Linux-Advocacy Digest #734, Volume #27 Mon, 17 Jul 00 15:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Craig Kelley)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (ZnU)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon? (Craig Kelley)
Re: which OS is best? (Matthias Warkus)
Misconceptions about Mozilla (was: Star Office to be open (Matthias Warkus)
Re: which OS is best? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ("John W. Stevens")
Re: [OT] intuitive (was Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready! I'm
ready! I'm not ready.)) (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:41:31 -0500
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:28:21 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>of control. But cooperative mechanisms can work, or we wouldn't be
>exchanging these thoughts as we are.
I think (almost) everyone but you, Joe Ragosta, and perhaps one or two
others of the fanatics on this newsgroup (you know, the
Apple-Can-Do-No-Wrong people) are convinced PMT is the Way Things
Ought To Be. CMT has failed - it's become more and more obvious, even
as CPU speeds get faster, that PMT is far faster and far more
efficient.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:41:34 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:27:47 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:35:38 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >> >Let's have your take on it.
> >>
> >> The oversight of an elected body rather than the whim of a
> >> Robber Baron that is in a position to do anything it likes
> >> being rather out of the control of the "invisible hand" at
> >> this point.
> >>
> >> Government is occasionally a necessary evil, usually to
> >> counteract some other evil. Hopefully, all such evils
> >> are checked in the end. This includes corporations.
> >
> >The statement above has absolutely no facts to debate. Instead of
reciting
> >the anti-MS "evil Microsoft" line try laying down some proven incidents
of
> >wrongdoing on Microsoft's part.
>
> You could have chosen to dispute the fact that Microsoft is no
> longer subject to control by the market for a start.
How so?
>
> No, you are simply trying to avoid very damning arguments you
> don't seem to have any satisfactory counter to.
You haven't provided any facts to counter, except maybe a roundabout
argument that government should cut MS off at the knees cause everybody uses
the OS therefore there MUST be a monopoly. You can't even show that if this
were even true it would be a bad thing let alone shopw that it's even true.
A companies size does not automatically require government meddling.
> Checks and balances are a nice concept when dealing with large
> entities that can exert much control over the citizenry. That
> concept shouldn't be merely limited to governments and
> anti-government rhetoric should not allow us to avoid one
> potential despot to be merely blinded to the threat of another.
How much control does MS exert over you?
> Without the market to effectively check corporations, the next
> obvious alternative is to allow governments to check them.
The market HAS effectively driven the computer industry. And will continue
to do so. It is the main reason why Microsoft has succeeded. As has a few
other major software makers and thosands of smaller ones.
> Mind you, this is one of the few areas in which the US government
> is actually granted explicit power to act.
Start aguing facts of the Microsoft case, not this bullshit check and
balance shit. It has nothing to do with the laws MS is accused of breaking.
Instead of arguing from the grounds that - "someone told me Microsoft is
evil and big" argue facts of the case.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jul 2000 11:51:28 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Darth Aggie) writes:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:20:00 -0700,
> KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
> <L0vc5.91120$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> + This is one of the times that I think they are doing it precisely for the
> + publicity. Notice the qualifiers, hence: "Sun is *considering* GPLing
> + StarOffice" not that they are actually doing it.
>
> Good point. And why the GPL when they already have their own "open
> license"?
Because their own license is very restrictive.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:58:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:35:38 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >Let's have your take on it.
> >
> > The oversight of an elected body rather than the whim of a
> > Robber Baron that is in a position to do anything it likes
> > being rather out of the control of the "invisible hand" at
> > this point.
> >
> > Government is occasionally a necessary evil, usually to
> > counteract some other evil. Hopefully, all such evils
> > are checked in the end. This includes corporations.
>
> The statement above has absolutely no facts to debate. Instead of reciting
> the anti-MS "evil Microsoft" line try laying down some proven incidents of
> wrongdoing on Microsoft's part.
Are you seriously implying you don't think Microsoft has done anything
wrong? I've got a 150 page document that disagrees with you....
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:24:36 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson) writes:
>
> Playing attrition games by reposting the same nonsense over
> and over again just get ignored... Sorry!!! :-).
So may I suggest to take a dose of your own medecine? (:-)
--
Stefaan
--
Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jul 2000 11:59:46 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Dynamic IP address such as ours attract far more attention than
> >one would think.
>
> I just got a connection attempt from 203.228.50.65 on port 53.
> Now why someone from eurasionrail.net would try to connect on that
> port I do not know, but I doubt it was sweet and innocent.
I've been getting *many* 53 and 119 connections on my 'easy target'
Linux box. A lot of these connections come from Russia and China.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:19:15 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 17 Jul 2000 09:38:17 +0200...
...and Tore Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, there is something called touch typing, that really requires an
> easily available Caps Lock key.
The only things that really require a Caps Lock key nearly all suck.
- COBOL
- FORTRAN
- JCL
- ...
Exception: SQL
maw
--
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, here I come!
-- Chet T. Laughlin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Misconceptions about Mozilla (was: Star Office to be open
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:17:23 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:10:50 +0100...
...and phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, making a big complex program open source won't necessarily
> attrack many outside developers -- look at netscape.
Netscape (i.e. Mozilla) has attracted a very large number of outside
developers (about 150). That's an impressive number of contributors,
especially for a project that uses C++ and that features so many
idiosyncrasies.
The only reason why the participation in Mozilla looks less than
impressive is that Netscape themselves employ about 300 developers.
Now do you want Netscape to lay off 250 people in order to make the
project look more popular?
mawa
--
Das Abitur ist der Deutschen wahres Vaterland.
-- Heinrich Böll
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:22:03 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sun, 16 Jul 2000 12:46:20 +0200...
...and Jens Prüfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why is it I am so fed up with Win-Trolls and lame Linux Advocates? This
> Newsgroup seems to be a total waste of bandwidth.
Let me interrupt the constant flow of more or less useful information
in this newsgroup for a little private announcement to one of our
German readers:
Dann halt' die Klappe, Jens, zu sagen hast du scheinbar ja sowieso
nichts Konstruktives. Oder irre ich mich da?
Thank you very much.
mawa
--
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, here I come!
-- Chet T. Laughlin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:58:16 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:38 +0200...
...and Lars Träger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A modern scheduler is sufficently self-tuning to work well on servers or
> > desktops without modification. When my FreeBSD machine runs its nightly
> > 2 am maintenance scripts, I can only tell if I'm physically present to
> > hear the disk drive's noises.
>
> Well then, Linux doesn't seem to have a modern scheduler. The solitair
> app that comes with KDE in the Suse distro has a bug in one of the
> games. When it's triggered, the game hangs in a loop and everything
> slows to a crawl.
Is the program just generating 100% CPU load or does it also access
files? Does its memory footprint grow in the process?
If the program's sucking up core, your system might be trashing. If it
accesses the drives, it might be the same problem as on my system,
where high load is less of a problem than lots of disk access because
my hard drive runs in some crappy PIO mode where the kernel needs to
spend lots of CPU whenever accessing it.
There's a kernel patch to get DMA going with this drive. I've finally
got to bite the bullet and install it.
mawa
--
You probably didn't notice, but during the past year, the moon slipped
about one and a half inches farther from the earth
-- Joel Bloch, "Stardate", NPR
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:13:03 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:41:34 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:27:47 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:35:38 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >wrote:
>> >> >Let's have your take on it.
>> >>
>> >> The oversight of an elected body rather than the whim of a
>> >> Robber Baron that is in a position to do anything it likes
>> >> being rather out of the control of the "invisible hand" at
>> >> this point.
>> >>
>> >> Government is occasionally a necessary evil, usually to
>> >> counteract some other evil. Hopefully, all such evils
>> >> are checked in the end. This includes corporations.
>> >
>> >The statement above has absolutely no facts to debate. Instead of
>reciting
>> >the anti-MS "evil Microsoft" line try laying down some proven incidents
>of
>> >wrongdoing on Microsoft's part.
>>
>> You could have chosen to dispute the fact that Microsoft is no
>> longer subject to control by the market for a start.
>
>
>How so?
That's your problem.
>
>>
>> No, you are simply trying to avoid very damning arguments you
>> don't seem to have any satisfactory counter to.
>
>You haven't provided any facts to counter, except maybe a roundabout
>argument that government should cut MS off at the knees cause everybody uses
>the OS therefore there MUST be a monopoly. You can't even show that if this
That's not the government's arguement at all actually. Neither
is that overly simplistic representation of the situation what
constitutes a legal monopoly.
>were even true it would be a bad thing let alone shopw that it's even true.
>A companies size does not automatically require government meddling.
It has nothing to do with size.
It has to do with power.
>
>> Checks and balances are a nice concept when dealing with large
>> entities that can exert much control over the citizenry. That
>> concept shouldn't be merely limited to governments and
>> anti-government rhetoric should not allow us to avoid one
>> potential despot to be merely blinded to the threat of another.
>
>How much control does MS exert over you?
They seek to make it difficult to allow me to choose which
product I wish in the marketplace. They actively conspire
to put up barriers to free and open communication between
me and their customers. They seek to make it necessary for
me to buy their product and line their pockets in order to
use computers at all.
Without Linux and FreeBSD, they would be considerably more
effective in those goals.
>
>> Without the market to effectively check corporations, the next
>> obvious alternative is to allow governments to check them.
>
>The market HAS effectively driven the computer industry. And will continue
...such that people 'choose' the harder and less featureful
DOS over Macintosh or even now manage to 'choose' Win9x over
a relatively superior MS alternative.
>to do so. It is the main reason why Microsoft has succeeded. As has a few
>other major software makers and thosands of smaller ones.
Nope.
Microsoft succeeded by aligning itself with the previous Monopoly.
If it weren't for previous anti-trust actions, Microsoft would never
have had the opportunity to get into it's current position. Unix also
would never have had the opportunity to get into it's current position
without the aid of another anti-trust action.
>
> > Mind you, this is one of the few areas in which the US government
>> is actually granted explicit power to act.
>
>Start aguing facts of the Microsoft case, not this bullshit check and
>balance shit. It has nothing to do with the laws MS is accused of breaking.
Microsoft has been immune from market forces for quite some time.
>
>Instead of arguing from the grounds that - "someone told me Microsoft is
>evil and big" argue facts of the case.
MSDOS 3 versus Macintosh.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:15:26 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:58:53 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:35:38 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > >Let's have your take on it.
>> >
>> > The oversight of an elected body rather than the whim of a
>> > Robber Baron that is in a position to do anything it likes
>> > being rather out of the control of the "invisible hand" at
>> > this point.
>> >
>> > Government is occasionally a necessary evil, usually to
>> > counteract some other evil. Hopefully, all such evils
>> > are checked in the end. This includes corporations.
>>
>> The statement above has absolutely no facts to debate. Instead of reciting
>> the anti-MS "evil Microsoft" line try laying down some proven incidents of
>> wrongdoing on Microsoft's part.
>
>Are you seriously implying you don't think Microsoft has done anything
>wrong? I've got a 150 page document that disagrees with you....
That document chronicles many well known complaints and
horror stories. Znu's citation is not an appeal to
authority as it is a vindication of a number of separate
arguments against Microsoft that have been put forward
by Microsoft critics and victims for over 10 years.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 17 Jul 2000 19:21:05 +0100
>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hell, how many people went out and got Office 2000, just because
>> it's the "new thing"?
Phil> MS Word has been getting *worse* since about 1995. The guy who
Phil> came up with that stupid paper clip wants to be shot. What
Phil> *were* they thinking of?
I managed to get rid of that. It took me a whole day but it
was worth it.
First you uninstall windows.....
Phil
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 17 Jul 2000 19:24:34 +0100
>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Within both the US and the UK the rate of TB is
>> rising (TB is simply caused by the conditions of poverty).
Phil> I think resistance to drugs has something to do with it as
Phil> well.
TB is totally treatable now as it has been for many a year.
The problem is that we are not treating it, because we have ceased to
care about it. The spread in TB is linked totally to the rise in the
numbers of a under class, and the squalid housing conditions (or
cardboard boxes) that they live in.
Phil
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 17 Jul 2000 19:28:04 +0100
>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phil> On 17 Jul 2000 12:24:10 +0100, Phillip Lord
Phil> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How would you ensure that everyone has access to capital though?
>> In our current society capital appears to be used to enforce the
>> class divide between those who produce and those who live of what
>> others produce. I would like to see and end to this class divide
>> and I think that it is possible, but my own ideas do not involve
>> capital.
Phil> How do you mean?
I'm not sure what your question is to be honest. My own ideas
do not involve capital. I think shifting capital around is not a
solution to the problem. We need to extend democracy to all fields of
our life, and make what we have more meaningful. Capital power blocks
do not have a place.
Phil
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:29:35 -0600
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Osugi Sakae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 1. I did more than just cast insults. Thus your post is
> > pointless.
>
> I responded to the insults in your post as they nullify any comments you
> make.
Nope. Insults are orthognal to the point.
> > 2. You claimed that one reason linux doesn't support as much
> > hardware as Windows or Mac has something to do with the lack of
> > profits for the hardware companies if they wrote Linux drivers.
> > I rebutted, pointing out that the drivers are given away free.
>
> That's true, but manufacturers generally write the Windows ones first.
Yep. Most people run Windows.
> It's more like I'm coming across the fact that Linux does not support
> certain devices.
This is true. It is also true that Windows does not support certain
devices. That's life.
It seems you've chosen to become a systems integrator.
Good luck, and have fun.
> Ah, but here on COLA it is proclaimed that Linux is better than Windows
> and is overtaking Windows. I thought I'd take a look and see if Linux
> has moved on since last I looked. Yes there are improvements but there
> are still areas where work needs to be done.
There is nothing the Linux community can do to make hardware
manufacturers write drivers for Linux.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:37:47 -0600
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> As for "accidentally" getting as much unsupported hardware, well it
> happens.
It happens because you are not aware of the simple fact that you are
doing something wrong.
A lot of your statements are the equivalent of:
"Geeze, Windows 98 SE won't install on my new G4 Macintosh! Windows
sucks!"
See, nobody, anywhere, has *EVER* claimed that Linux runs on all of the
same hardware as Windows does. So if you bought hardware just 'cause
Windows supported it, then were all surprised if Linux doesn't support
some of it . . . we have to wonder when you will figure out that you are
doing something wrong.
> I didn't deliberately pick a system that I knew would fail on
> Linux,
No, and you *ALSO* didn't do the job you volunteered for.
If you are trying to install Linux from a CD, then you (*YOU*, nobody
else!) have volunteered to perform the tasks of system integration, OS
installation and OS configuration . . . three jobs that are normally
done for you when you buy a pre-installed Wintel box.
> I just tried it out, and found a few problems.
Problems that you agreed to when you decided to buy the parts
separately, and put them together.
> I agree. Where are we now with Windows 95? 98? Me? NT 4.0, 2000?
When will Windows run on PPC? Now, there's some hardare Linux supports,
that Windows does not.
> As for me, why I'm absolutely perfect as I am 8*}!
I tend to disagree . . . as soon as you figure out the difference
between buying a complete product, vs. buying a kit . . . then you'll be
perfect! ;->
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: [OT] intuitive (was Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready!
I'm ready! I'm not ready.))
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:47:48 GMT
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, that is the focus of my argument, though it applies equally well to
> the Macintosh. Neither is intuitive; the Mac is just a lot easier. (It
> also relies on the mouse far too much for my convenience,
Heck, *Windows* relies too much on the mouse for my convenience.
I would prefer if *everything* that could be done with the
mouse also had a keyboard equivalent. It ain't so.
Most web browsers are horrific in this regard. I like w3...
except that it tends to produce a really junky looking page
when the HTML deviates too badly from the standards. Not
that this isn't ultimately the webmasters' fault, but w3
isn't very good at dwimmery.
- jonadab
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
