Linux-Advocacy Digest #390, Volume #27 Thu, 29 Jun 00 08:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Competition and Open Source (Ray Chason)
Linux Demo Day (LinuxKnight)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Ready for Linux ? The "Furniture Scale" ("Martin Fitzpatrick")
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Competition and Open Source
Date: 29 Jun 2000 09:28:40 GMT
Osugi Sakae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>MS should be shitting their pants.
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
Microsoft has been shitting their pants for some time now.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: LinuxKnight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux Demo Day
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:53:20 GMT
Hello group-
If anyone out there is in the Southern California area, and is
interested in seeing a demonstration of Linux running on various
hardware configurations, with various Linux distributions, then you
might want to stop by Linux Demo Day.
I am the coordinator of Demo Day for Orange County Linux User's Group.
Other LUGs have done demo day as well, it was started last year, we
participated then also. Last year around 150 LUGs worldwide held their
own demo days, coordinated thru mailing lists. See
http://www.linuxdemo.org for details on this year's event which was
originally in February. We are holding ours now instead of February
because:
1) We wanted to wait for W2K dust to settle, and
2) Our demo site was not finalized, we now have one
It is being held this Saturday, July 1st, @ MicroCenter in Tustin, CA.
For more info on this, please see:
http://linuxmax.cjb.net
Also if you know anyone who has not seen Linux, or is interested in it
and has only seen glimpses, bring them by and we'll show them what Linux
can do. Perhaps we can break more people free from the M$ collective.
Thanks.
PENGUIN POWER
--
Matt M.
LinuxKnight
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:05:54 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:11:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote in
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:23:57 GMT, John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:17:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
>>comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>>
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 13:14:41 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
>>>> Richardson) wrote in comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>>>>
>>>> >Sure, use Siag, you can also embed a netscape navigator in your
>>>spreadsheet,
>>>> >or an xterm, or pretty much any program you want.
>>>>
>>>> Interesting. Is the embedded data (html or whatever) stored inside
>>>> the saved document, or is it just a program running in a subwindow?
>>>
>>>Of course the program runs in a subwindow, that's the only reasonable
>>>way to embed something.
>>
>>Not at all. The best way to embed something is in place activation
>>(document centric rather than application centric).
>
> ...as if the two are effectively any different.
They are very different. Document centric means you open a document
and edit it, not caring what applications control which parts. App
centric means you have to activate particular apps or plugins manually
to work on different parts of a document, generally in different
windows.
>>>As for storing the data, it can either be
>>>imported and stored with the main document, or linked and stored
>>>separately.
>>
>>I assume when you import it, it reactivates the original application
>>when you run. Does this only work where you have a plugin written for
>>the particular application, or is there a generic document/data
>>transfer protocol in use here? (Just trying to guage the technology
>>against COM/OLE).
>
> Since even under OLE, when one is imbedding an object and then
> editing it in place one is essentially just activating some
> 3rd party app, one really doesn't need that much sophistication
> or overhead anyways.
Depends on how smooth you want it to look. Given OLE at the moment,
editing an Excel sheet in word changes the Word menus to Excel menus,
toolbars can be placed in the original window and so on. Basically it
appears to the user that Word itself knows how to edit the object when
it is really Excel running behind the scenes.
Things like document size, shape and other things can be sorted out
through the OLE interactions as well as limiting the amount of
overhead that is required when the user stops editing (basically Excel
can shut down).
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:13:26 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:06:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Not at all. The best way to embed something is in place activation
>> (document centric rather than application centric).
>
>Buzzword centric, perhaps. ;-)
Yeah, I know. Sometimes buzzwords are useful to explain what you mean
though.
>Let's say you want to embed the data Foo in document Bar.
>You can then either display an image of Foo in a window
>or you can let an application that knows what to do with
>Foo run in a window. Siag did it the first way until
>a few years ago, when we wanted a more dynamic behaviour.
>In either case, at some point you need to let an application
>generate an image of Foo.
I agree. App A needs an image generated for the embedded object
created by App B. The question is the behaviour when you want to edit
the embedded object - do you open a new window or edit in place?
Personally I think editing in place is much smoother for the end user.
YMMV.
The issue of actually having to run the application to display the
embedded object, rather than showing a cached pixmap is another
efficiency point that I'm wondering about? Which does Siag use, or
does the custom plugin take care of that?
>> I assume when you import it, it reactivates the original application
>> when you run. Does this only work where you have a plugin written for
>> the particular application, or is there a generic document/data
>> transfer protocol in use here? (Just trying to guage the technology
>> against COM/OLE).
>
>Files and pipes, this is Unix. The data for each plugin is
>stored in a file. The control protocol which runs over a pipe
>is used to tell the plugins to save their data, to print
>themselves, to quit and so on.
>
>The amount of work required to make a plugin of a particular
>application depends on the degree of control that is required.
>For example, trivial applications like xload or oclock don't
>need to know how to cooperate at all, so they can be controlled
>by a tiny shim that only pretends to be a plugin.
Fair enough. So basically you need to write a wrapper (plugin) for
each application you want to embed objects for?
I guess the plugins correspond to an OLE object which effectively
wraps a non-aware app to do what you want it to.
Can an application be written so it doesn't need a plugin and is just
picked up by Siag? Kinda like an out-proc OLE Server on Windows?
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 29 Jun 2000 12:08:51 +0100
>>>>> "Stefaan" == Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefaan> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Phillip
Stefaan> Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> "Stefaan" == Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefaan> You have to understand that the reactions of companies and
Stefaan> unions is wholly self-serving. Mealy-mouthing about free
Stefaan> Oops! are ^^ trade, or solidarity is just selfrighteous
Stefaan> bluster designed to hoodwink the public or allow people to
Stefaan> feel good when choosing sides.
>> Thats one way of putting I suppose. It is possible I think to
>> express an opinion on the "free" market, or trading
>> relationships, or society in general without necessarily being
>> self-righteous, or desiring to hoodwink people.
Stefaan> That's true, but I'm very cynical when it comes to the
Stefaan> opinions of people getting their income from organizing and
Stefaan> leading others, as there are: churches, trades unions,
Stefaan> political parties, etc.
Well I agree with this. Very much so. Having worked within
the trade unions I am well aware of this. At the current time as we
have a "labour" government, the main job of the union leadership
appears to be excommunicating left wingers from their unions.
Stefaan> There's a huge difference between workers organizing
Stefaan> themselves to obtain better conditions in the early 1900's,
This is absolutely true. But there are two reasons why the
unions are good and important things. The first is because of their
history. Its important to remember where they came from, namely the
revolutionary fire of the 1800's, and from a desire to change the
world for the better. The second point is that even being what they
are now they do a lot of good. They do have an impact on workers
conditions, and they can politicise people.
I do not have any real problems with saying that the unions
are good things, in the full knowledge of all of their problems.
Phil
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:14:37 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:55:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote in
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:48:15 GMT, John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:13:20 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>>comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>>
>>>
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>> On 27 Jun 2000 09:42:42 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>wrote:
>>>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>> >John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> That's a fun thought: what if your printer is still perfectly
>>>> functional but your hardware vendor doesn't want to go to the
>>>> trouble to actively support it anymore?
>>>
>>>That is not just a "could it happen" it and other situations like that are
>>>already happening today and have been for a few years already.
>>>
>>>Just take a look at the alt.comp.hardware.* newsgroups for a while and see
>>>how many of situations like this are happening.
>>
>>Sure. You can also look at the comp.xxx newsgroups and see the number
>>of things Windows supports that Linux doesn't. Getting into "My OS
>>supports more hardware than yours" is very dangerous.
>
> That doesn't matter any more once the end user has to undertake
> the burden of not getting or possessing incompatible hardware.
> Linux doesn't get sold based on "runs everything", whereas DOS
> does.
Ok. Fair comment. Choosing Linux may result in costing you more for
hardware, but that hardware is likely to be higher quality.
That sound right?
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: "Martin Fitzpatrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ready for Linux ? The "Furniture Scale"
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:16:01 +0100
Having lurked in this group, I have seen a number of posts from people who
seem to have installed Linux without realising the cost/benefit map of the
situation. I have therefore comiled the following "Furniture Scale" as a
guide to determine whether Linux is likely to be useful to a given person.
Please answer the following multiple choice question.
When you have procured furniture in the past, have you -
a) Only ever bought fully pre-built furniture ?
- Aviod Linux like the plague. Get yourself a fully pre-built PC with all
software fully installed by the supplier. You should probably also look into
a helpline service. Consider getting a Mac.
b) Bought some flat-pack, home-assembly furniture ?
- One day, Linux will be ready for you. Possilby within the next year or
two. For now, stick to WinDoze.
c) Bought second-hand furniture, stripped it back to the wood, removed that
nasty bits and filled the holes, sanded it, stained the wood and finally
varnished it ?
- One of the more 'user-friendly' Linux distributions would be recommended.
You have a lot of the qualities required for ownership of Linux. Notably,
patience.
d) Avoided furniture stores completely, stripped out the plaster from the
alcove in which you want your built-in wardrobe, marked out and measured it,
then gone down the timber store and bought the boards, battons, plugs,
nails, screws, paint and brushes ? Have you then spent the weekend and
several evenings during the next week building the thing, only to make
several further trips to the store for things which weren't obviously
necessary before you started ? Do you still get a warm feeling when you look
at the wardrobe, having long ago forgotten the cuts, bruises, burns and
hospital visits involved in the original project ?
- You are a prime candidate for Linux. The road will not be an easy one, but
you stand more chance than most of actually getting to the end of it.
Hope this helps ;-)
Martin.
(This posting and its contents represent my views alone.)
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 29 Jun 2000 12:21:37 +0100
>>>>> "Hyman" == Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hyman> Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The point is that it would be nice to have a society where we can
>> openly discuss ideas, which our political systems do not really
>> seem to do. It all seems to be about spin and PR, and who can pay
>> for the most air time.
Hyman> We have such a society. "Spin and PR" are pejorative terms
Hyman> that one side applies to the efforts of the other to present
Hyman> its case in the best possible light.
Undoubtedly the terms are pejorative. But I am afraid that
in many instances the purpose of spin is just to ensure that issues
are not discussed.
Hyman> You perception that our political systems do not openly
Hyman> discuss ideas is simply a consequence that on divisive
Hyman> issues, an elected representative must speak cautiously to
Hyman> avoid offending a large number of constituents.
No I don't think that this is true. There are a number of
issues for instance that very few politicians will speak on. It is
impossible in the UK to discuss several issues. Drugs is an obvious
one, the Royal Family another. And the single currency is fairly
dubious. The point is that no MP is prepared to stick their head above
the trench because it will inevitably get shot off. So our political
system never discusses the issue.
Hyman> And the right to free speech means that you may buy as much
Hyman> speech as you are willing to pay for.
And you do not see this as a problem?
Phil
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:27:46 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:02:54 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>Wake up! This is not about Linux, we are talking about the lifespan and
>support of winhardware, reguardless of the OS even Windows itself. So next
>time read a little more and don't post a knee jerk reply without
>understanding what you are responding too.
So you are allowed to introduce new topics and complain when someone
introduces a topic you don't like. If you don't like my battlefields
then I'm sorry, but your stuck with them.
Fact is, I counter your points. When I introduce new ones you
complain about the topic.
[snip]
>> As long as the person states that his computing environment cannot
>> support a Winprinter when he buys it and makes sure it is written down
>> somewhere then he can take the printer straight back.
>
>Take it back? and get what in exchange? If the dealer has nothing in stock
>that that the customer needs, and if the dealer has a policy of providing
>only credit vouchers for furture purchases in excange for returned goods.
>The customer gets nothing of value in exchange for his return. What about
>the restocking fee that so many dealers charge on returned merchandise. As
>well as the lost time and resources required to purchase, test, and return
>the unit. Purchasing somthing and then returning it when it is not a
>represented is not a zero sum transaction.
If you have bought the hardware on the condition that it is compatible
with Linux and you find it isn't then you have the right to a full
cash refund. Maybe you should learn your rights at some stage, and
something about contract law?
The above must be a zero sum transaction or you can sue the store for
the difference. They are the ones that broke the contract.
>> It's usually very easy to tell though - just look for DOS support. I
>> figured someone as bright as yourself should have been able to work
>> that one out. Guess not.
>
>Having Dos or other OS listed as being supported is a good tool for a first
>estimate the a piece of hardware is not a winhardware unit. However, this
>does not work every time, just like having only Windows listed as being
>supported does not always mean that the unit is winhardware. In the case
>of the speciality printer I was discussing, the vendor specs only stated
>that it was compatible with popular operating systems. A statement that
>could be used to mean just about whatever the company wants it to.
See my note above. Make sure that you specify it must run on Linux.
The store is then bound to sell you a printer that does.
>If winhardware is so popular with users, why don't the manufacturers promote
>as being winhardware as they used to when those type of devices were first
>offered to the public? Only then could you say that when a customer buys
>one, he knew what he was buying.
Maybe they realised customers didn't care one way or the other? I'm
not in marketing (and nor are you from the look of things) so how
should I know. Basically offering the hardware as cheaper is plenty
enough to draw the customers in. They don't have to mark them as
"different" to sell would be my guess.
>> What sort of daft idea is that? The person getting you the gift
>> should have known better.
>
>What this is about is cases of how someone coud aquire winhardware with
>being able to control its selection. How many times a gift giver not
>consult with the reciever of the gift--such as a supprise gift--and rely on
>the salesmen to help them make the descision of which deal is best.
Actually what this is about is that there is value in the software and
that there are cases where it is better for it not to be open source.
For the person complaining about me going off topic, you've forgotten
the topic very quickly.
If someone buys you a Winprinter as a gift I'm sure being the nice
person you are, you'd use it and get the best value you could from it.
>> What if they gave you a laptop that didn't
>> even support Linux?
>
>Then I would find a job for the laptop as it is. I do in fact have an XT
>class laptop that is about 15-years old. I use it to run software from that
>period. It had two floppies and no harddrive, so I use it as a Dos NetWare
>client. It was not designed to support a network interface so I provided it
>a parallel port ethernet interface which came with packet drivers. Using
>those drivers and pctelnet, I also use that laptop as a remote telnet
>terminal.
Great. You see what I mean?
>> How about an iMac which didn't run your existing
>> software.
>
>I would suspect that I would use it to run software that my other hosts
>cannot or I might install a unix OS on it and it would just be another host
>on my network.
So you can find uses for things. Guess your aversion to software
isn't so bad.
>> If you are that worried about hurting your friend's
>> feelings then you should probably run the OS he gave you as well. I
>> mean wouldn't want to hurt his feelings given that he paid for it.
>
>Who said anything about the hardware coming with ANY operating system? That
>was not a part of this subthread we were talking about aquiring hardware.
See - complaining about my topics again. Only want to fight your
arguments, don't you? Can't win mine?
You talked about gifts of hardware. I asked about your feelings on
gifts of software and you run for cover. Guess it just got too much.
>> Sounds like you've invented stories to support your view. I'm not
>> even going to stoop to that, aside from stating the obvious:
>
>No, they are based on reality.
Your own special private reality.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:39:29 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:01:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote in
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>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...
That's about what I figured. I also figure if you end up with a
Winprinter, you can probably scrape together a $200 machine to act as
a coverter too...
>>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.
I noticed. :-)
>>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.
http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/newpc/
Given that Microsoft drives the direction of hardware (at the moment -
that may change)
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20000608.html I think the
death of serial and parallel devices (as well as PS/2 connectors and
keyboard connectors) will come about in the next few years. Apple
have already done this on the Macs and Microsoft is following.
I think all Winprinters are parallel at the moment. They are pretty
ordinary anyhow given that their whole purpose is to cut as many costs
as they can. I'm only trying to illustrate the point that drivers can
have value - mjcr seems to think otherwise and is using one case to
prove his generalisation that all work should be done in hardware and
not software. He just hasn't learned yet that one or two cases don't
make me wrong and he's avoiding the cases that make him wrong (video
cards).
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:44:42 GMT
On 28 Jun 2000 10:58:13 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote in comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>That's not a particularly valid question as they have no intentions to
>>>>do either. If they wanted to do this then they would have paid twice
>>>>as much and got a printer that could.
>>>
>>>So, if you can foretell the future, they are OK...
>>
>>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.
>
>Yes, the Wintel group does rather slavishly follow slowly behind
>the MAC lead, don't they? But, no problem - my home printer has
>both parallel and USB, and you can get a conversion cable if you need it.
Ditto mine. Funny that when you have a G3. ;-) MS have always
follwed Apple's successes. In fact MS always follow anyone's success.
That's why they are successful themselves - they wait and see what
others do then copy or buy it. I figure they are hoping GPL loses in
court sometime so they can start MS/Linux. (That was a gratuitous
troll).
>>Linux doesn't support USB well yet so I guess that means you guys are
>>stuck with dead end or high end hardware.
>
>Like NT, I guess, only it won't cost anything to upgrade. Mandrake 7.1
>has USB support backed into the 2.2 kernel and it will be in 2.4.
Kinda like that, except Win2k's USB support is a hell of a lot more
complete than Mandrake.
>>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.
>
>For office use I always get ethernet. For home use I got both
>interfaces more than a year ago.
Ditto. Always use USB now though.
>>As for Winprinters, if the price is right and the purpose is right
>>then you should get it. Buying a printer to last 10 years these days
>>means you are getting high end and not low end. Figure it out.
>>People replace things. Often it is cheaper that way and more
>>efficient. It depends on your setup, tax structure and other things.
>>
>>You'll never agree - your rel^H^H^Hphilosophy won't let you.
>
>Just a matter of practicality. Printers should be sharable
>on the network and my assortment of machines are never going
>to be limited to a single OS. If I can't send it a print job
>from any machine, then it isn't really a printer.
That's your requirements and I don't argue with their suitability
(mainly because they are mine as well). Many people just want Win98
and a printer. That's a different ball park and should be looked at
differently.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
