Linux-Advocacy Digest #532, Volume #27 Sat, 8 Jul 00 06:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: The MEDIA this year! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Trying Linux yet again.... (Ray Chason)
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Ray Chason)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Gnu GPL problem: License copyrighted things under GPL??? (Ray Chason)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon? (Ketil Nordstad)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The MEDIA this year!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 08:06:30 GMT
In article <8jkc31$oh9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By the way, if you've never seen video streaming through Linux, you
> are in for a treat.
This is a curious statement. If you could point me toward a Linux
utility for streaming video over a company intranet (multicasting, not
unicasting) from any major format (MPEG, *.avi, etc.), I would be
eternally grateful.
Terry Slack
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Trying Linux yet again....
Date: 8 Jul 2000 07:21:26 GMT
John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> You half to recompial the kernal a cuppal of times and maibe patch it to. Or
>> you can save
>> yourself the trubal turn your LIE-nux partitian into a Windo's won and put
>> all kinds of
>> spifee ap's in it and show off for your frends.
>
> You've got future in management.
*shudder*
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: 8 Jul 2000 07:20:33 GMT
Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 6 Jul 2000 03:40:57 GMT, Ray Chason
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>It won't healp LIE-nux anny. Nobuddy want's to reed HOWTO after HOWTO after HOWTO.
>You alreddy have
>>>users reeding TOO HOWTO's PLUS the ones they alreddy half toreed to get the rest of
>CommyLie-nux working.
>>
>>Can't you set up your Windoze-based newsreader so it doesn't spew these
>>mile-long lines?
>
>Cant you make your Generly Not Usefall (GNU) CommyLie-nux crap to handall long lines
>propperly?
1) My newsreader is of my own design and handles long lines just fine,
thank you very much...
2) but others read news in university labs and such, using VT100 terminals
with no GUI capability.
3) Then there are those who have to use large fonts just to read news at
all. Some of them are even Windoze users.
4) You could horizontally scroll but that's a PITA.
5) Hence long-standing rules of netiquette call for lines to wrap in the
low 70's.
You piss and moan that Linux makes *you* work harder, yet you're perfectly
willing to make *others* work harder to read your posts. Timmy-boy,
you're not just a Wintroll. You're also a hypocrite.
>>...which is why nearly every Linux newsreader has a decent killfile,
>>unlike Lookout; why nearly every Linux newsreader honors user-
>>supplied margins, unlike Lookout; why no self-respecting Linux mail
>>client goes around spreading viruses, unlike Lookout....
>>
>>Oh, but Orifice does have that cute little paper clip. That paper clip
>>must fascinate you, doesn't it, Timmy-boy?
I see you couldn't address this point.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 04:52:15 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Hyman Rosen from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 05 Jul 2000 12:38:02
>Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In the first case the BBC used to broadcast many of the large
>> sporting events to the entire population, as a "public service". When
>> Sky came along the spend huge amounts of money in acquiring TV rights,
>> and then selling subscriptions to them as loss leaders. Nowadays if
>> you want to watch many of these events then you have to pay for
>> multiple subscriptions.
>
>In other words, the sporting leagues realized that they could make
>extra money by charging television viewers for the privilege of seeing
>games, instead of allowing them to be broadcast for free. That seems
>fine to me. Why should someone have the right to demand that others
>give away their services?
The choices was not to give away services or not; the leagues were
making money already. Why should we assume that profiteering is
acceptable behavior?
>> The point remains though that it was not consumer choice at
>> all. It was just the economic power of one company. Nor was it the
>> activity of competition, and the free market as it was a loss leader.
>
>Consumers are not permitted to choose the price at which things they
>buy are sold, because that choice would be zero. The choice of the
>consumer is what to buy, and whether to buy it. It is a case where
>someone who was giving something away decided to begin charging for
>it. There is nothing wrong with that, despite the fact that the
>former recipients are annoyed.
I think you may run aground of the British way of thinking here, which
allows for much more, by experience, of what you would call 'socialism'.
Annoying former recipients, or more specifically duping, defrauding,
taking advantage of, or profiteering on the former recipients, is
precisely what is wrong with that, though not the only thing. And,
again, you don't seem to realize that it *isn't* a case of someone
giving away something for free and then later charging for it; it is a
matter of something which was free still being free, but requiring a
charge for something new which is now required to gain the use of the
original something, but wasn't required previously.
>> No. It was a situation where our Prime Minister decided that
>> she was going to change things, and use the police as a political
>> weapon, and extreme force to ensure that she got her way. The
>> Metropolitian police has a unparallelled reputation for violence and
>> thuggery, and they were used extensively during that period of our
>> history for crushing dissent violently.
>
>I don't know the events involved, so I can't say whether you are
>correct or not.
If you don't know, then all you can say is he is correct.
>The good news is that unprovoked use of government
>violence against peaceful protesters tends to spawn backlashes
>that overturn the status quo. That certainly happened in the States
>during the civil rights movement.
This kind of self-serving teflon coated mockery of responsibility is
offensive.
>> It may be true that government by the noisiest is not a
>> terribly good idea. As it happens I agree. But I also think that
>> government by the richest is an equally bad idea, and by and large
>> that is what we have at the moment.
>
>I disagree that that is what we have.
Your disagreement flies in the face of reason, and seems more based in
contrariness than honesty. The government is not run by and for
exclusively the richest, but they certainly have more influence and
generally gain more benefit than those with less access to public
discourse run exclusively by profit motive.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 04:56:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Wed, 05 Jul 2000
[...]
>The GPL is yet another commercial license (with source code available)
>in sheeps clothing :-).
I think that is a very adequate and agreeable way of putting it. I will
point out, however, that there is no monetary cost for a GPL license, so
your statement that it isn't "free" isn't very clear to me.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 04:57:49 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Wed, 05 Jul 2000
[...]
>Actually, I am not talking about 'liberty', I am talking about the GPL.
>You continue to create straw-men by adding in superfluous notions. Lets
>argue about the moon being made of green cheese also, but that doesn't offer
>any help on the issue of the GPL being non-free.
Neither did that. Why do you say that "the GPL" is "non-free"?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 05:04:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Wed, 05 Jul 2000
[...]
>You don't know me: I am not a corporate boot licker (but are you an
>RMS toadie?) :-). Please note that, unlike most reading this, I don't
>have to answer to any sort of organization with an agenda (that includes
>the FSF, or corporations.) I do own LOTS of stock, but certainly avoid
>the valueless ones that have (in their corporate charter, formally or
>informally) an intention to avoid gaining assets.
It isn't who you answer to which sways your opinion, it is your
self-interest. Owning lots of stock, and avoiding those which attempt
to encourage development of the science and useful art of software and
prefer profiteering, does not speak highly of your honesty in this
matter.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 05:09:34 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Wed, 05 Jul 2000
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> >You want Liberty for buyers on the slave labor of add on developers.
>>
>> You have the trappings of being a capitalist yet you expect
>> to be able to use other's work for free. That is simply
>> absurd.
>>
>Actually, a gift is a gift. I don't argue against using the
>GPL, but argue against using the GPL as a FREE LICENSE. If you
>wish to give software away, then issue it under a free license.
>If you don't wish to give it away as free, then don't use a free
>license, and the GPL is a good example of a non-free license.
>
>I really don't care (from a philosophical standpoint) whether or
>not an individual issues the software under a free license or
>under GPL. It is inaccurate to say that the GPL is a free license
>though.
>
>Please quit creating straw arguments. It would be interesting to
>see any non-straw or non-messenger attacking arguments though.
>I enjoy the continued moral justifications of the GPL, that are
>just not responsive to the issue of it not being free :-). It
>is becoming quite entertaining...
I think you are simply misrepresenting your position. When you talk
about the GPL not being free, you are factually incorrect. The license
itself is entirely free; you don't have to pay a dime for it. Of
course, you have to accept the license, but that doesn't make it
"non-free". That makes it a license. Why would you pay for something
that is given to you for free? Software is copyrighted work; you have
no right to use it unless you gain permission from the copyright holder.
They can charge for it, or not. If they don't, then the license is
free. It doesn't mean the software isn't protected by copyright.
You argue the GPL isn't free, but the only support you've given for your
argument is that it is not public domain, but GPL, software.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:16:47 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John W. Stevens) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> My point is that I entered something like the following:
>>
>> Monitor "Bloggs"
>>
>> What I did not know was the script gets confused if you enter a " in
>> the parameters - how was I supposed to know that? It did not come back
>> with
>>
>> " is an illegal character
>>
>> it went ahead a generated a script that fails.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with knowing how to type.
>
>Correct. It has everything to do with the all-to-common mistake of
>blaming the package, instead of yourself.
ROFL. Sorry, but you've got it all wrong. The package should have told me
" is an illegal character, but it didn't.
So, the next time I type an illegal character in a system, and it dies, do
you think I'll blame myself? No! I'll blame the people who wrote the
package because they didn't allow for not unreasonable assumptions on the
part of their users!
>As my instructor once said: "Don't blame the mountain 'cause you don't
>know how to climb."
That analogy does not apply here. If a package is written not to understand
something, it should gracefully fail it, not carry blindly on and generate
garbage!
>Slackware is like a high performance sports car that comes with a manual
>transmission. If you buy such a car without knowing how to drive a
>stick, whose fault is that? Yours, or the cars?
See above.
Pete
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 05:17:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Thu, 06 Jul 2000
[...]
>GPLed software isn't free and has redistribution encumberances. Calling
>the GPL free is not accurate because of the encumberances. I guess that
>a short attention span can make you confused like you are. :-).
GPLed software is free and has redistribution encumbrances. Calling GPL
free is accurate because it is free. The fact that it has
redistribution encumbrances does not add to the cost of the license,
merely to your use of the software, but that is at your option, of
course. Nobody is forcing you to redistribute it, nor preventing you
from doing so. Merely maintaining (token) ownership of their
intellectual property. But they're not charging you a penny, and that,
by definition, means whatever they are providing you is "free". But you
don't have to accept their offer if you don't want to.
>GPL is just another
>commercial license. It might even be a slightly improved license,
>but it ain't free :-).
GPL is entirely compatible with commercial use of software. It will not
entirely replace all other types of licenses, but why pay for something
that you can get for free?
[...]
>Hey, I am not arguing against GPL, I am arguing against lying. You are
>ONLY defending lies and deception by defending the unqualified term
>'free' when describing the GPL...
You are not arguing, you are just lying. Which is to say that you are
mistaken, and don't understand why your mistake is important. Now that
I've pointed out what your mistake is, do you suppose you'll re-evaluate
your position?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gnu GPL problem: License copyrighted things under GPL???
Date: 8 Jul 2000 07:55:30 GMT
Tijmen Stam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This has not much to do with linux, but more with the GNU GPL.
>
>I am busy with a pov-ray scene (that's a 3d modeling program) about the
>"Erasmusbrug" a bridge in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. But on the net I
>read a case about a photographer who made a nice photo of that bridge
>(for an advertising campain) but he was mailed by the architect that the
>architect has the copiright on the bridge and it can only be
>photographed for touristical reasons... By the way, the architect can
>claim his right for the copyright (since a law was erased in 1989 that
>public objects couldn't be copyrighted, the erasmusbrug is newer :-(
>But I had planned to make my nice bridge (wich is built according the
>original plans, so it will be copyrighted) available as source code
>under the GNU GPL... Is this legal and if not, what should I do?
The Right Thing is to see a lawyer. If that's too expensive then I'd
say you're out of luck. :-(
Oh, and please don't post HTML to newsgroups.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 05:25:22 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Thu, 06 Jul 2000
>Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
>> >> It may be simple, but the restrictions make it anything but free.
>> >
>> >Nope, just like my favorite new example, two-hour free parking.
>>
>> And in the fine print: any work done while sitting here must
>> be given away, along with any tools used to do it. Not
>> quite accurate, but car analogies are always flawed.
>>
>I have gotten trapped into accepting an analogy also. It is
>stupid to start that process, and it is stupid to continue
>with an analogy argument.
>
>There is almost always some sort of perversion of meaning in
>analogies, and such discussion is frought with landmines.
>
>John
Analogies can only be feasibly used to illustrate and argument, not to
support it, that's all. As for the current analogy being quoted, I
don't recall that any tools I use to write GPL software need to be given
away. Only the GPL software itself. Of course, if I used GPL tools,
then they were never mine, I just licensed them, and am contractually
obligated to follow the license. Not that I am contractually bound to
use the tools.
And not that I write software, in a car or anywhere else.
So tell me about the two hour free parking analogy.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Ketil Nordstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 11:36:54 -0100
> The attack continued until mid morning today; other than a little loss of
> badwidth the attack did not have any real effect on my network, my firewall
> stopped the attack cold. I would like to remind the attacker that doing a
> port scan attack on a network or computer without the permission of those
> have authority over that equipment is a serious matter that can have
> regretable results for the attacker. Performing an attack of this type
> could also be a violation of the agreement that one has with their own ISP,
> which could cause cancellation of the attacker's account.
Why get all excited because of a simple portscan? It wont harm you. I
dont know about the US, but in Norway this kind of behaviour is not
illegal. And i dont consider this an attack. Its more like checking if
someone is home, and wether or not your doors are locked. So instead of
going all mad when someone does this to you, why dont you just lock your
doors?
Even though simon777 is kinda obnoxious dont blame him for a random
portscan without any proof.
ketil
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:32:10 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I don't know, I guess I have a problem with habitual liars. You see, to
>me saying Linux lags behind Windows without any qualifiers at all is a
>bald faced lie. Up to this point I have constantly tried to politely
>tell you that you are taking one facet of a situation and turning it
>into something else entirely. You are arguing that Linux lags behind
>Windows in common x86 desktop support and then using that argument to
>say what looks like Linux lags behind Windows in all things. I don't
>agree and in fact, in many areas Windows lags behind Linux. Linux lags
>behind Windows on the desktop (due to third part support issues). This
>does not mean that Linux lags behind Windows everywhere. This is why I
>would say if you are trying to say that Linux lags behind Windows in all
>things I will stop being polite and join the attack. I was under the
>impression that you were stating it that way from laziness (not typing a
>few extra characters) and not from intentionally trying to mislead
>people. I'm not completely sure, but I'm trying to give you the benefit
>of the doubt.
Calling me a "habitual liar" is a bit combatitive, is it not?
I'm saying "Linux lags behind Windows" because in a lot of areas, it does.
Now, I believe, the number areas Linux lags behind Windows is greater than
the number of areas Windows lags behind Windows, so that's how I justify my
statement.
>Just curious, are you hoping to make me tell you you are
>an idiot? I kind of wonder because of the way you try to twist around
>things.
I hope you will call me an idiot because then I can say "look, he resorts
to insults again". However, you haven't, you have remained polite and an
interesting discussion is proceeding.
>I could be mistaken, but you seem to have a combative attitude
>towards anyone that has the opinion that Linux is fine for them. I
>personally do feel that way, but I don't attack Windows users for their
>choice. If a Windows user attacks me, or Linux with absolutely false
>and completely derogatory comments, I will attack back. It's that
>simple.
I have a combative attitute towards anyone who calls me a complete idiot,
or moron, or shithead, or uses the expression WinDoze, or LoseDOS or
whatever.
Incidentally, if someone posts incorrect facts about Linux, does it make
sense to attack? Why not politely point out the errors, you might get a
more reasonable response, rather than the shouting matches that go on.
>See, that's something that can actually be proven or disproven. Linux
>has multi-platform hardware support. That is a fact. I can run it on
>PPC, Alpha, Sparc, x86, ARM, S/390 (if only I had the money) and other
>architectures. This isn't a matter of saying it may support this in the
>future to try and garner support. It does support this right now. This
>is not meant to attack your statement. I'm just putting forward the
>facts.
Windows NT had support on Alpha and RISC, but it died out. Why? Simply
because no one was writing any applications for them. A great OS on a
platform is dead without application developers writing for it (a fate that
overtook Acorn's Archimedes and Alpha NT).
Where are most of the games writers, the application writers et al - on
Windows - well, not including the games writers for the consoles. Even
Oracle has a database on Windows NT.
> Sure, I can't buy StarOffice for all of these platforms, but
>once you move away from x86 you aren't talking about common desktop
>hardware anymore. If all of your arguments center on this (common
>desktop hardware) then it changes everything. But, if that is your
>argument, then please state it as such. You have accused Linux
>advocates of not using correct semantics in the past, (you ask which
>Windows? or say not to make sweeping statements) so please practice what
>you preach. That's all I ask.
I stopped qualifying my statements when it became clear nobody else was
going to qualify theirs. I still see Windows being used when the writer
really means Windows 98 or Windows 2000. I still see statements like Linux
is three times faster than Windows whereas in fact it really is Linux in
three times faster than Windows 2000 in one specific benchmark.
>Please note, I am not one of those calling you an idiot, or a dumbass,
>or any other name. I am simply bringing forward facts and opinions and
>asking you to follow your own advice. Are you still going to insist
>that "Linux lags behind Windows" is the proper way to state your
>argument?
Yes, see above and further above.
>I repeat, what you have argued up to this point is "Linux lags behind
>Windows in common x86 desktop hardware support". If there are other
>reasons you feel Linux lags behind Windows, state them too. But I don't
>feel a sweeping statement is applicable in this case. Your implication
>is Linux<Windows. While this is true in some cases, it isn't true in
>others. I wouldn't say Linux>Windows just because of the things I know
>Linux can do and Windows can't. Neither is perfect.
I would say, in general, Linux < Windows. In hardware support, in the area
of desktops, in the variety of applications available for it... the list is
endless.
Linux seems to be gaining in the server market, I also note there are loads
of Apache web servers out there, rather than IIS.
I also note the perception of the desktop machine is seen to be Intel based
machine with Windows, with possibly Macintosh next. Linux is not even
mentioned.
Pete
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
