Linux-Advocacy Digest #380, Volume #27 Wed, 28 Jun 00 11:13:06 EDT
Contents:
RE: Why linux sucks and why linux is best ("Pedro Iglesias")
RE: How fast is your text? ("Pedro Iglesias")
Re: Help setting up a home network. (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Processing data is bad! (Geoff Lane)
Re: 1st Linux PDA !!!: (Geoff Lane)
Re: Do not like Windows but ... (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: slashdot (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Kenneth P. Turvey)
Re: Windows98 (Tim Kelley)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(Bob Hauck)
Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause (Bob Hauck)
Re: Makefiles vs. VC++ 6 Projects, Error Levels (Bob Hauck)
Re: Microsoft and General Stupidity (Neil Cerutti)
Re: VB suck and Java rules (was: Re: Is Java 'larger' than VB ?) (Bob Hauck)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Jay Maynard)
Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Pedro Iglesias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why linux sucks and why linux is best
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:08:47 GMT
> Ordinary people, that doesn't use hours on learing operating
> systems, use windows and they are happy with it. Office is
> better than star office etc. I think windows98 and NT is better
> for 1) ordinary use with office, photoshop, games etc.
Windows NT/2000 is not better for games than Linux is. The rest
of the apps you say; of course, there is not a Linux version, so if
you need them, use Windows (or Mac or whatever). It is not inside
the system itself, it is a matter of software availability.
>I think
> Linux is better for companies that need more secure on their
> servers.
Obviously Unix servers are much better, but what's it against having
my home computer secure ?
> It doesn't matter for ordinary people that the security isn't on top
Security should always be on top, and more and more with internet
connections that are to come (at least at my country) with cable, DSL
and the so ... if you are not secure, uhh, sour data ...
> but it's best for servers and it isn't good for personal useage.
I agree with you, even when I think it is not a matter of the OS itself,
but hardware, and software vendors support. The Linux design is
good (or FreeBSD if we go to that).
> Why doesn't Linux support USB and plug and play?
There have been the isapnp tools around for a log time, and these
tools work very fine (in fact, are a lot of flexible). But, kernel 2.2.x
and 2.4.x (still not stable, but very close) support PnP. USB has
support at 2.3.x and 2.4.x (and 2.2.x patched too), and although
there will be non supported devices, remember than NT had not
USB support, and that Windows 98 USB support sucks.
------------------------------
From: "Pedro Iglesias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: How fast is your text?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:08:48 GMT
What kind of non-sense test is this ? Given a minimun text
throughtput, whichever amount above that will be superfluous.
Anyway, Microsoft does not encourage console applications
too much ... and yes, DOS Box on NT or Windows 2000 is
pathetic, but except for console tetris, what do you want the
text to be so fast for ?
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help setting up a home network.
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 08:17:29 -0500
Tim Palmer wrote:
> >The cheapest way is to use a crossover cable. You can only hook
> >two machines up this way, but otherwise he will need a hub.
>
> Shut up, you WOTHLESS COMMY!
>
I believe the strain of making up lies has finally broken what little
was left of his mind. Too bad, this was one of my favorite WinTrolls.
A nice pet for the group.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Lane)
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:50:55 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Yea but Windows GUI looks and works well.
MOO (matter of opinion)
I find it hugely cluttered with no real order to it's menues. Too much
screen space is taken up with non-relevant buttons and tabs and so on.
OTOH, some Unix gui are not much better.
--
/\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\
Happiness is a conscious choice, not an automatic response.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Lane)
Subject: Re: 1st Linux PDA !!!:
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:58:02 +0100
>> Nope. My point was that Windows is only of use if you have applications
>> that you want to run on it. If a user _wants_ to run Unix apps
>> then Windows is bugger all use.
there's always two sides to an argument :-)
--
/\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\
Happiness is a conscious choice, not an automatic response.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Do not like Windows but ...
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 08:47:09 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > The real killer for me is the ability to take that LyX or TeX file after
> > you are done and spit out PDF or Postscript files without paying any
> > money to the gods of computers (Adobe and M$). Thus, you are ready to
> > ship to the publisher, or even to post to "standards" based web sites
> > (You know, the ones that require you to post files in postscript or PDF,
> > hoping you will generate some money for Adobe in the process.) Not only
> > do you get the ability to generate these files for free, but you also
> > get the ability to work on a huge file without bogging your system into
> > senseless oblivion. I know it hooked me.
>
> You can also generate HTML documents from the same LaTeX source that
> generates DVI files. The DVI translations programs which are called drivers
> then translate the DVI files into PostScript, PDF, PCL, and another of other
> formats. Which puts the lie the statement that so many detractors use, that
> unix can only use PostScript printers without going through GhostScript.
Exactly. I've also used LyX to create some nice HTML based stories.
Output to HTML and you have a nice little story broken down by chapter.
Nothing bothers me more than those idiots that say only Postscript
printers can be used under Linux. I use a Canon Bubblejet, a HP InkJet,
and three different HP LaserJets. Haven't had any problems yet.
I just love the fact that no matter what type of output you are hoping
to create, you can type it up in LyX and be almost completely garuanteed
that you can convert to your desired output. No wasted time retyping or
hoping and praying that you can convert between text and then reformat
the way you want it. Just set it up and convert straigt to your desired
file format. That's what standards based computing was supposed to be.
Not this, MS Word, MS Excel, MS Powerpoint, MS .... thing that it has
turned into in most businesses. That's really sad, standards based on
lock in are no standards at all in my book.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:40:15 GMT
In article <8j9l2q$pvj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8j9fq5$lg8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I'm looking at it as
> > > an alternative to Windows.
> >
> > That's nice but don't expect Linux to be like Windows. It isn't.
>
> Oh I can see that. I can see the inconsistancies, the holes and
> mish-mash of ideas. This is the system that is trumpeted here as the
> downfall of Windows. Yet I can't even do something as simple as an
> Upgrade with one distro.
>
> 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.
I'm very curious about this.
KDE's window manager doesn't show anything that can be dragged (unless
you mean a window?), and there's nothing called explorer in KDE.
Perhaps you could rephrase, or even describe like "I dragged the thing
with a picture of a cow into the square watchamacallit which said
"gizmo" in the titlebar".
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: slashdot
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 08:48:47 -0500
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:33:46 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Jeff Szarka wrote:
> >
> >> I just think it's funny. The point is supposed to be Linux is so much
> >> better than NT right? I remember when the Win2k test site was DoS-ed.
> >> The suggestion at the time was that Win2k sucked because of it.. I
> >> don't really care why slashdot is down... It's the irony of it I
> >> enjoy.
> >
> >Every time you are tempted to post this sort of flamebait, you
> >really should go check out the OS statistics for hacked web
> >servers at attrition.org. NT/IIS is not looking very good, what
> >with 20% of "market share" and 90% of the defacements.
>
> Shut up you COMMY LIAR!
>
> >
> >--
> >Tim Kelley
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ah, the subtle approach. Gotta love it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenneth P. Turvey)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:51:57 -0500
On 27 Jun 2000 23:50:52 -0700, Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> "Kenneth" == Kenneth P Turvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Kenneth> I think is a very good reason for not allowing majority
> Kenneth> decisions in the most important aspects of our life. The
> Kenneth> whole point of the Bill of Rights (the first ten
> Kenneth> amendments to the US Constitution) is to take away the
> Kenneth> power of the majority to infringe some select rights of
> Kenneth> the minority.
>
>This is not correct. The purpose of the BoR was to prevent the
>government from infringing on the rights of "the people." There are
>no protections for minorities of any type in the Constitution itself
>nor in the BoR. Also, remember that in the late 18th C, only about
>15% of the population could vote. It was primarily their rights that
>were being protected.
The only people protected by the Bill of Rights were those that the
majority would punish through the normal processes outlined in the
Constitution. This group of people was a minority of the population at
large. The Bill of Rights protected a large portion of the 85% of the
population that could not vote as well. It specifically did not protect
enslaved blacks, but many of its protections were afforded women and the
landless even though they did not have the power to vote.
>Most of the history of the United States, up until mid-20th Century,
>is the history of political, social and economic mistreatment of
>minorities by the majority.
The terms `majority' and `minority' are not only used to denote race. I
was not using them that way in the previous post. The Bill of Rights
protected those with minority points of view from persecution. It still
does. The majority does not require protection.
--
Kenneth P. Turvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.tranquility.net/~kturvey/resume/resume.html
========================================================
IDIOT, n - A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in
human affairs has always been dominant and controlling.
-- Ambrose Bierce
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Kelley)
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:56:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27 Jun 2000 06:13:30 GMT, Darren Winsper
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:57:10 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> > So how is the proletrareit doing you STOOPID COMMY!
>>
>> This guy has got to be a joke. I hope so, because someone this
>> fucking stupid is almost not even imaginable.
>
>My guess is that "Tim Palmer" is S The Next Generation.
Can't be ... he's got to be faking it. "S" is genuine (a genuine idiot)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.iww.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
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?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:01:17 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:37:05 GMT, John Wiltshire
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If I could foretell the future, I'd be doing something other than
>buying hardware. As I can't I get the machine that best suits the
>current needs. Tomorrow's needs are hard to pick. Given that a
>serial modem now has a limited life (USB looks like it will replace
>serial ports in standard machines), and parallel ports are definitely
>on the way out.
I sure hope you are wrong about both of those. In our lab we have many
and varied uses for serial ports, so much so that our lab server has an
eight-port Boca card in it. None of these uses are running printers or
modems. Similarly, all sorts of gadgets are controllable via the
parallel port.
I guess if you're right there will be a market for add-on IO boards
and USB-to-whatever converters though...
>Linux doesn't support USB well yet so I guess that means you guys are
>stuck with dead end or high end hardware.
USB support is reputed to be much improved in 2.4. There is some
support, e.g. for USB modems, that has been backported to 2.2.
>You can say that for anything. What printer interface would YOU have
>recommended a year ago? If it is parallel or serial then I guess you
>would be stuck with hardware you can't even plug in to your machines
>let alone get a driver for in a year or so's time.
Hmmm...I guess I haven't seen these machines that have no parallel or
serial ports. Most winprinters seem to be parallel. I think that by
the time your prediction comes true that Linux will have the needed USB
support. This all sounds very similar to the advocacy of about three
years ago when Linux was doomed because it didn't have 3d support at
the same time as Windows.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:03:04 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:43:58 +0100, Sean Akers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>But as usual, it's the one rotten apple that spoils the whole
>>basket. I'd say try SuSE, it's in my opinion the best Linux
>>distribution available.
I'm pretty impressed with Caldera eDesktop as well.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Makefiles vs. VC++ 6 Projects, Error Levels
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:19:33 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:17:24 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[changed warning level]
>"The project setings have changed since the last build. Would you like
>to rebuild the affected files?"
>Watch it build the affected files, namely all of them!
>Brain-damaged doesn't begin to describe this behavior!
You can reproduce it with makefiles by having the targets depend on the
makefile. If you want this behavior that is.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Subject: Re: Microsoft and General Stupidity
Date: 28 Jun 2000 13:56:57 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mario Aparicio posted:
>User stupidity? Well, does a PC user have to know exactly what's
>going on in a computer in order to use it properly?
Yes.
>From my experience supporting my office-mates and family and
friends, they cannot be effective computer users until they
understand certain concepts... the more they understand the
better. Try teaching Windows Explorer to a user that does not
understand the file system, as an example.
Micros~1 has been successful in getting people to *believe*
things, e.g.:
An operating system is worth paying a lot of money for; You can
use a computer even though you're not interested in learning
how they work;
The first time those expectations and beliefs are shattered is a
bad moment for novice users, and they will not be consoled by
a more knowledgable person explaining why things went wrong.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: VB suck and Java rules (was: Re: Is Java 'larger' than VB ?)
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:28:54 GMT
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:36:43 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Michael Marion wrote:
>> > http://www.zdnet.com/products/stories/reviews/0,4161,2556513,00.html
>> - They also say that Solaris can't "view server logs with base product,"
>> Uh, what? I can sure log into a Solaris server and use any tool I want
>> to view the logs. Solaris is part of the "base product."
>
>This may be a silly question, but aren't the server logs text files?
>If so, couldn't one view them in any editor (or even less)?
Of course, but if you have adopted the Windows Approach (tm) you must
have a special tool for every purpose. Using a general-purpose thing
like an editor is Just Not Done.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jay Maynard)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 28 Jun 2000 14:38:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 28 Jun 2000 14:00:04 +0100, Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are wrong on both counts. Business is universally of the
>side of protectionism that benefits them.
It is that qualifiction that shoots the hole in the argument. The original
argument was that business is universally on the side of protectionism. Your
statement is true, and unremarkable: aren't businesses allowed to act in
accordance with their own interests, just as people are?
> For someone who is so
>cognisant of the problems with the use of the word "free" as espoused
>by the FSF, I am surprised that you have not realised that the "free"
>market is a total sham.
No, I simply recognize that the free market must, like all other freedoms,
necessarily include the freedom to do things that piss you off.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 09:56:14 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [deletia]
> > God, even a professed newbie sees how damaging Corel's attempt at
> Linux
> > is. I think they seriously had the best ideas in mind when they
> > started, but a corporation built on the ideals of closed source
> software
> > just can't figure out how to "make Linux thiers" the way they want to.
> >
> > It's too bad. I would have liked to have seen Corel really build up
> on
> > Linux properly (like an actual Unix/Linux based Word Perfect Suite,
> not
> > a Windows based port), but they seem bound and determined to kill
> > themselves. Selling Netwinder was another bad idea in my opinion.
> The
> > Netwinder was a great product, and it would have made a killing given
> > the proper attention. Rebel.com has some good ideas, but they don't
> > have the marketing force that Corel has. Overall, Corel is adding
> > credibility to the people that say Linux is a cheap knockoff of
> > Windows. They are trying very hard to make it appear as if that is
> > exactly what it is. Too bad, a lot of people are buying Corel's Linux
> > packages. If this is thier first experience, a lot of them will
> assume
> > that is just the way Linux is and give up on it.
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Nathaniel Jay Lee
> >
>
> I own a personal copy of Corel's WPO2K and I am extremely satisfied with
> it. I use the MS flavour of WPO at work, and I found switching between
> that and WP8 at home extremely annoying because of all the WP8 Motif
> baggage; the WP8 widget set sucked. Now I have exactly the same
> interface at home that I do at work, and I can just get on with whatever
> project I'm working on and not have to try and remember each and every
> subtle difference between the two. Kudos to Corel for that decision.
>
> Except for the initial load time, WPO2K outperforms MS Office on my
> underpowered home system. I'm not so much of a purist that I care what
> libraries Corel uses as long as they load and don't crash. And I
> certainly prefer Corel's approach to Sun's bloated StarOffice.
>
> Corel put a lot of development effort (spelled $$$$) into further
> developing the Wine environment for this project. And they gave that
> work back to the open source community. I don't understand how you can
> see this as a negative, or an attempt by Corel to "own" Linux. Wine is
> a free ticket for many of us out of our involuntary MSFT bondage.
>
> I also have a half dozen other "proprietary" Linux applications, from
> drivers to graphics apps. I don't have, and have never had, a problem
> with paying for something if it offers the best value for my money.
>
> Sorry you feel the way you do about Corel. If they go under, we'll all
> have less choice, and I thought Linux was all about choice.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
I personally, feel that Wine is the wrong thing to do. I know that
Corel are trying to do the right thing by Linux, but they just don't
seem to be able to figure out what that right thing is. As far as your
attempted implication that I am anti-commercial Linux, where did you get
that impression. I have no problem with buying thing either, if they
are worth buying. I have purchased many Linux applications (MoneyDance,
StarOffice before it was free, Applixware, games, drivers) and I have no
problem whatsoever with commercial interest or development for Linux. I
just think Corel has taken the wrong track.
Corel's decision to impliment WPO2K on Linux with the Wine emulation
layer is, in my opinion, a mistake. They could have switched to one of
the "modern" widget sets on Linux without ditching actual native code.
I realize it would have taken a lot of time, but porting win32 to Linux
is a bad thing IMHO. I don't see how putting all the Windows garbage on
Linux is going to help Linux. Yes, you can run Windows applications on
Linux, but I seriously want Linux applications. They run faster, are
more stable, and don't carry along all the windows baggage. This is my
*opinion*. I don't wish Corel ill in their attempts at Linux, I just
think they aren't doing what they need to do to survive. I feel they
are shooting themselves in the foot. This doesn't mean I want to see
them fail, just that I see them failing. I'm sorry you interpreted that
as ill will. Corel had a chance to really make a positive impact on
Linux, but their shoddy distribution (have you seen the horro stories?)
and attempt to drag along all the Windows baggage they can are destined
to fail, and make Linux look like the cheap clone it is trying not to
be. Some people think Linux should just be a Windows clone. While they
are entitled to thier opinion, I don't feel Linux should be steered in
that direction. That is what Corel is trying to do at the moment,
instead of building on what is there or trying to come up with something
truly killer for Linux, they are trying to turn it into a Windows
clone. This will only hurt Linux's reputation (as it becomes more
Windows like, and wine running apps become the norm: buggier windows
apps on Linux that is) and make Corel look bad to both Windows users and
Linux users.
If you feel this is an attack on Corel, I'm sorry you see it that way.
It is just a statement of what I see happening mixed with my opinions on
the matter. Corel is making mistakes. I don't see how that can be
denied. Look at how poorly their business is doing. Something isn't
right there. I'm pointing out what I see as the mistakes. If I'm not
right, then so be it. But I do think Corel could do some great things
if they focused on the right areas. Right now they are kind of up in
the air. Hopefully they can turn things around. But, I'm not holding
my breath waiting for it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
