Linux-Advocacy Digest #553, Volume #27 Sun, 9 Jul 00 18:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Mig)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ("TimL")
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Hyman Rosen)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (void)
Re: Where did all my windows go? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Hyman Rosen)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Hyman Rosen)
Re: Distribution reviews ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> He's kind of wrong when he claims that Open Source projects are not
> "customer oriented". Some, like KDE for example, certainly are.
Hmmm kind off. Really depends on how you define the customer. Neither GNOME
nor KDE are really "customer" oriented since the "customer" is the
developer or the people the use the desktop enviroment and make themselves
heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
What KDE and GNOME needs is a group of nontechies that has some
demands that must be met and some kind of veto before a new version
is released. This is the only way to ensure end-user friendlyness and to
have other people like interfaceexperts and graphical artists to
participate in the developemnt. I dont think this is going to happen some
day soon
Cheers
------------------------------
From: "TimL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 21:27:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
> Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>
> 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
>
Perhaps you should talk to Iomega about this?
> 2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no
> drivers.
Perhaps you should talk to HP about this?
> 3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this.
> Even
> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to
> install.
Perhaps you should talk to 3dfx about this?
You fool! Do you really think Microsoft supports all this hardware because of
Microsoft?
Microsoft supports all of this hardware thanks to the hardware manufacturers
themselves.
> So now I have a console only Linux system. End of evaluation.
>
> Windows support all of these products as there are drivers available for
> them.
>
> Pete
The 3rd parties involved support the products not MS. You're quite the fool!
/TimL
------------------------------
From: Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 09 Jul 2000 17:28:34 -0400
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That would depend entirely on the actual numbers, which you don't have,
> and are merely assuming would work out. There's every likelihood these
> days with the growing "force" of huge media corporations, this is simply
> profiteering. It would be dishonest to suggest that it should not be
> examined rather than assumed it is reasonable, I think.
What is "profiteering"? The owners of a commodity are free to charge
whatever price they want, and the consumers are free to buy or not to
buy it. In the case of football, the owners of the commodity are the
leagues. They must pay their players and staff, and they can sell the
right to attend and to view the games. If there is sufficient majority
interest, the people can vote for the government to purchase viewing
rights in competition with private broadcast networks, or they can
vote to form government-owned leagues.
> You really get off on that kind of bullshit, don't you? You don't even
> know anything about it, but are willing to assume that those in power
> were right, and insinuate that people exercising their free speech were
> somehow unconscientious troublemakers, rather than trying to defend
> their liberty?
It's not often the case in the Western democracies that that police
attack peaceful demonstrators with violence. When it does happen, it
tends to bring about changes in the status quo in fairly short order.
I didn't insinuate that the protestors were unconscientious, but it is
often the case that such protests are highly emotional, and outbreaks
of spontaneous violence occur. These can spark full-fledged riots if
not brought under control, and it's understandable that police might
use violent means to gain this control. This has nothing to do with
which side is "right" or "wrong", assuming such terms even apply to
the sorts of issues these protests are usually about.
> Even if you were right, your assumption and posturing, as well as
> general attitude and approach during this discussion, would indicate
> that you have no less than an abominable mis-understanding of both
> justice and liberty.
I think I have some understanding of both. Neither requires that
everyone be satisfied by every government decision, nor that
dissent must be funded by those who choose not to dissent.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 9 Jul 2000 21:36:01 GMT
On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 14:04:03 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[...] I imagine the realization that it is only a matter of time now before
>that groups (alt.destroy.microsoft) putative "goal" is accomplished, as
>Windows inability to properly function, its user's general inability to
>accurately troubleshoot, and Microsoft's inability to defend themselves
>from the criminal charges for which they've been convicted seem to be
>on-track for allowing the world to embrace the superior and free alternative
>that now stands before us.
Don't equate Windows with Microsoft. In particular, don't assume that
their botching of Windows technology means they'll be unable to capture
new markets. They've always understood software market dynamics better
than they've understood technology.
--
Ben
220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Date: 9 Jul 2000 21:50:04 GMT
On Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:04:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Nothing new said! Still can not justify calling ALL of linux bad because
>of ONE application exiting without an error message!
I never asserted such a thing. After reading more of this discussion,
I feel that Peter overreaches somewhat and indeed mistakenly claims that
Linux really is behind Windows ( not just in terms of desktop usability ).
>Any claim that KDE is critical to Linux having a GUI and thus it's OK to
>claim that KDE is part of Linux is just plain silly. Linux and Unix have
>a variatiy of desktops to choose from. If a *desktop* is not stable,
>CHANGE IT! (you can do this without changing the kernel).
Yeah, but "change it to what" ? No one has time to test all of them.
By the way, if there's nothing substantially better than KDE ( and if
"better' means "easy for new users", I believe this assertion to be
correct ), then changing them is not going to help.
Another problem I have with this attitude is that it's a too-easy way
to deny responsibility for anything. Use "How do I use (X) ?" Support:
"Sorry, we don't support your distribution. Install distro (Y) and
get back to us" Users are not going to be satisfied with "foo isn't
part of Linux". They want a complete package. They need a distributor
who can actually stand behind the product rather than ducking for cover.
I'm glad you're not a distributor.
It is stupid and irresponsible to put new users on a merry-go-round,
especially if the advice offered is zealot talk as opposed to good
advice.
The real problem is that
there's no single desktop that everyone agrees is usable. Personally, I'd
stand 100% behind KDE and say that it's a perfectly good desktop, but
that its file manager really is a file manager and not a drop-in IE
replacement.
I wouldn't run for cover and try to pretend that a problem in the best
available desktop for Linux is not a problem for Linux's usability.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: 9 Jul 2000 21:53:21 GMT
On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200, Mig wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
A lot of peopple on the user lists are not very technical at all. They
certainly don't exclude non-techies.
>What KDE and GNOME needs is a group of nontechies that has some
>demands that must be met and some kind of veto before a new version
>is released.
I don't think that's a good idea. non techies don't know very much about
software design. What's really needed is a dialogue between non techies and
techies.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 09 Jul 2000 17:57:01 -0400
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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?
Because we believe in private property. The owner of a commodity
may attempt to sell it for any price he wishes. The consumer may
choose to buy it or not. Neither the owner nor the consumer has
the "right" to set a price and force it to be accepted.
At best, one may consider "profiteering" to be immoral during
grievous situations such as wartime or natural disaster. To apply
it to football games means that you have abrogated any concept of
private property, and are asking the state to set prices, on a
basis that I can't even imagine. I would strenuously object to,
and vote against, a proposal for such a system.
In fact, such a system was briefly popular among the left in the US.
It was called "comparable worth". The idea was that the government
would place unrelated jobs into equivalence classes, and force wages
for all jobs in a class to be equal, presumably at the highest wage
present in that class. Needless to say, the concept quickly died the
death it deserved.
> If you don't know, then all you can say is he is correct.
No, because I can attempt to apply my knowledge of similar situations,
and my judgement of his opinions from what I have read so far. One is
not required to take statements at face value. For example, this is
the basis of the jury system - a witness makes a statement, and the
jury attempts to evaluate the veracity of the statement, without any
actual knowledge of the true situation.
> This kind of self-serving teflon coated mockery of responsibility is
> offensive.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this applied to what I said. I claim
that unprovoked and abusive violence by the government against its
citizens tends to anger the citizens enough that they bring about
substantial change in the situation that led to the violence. The
civil rights movement in the US is such an example. So is the reaction
against the New York City Police Department in light of the various
incidents there. This does not mean that arbitrary violent protest
is allowed to rage out of control. When this was allowed, in the Crown
Heights incident in New York City, the repercussions against the
leadership of the city were equally swift.
> 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.
Well, until fairly recently, the US had incredibly punitive tax rates
for the rich. The government has filed antitrust actions against some
of the largest businesses in the country. In the face of business
opposition, the government has passed numerous environmental
requirements, family leave requirements, and the Americans with
Disabilites Act.
I think it just seems like the rich and the corporate have more control
over government because they have more involvement with government. When
you have a business, especially a multi-national one, there are so many
laws and rules to follow that it becomes essential to have advocates who
can explain to the government what effects new rules will have, and to
try to mitigate the harmful effects of existing ones.
------------------------------
From: Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 09 Jul 2000 18:04:08 -0400
John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Calling the GPL 'free' is a lie. Almost everyone who is calling the
> GPL free, also give exceptions to show how it isn't free. The lie
> is obvious.
Free but with restrictions is true for every "free" license but public
domain. Yet you seem to reserve your animosity for the GPL. Why?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Distribution reviews
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:43:40 +0100
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Hauck wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 09:50:27 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >I have used Lynx quite a bit actually. It's too bad so many sites are
>> >going out of thier way to make things totally unreadable in Lynx (you
>> >almost have to do that on purpose as Lynx reads standard HTML very
>> >well).
>>
>> Except for tables. I doesn't handle them real well. w3m does much
>> better.
>>
>> --
>> -| Bob Hauck
>> -| Codem Systems, Inc.
>> -| http://www.codem.com/
>
> True enough. I have used w3m, but started just using Netscape or
> Mozilla for anything that requires tables support.
Another alternative is links. (yes, I know it is confusing in conversation)
Version 0.84 is in Mandrake 7.1, latest is 0.92, which has rather good table,
frame and colour support. Parses & renders faster than w3m, and you don't have
to wait 'til the whole file is downloaded before it starts. Doesn't do SSL or
cookies very well yet, though.
http://links.browser.org.
--
____________________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | It is not 'who' you are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | But who you are becoming.
| -- Goethe
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:04:21 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>If you had said this before, I probably wouldnt' be this deeply involved
>in this discusion. What you have stated here is an opinion, based on
>your observations. I truly believe that anyone is entitled to thier
>opinions, no matter how much they differ from mine. Just don't try
>stating an opinion as a "well known fact", that borders again on
>lieing. Perhaps, for you this statement is completely true. But, for
>me it is completely false (my opinion). Some people in here have real
>difficulty accepting that opinions can be different amongst different
>people, which leads to the usual breakdown we see. If this is your
>opinion, great. Mine is the oposite. Who is right, neither of us. I'm
>right for me, but completely wrong if I try to apply my opinion to your
>situation. You are right for you, but completely wrong in my
>situation. Stalemate? Probably, as opinions can lead to heated
>debates, but no one is going to change their mind unless it can truly be
>proven to them that there is a better way of thinking. I try to remain
>open to other ideas, but I have found over the years that Windows just
>doesn't work for me. It works for countless friends of mine, and that's
>great. I help them out when they run into little difficulties here and
>there, and I truly do not berate them for using Windows. I get Windows
>running for them again, and leave them to their computing. Windows
>works for them, Linux works for me, and nobody really tells the other
>they are wrong. I would say over the next few years computing will open
>up more and alternatives to what is now considered the "norm" will be
>more easily accepted. I hope I am right about that, but only time will
>tell.
I'm having trouble sorting out the difference between opinion and what
seems (to me!) to be observably true.
I guess I am ascribing what you call is my opinion to fact.
>This is kind of the attitude I'm sensing in a lot of your writing. You
>tend to come across as someone that is coming to COLA just looking for a
>fight. Still, I find the discussion more interesting if each side tries
>to keep thier cool. This also comes across as another interesting
>statement in the fact that you sometimes seem to think that all of the
>people supporting Linux are one single entity. Charlie tells you
>something and then you say that "Linux people" think whatever thing
>Charlie has said. I personally feel Charlie is a bigger problem for
>Linux than someone like Simon/Steve/whatever or Tim Palmer. He uses
>lies to promote his beliefs, which is no better than what they do for
>the Windows team.
Advocacy groups are generally speaking areas you can expect a fight in. I
don't come looking for a fight, but I'll give you one if I hear certain
things.
>See, I don't agree with the tactic of stooping to your rival's tactics.
>You do point out errors in Linux advocates statements, why not find your
>errors and correct them. The less chance you give a rival to find an
>error in your statements, the more of a chance you will have of comming
>across in a positive way. Isn't this your ultimate goal (as it should
>be for everyone in here)? Also, some of the things you bring up are
>errors made repeatedly by the same people. Why not use my tactic and be
>combative with the ones that are mistaken, rather than taking it out on
>the entire group with your "I'm not going to qualify my statements
>because ........ doesn't qualify his" attitude. Qualify your statements
>and you will interest more of the people interested in actual
>discussions. At least, in my opinion you would.
And I thought I was perfect! 8)
OK, I will give considerable thought to qualifying my statements a bit more
carefully.
>I'm kind of curious, as you seem to be one of the few Windows oriented
>people to come in here not automatically assuming any Linux user is an
>idiot, what your opinions are on some of the other OSes available. Have
>you tried any other operating systems on your desktop? If so, which
>ones, and what did you think of them?
On my second degree, we used a PDP11 running UNIX. That's where I first
came across some of the ideas in UNIX (the directory structure) and some of
my hatred of the shells! Later, working for Digital, I grew to like DCL
(VMS) with all its peculiarities.
To date I've only tried Linux (with KDE) and BeOS.
My feeling about KDE is that it has a way to go as yet. My interest in KDE
is that Borland are porting my favourite package, Delphi, to Linux as
something codenamed Kylix. I'll be able to port things in Object Pascal and
C++ to both Windows and KDE in one development package. My 3D scene editor
running on both Windows and Linux!
BeOS is a fairly nice package but it lacks hardware support, even more so
than Linux.
Linux (maybe I mean X?) the OS itself I feel has a way to go to making
things easier for the user. I just installed XFree86 4.0.1 (support for my
Voodoo 5 card) and it took a while to get that to work.
On other machines - Mekon8 (hey, my own design BIOS for the 6809!)
supporting FLEX9, RSX11, VAX/VMS (OpenVMS), Digital UNIX, Archimedes RISC
OS and then all the Windows flavours (3.1 [eeeyuk], 95, 98, 98 SE, ME and
2000).
As for the various distributions of Linux: Slackware (eek! guaranteed to
terrify most Windows users!), RedHat and finally Mandrake.
>I've tried FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, BeOS and Macs on the desktop and
>personally feel that BeOS was probably the best (from just an operating
>system standpoint) of any operating system out there for desktop use.
>It has some great features. Of course, as you said previously, without
>application support the best dies (as BeOS is currently doing, sad to
>say).
I've yet to try Mac.
I became Windows centric as a career choice - you can see where the market
is going here in the UK. Digital was moving heavily into Windows, and I
descovered writing GUI's was a passion for me. I tried MOTIF first but that
never seemed to get started. The Windows upstart crept in (cheaper machines
after all) and I never looked back. I dropped RISC OS at home because the
ARM chip at the time did not support floating point, something kinda
cruicial to my interest in ray tracing (hence POVray).
On the Archimedes I very nearly produced a commercial package in
cooperating with a maths genius who rewrote Rayshade in ARM machine code.
It was my 3D scene editor plus his ray tracer. Unfortunately, I could never
agree a contract, the Archimedes started its nosedive, so nothing ever
materialised.
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
******************************
