, and bye it insted of worrying wether its on the HCL or not.
Then you are a moron. You negate the invisible hand and the whole
point of a free market. Uniformed choice is no choice at all.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:25:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Tue, 27 Jun 2000 17:42:03 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>He sure is a fucking retard, for trying Linux in the first place.
>
>He got what he deserved.
At least he has the option of trying Linux without paying for it.
>
>
>On 27 Jun 2000 20:12:18 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>*snip*
>>
>>Jerry, the reason that you are having so many problems with
>>linux is because you're a fucking retard. Any five year old can
>>understand how to make linux work; why cant you?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-----yttrx
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:25:27 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:55:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Linux is a stinkin', steamin' pile of shit as far as I am concerned.
>
>I wasted $40 on Corel Office and wish I could get my hard earned money
>back!
Corel is a wannabe, that's all there is to it.
[vague complaints removed]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:27:14 GMT
Hoobajoob wrote:
> It's the theory anyway, it's never happened to me...
> Oh, and just for the record, win2k _never_ overwrites protected dlls. So
> trhe worst you can do is break an application by overwriting one of its
> dll's, you can't really break windows that way.
Au Contraire... w2k pops up a window warning you that the program/driver
you're installing is trying to overwrite one of the protected dlls.. and
allows you to let it continue if you want. Get an SBLive and try
installing the Livewire for w2k drivers/suite... you'll see what I
mean.
This highly touted feature of w2k boils down to this:
1. You can allow the driver/program to overwrite the files and perhaps
make w2k unstable (and of course then it's your fault).
or 2. You don't let it overwrite and the program/driver you're
installing either fails, or won't work properly.
So this protection really only limits the system, it doesn't fix the
underlying problem.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
More favorite error messages:
"Press almost any key to continue"
"System Error: the operation completed successfully"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:29:37 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:24:58 +0100, Alistair Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8jb1r2$2qmm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> *snip*
>>
>> Jerry, the reason that you are having so many problems with
>> linux is because you're a fucking retard. Any five year old can
>> understand how to make linux work; why cant you?
>
>Leave off him! It aint easy reading all those HOWTOs when the customer wants
>another fries and a coke with his order.
Howto's have nothing to do with it. PCI is PCI and assuming he doesn't
have some relic that Win9x would puke on, his claims are somewhat
dubious.
Although, Corel tries to ignore ISA. But then again so does BeOS.
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:31:28 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 17:45:22 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Have you ever considered the fact that maybe for the normal people out there
>Linux sucks?
Your rhetoric doesn't effectively counter his point. The
complaints were completely generic. They are meaningless
both in that they are unverifiable and that they lack the
detail necessary for anyone to render assistance.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:31:41 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Marion
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >Full Name wrote:
> > >
> > >> We recently had a Mandrake box rendered unusable when the machine that
> > >> was used as a backup failed to answer the mount request.
> > >
> > >Why don't you configure it properly...
> >
> > Ah... the usual UNIXhead answer whenever someone complains about falling
> > into yet another UNIX misconfiguration trap: "It's not the fault of
> > UNIX, it's the fault of the user for not configuring UNIX properly."
> >
> > And they wonder why the Linux companies have fallen on hard times...
>
> Just exactly what hard times would those be? Linux continues to increase
> marketshare, mostly with servers, but also some desktops.
>
> as for configuration...you should see the nightmares that arise when
> Windoze isnt correctly configured.
Every linux install I have withnessed had the difficulty in configuration.. but i've
yet to see
any nightmares over windows.
Insert CD, click install.. sip some coffee.. then install one's applications.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:35:41 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:35:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Griping too much?
>
>I tried Linux and it didn't recognize one piece of
>hardware I had.
I've had Linux successfully detect & supprt hardware from nvidia,
ati, 3dfx, s3, 3com, creative labs, linksys, umax, buslogic, adaptec,
seagate, quantum, advansys, mylex, hauppauge, toshiba,
western digital, dlink, and a couple of lowend USB vendors.
YMMV.
>
>A total waste of time.
The claim that Linux wouldn't detect ANYthing is rather dubious.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:40:08 GMT
On 27 Jun 2000 17:03:39 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 26 Jun 2000 10:56:30 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 26 Jun 2000 06:29:45 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:17:15 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>>> Got an extra $300 he could have?
>>
>>That gets you a bare OS - not even a compiler. You'd need a few
>>thousand at least to match the functionality of the things included
>>in almost every Linux distribution.
>
>James wants fonts that don't look like shit. Windows has them. Lie-nux doesn't.
You repeating that lie won't make it any more true.
Besides, even if it were true you could throw a lot of pixels at
the problem with the money you would end up wasting on WinDOS.
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: How fast is your text?
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:43:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:21:28 -0400 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> And how many Windows users are concerned with text?
>>
>
>Apparently Pete Goodwin whose lame attempt at proving Windows was faster than
>Linux consisted of writing a few million lines of text to a file. That is what
>started all of this. You should really keep up.
No doubt. :-)
However, the benchmark in this case writes to the display.
Slightly different issue, and sponge's point is a valid one,
in a sense. It's possible NT's console text handling sucks
but everything else works wonderfully well (I have my doubts;
I think the problem's in the bitmap scrolling) -- note that
the old IBM BIOS sucked as well printing text to the character
display (never mind the bitmap!), so there's precedent. :-)
>
>Gary
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:43:00 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:31:41 GMT, Shock Boy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> >
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Marion
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Full Name wrote:
[deletia]
>> as for configuration...you should see the nightmares that arise when
>> Windoze isnt correctly configured.
>
>Every linux install I have withnessed had the difficulty in configuration.. but i've
>yet to see
>any nightmares over windows.
>
>Insert CD, click install.. sip some coffee.. then install one's applications.
Whereas the experience of many of us has been quite the opposite.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
