Linux-Advocacy Digest #1, Volume #28 Wed, 26 Jul 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Damien)
Re: Windows98 ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451753 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451753 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Another one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Clell A. Harmon)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Steve)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451753 (tinman)
Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation (Loren Petrich)
Re: If Linux, which? If not Linux, what? NOT flame-bait! (Smitty)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: [OT] intuitive (was Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready! I'm
ready! I'm not ready.)) (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Star Office to be open sourced ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting ("Colin R. Day")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 23:54:24 GMT
[apologies for continuing the cross-posting, followups set.]
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:38:20 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Said David Brown in alt.destroy.microsoft;
| >T. Max Devlin wrote in message ...
[...]
| Ed Muth (to whom the staff engineer who wrote
| the Halloween memos referred inquiries concerning them) had an interview
| with ZD in which he practically quoted from a FUD textbook. From a
| parody of the circumstances written in response to Mr. Muth's reference
| to Linus and the Linux community as "Robin Hood and his Merry Men" (who
| didn't understand that it is supposed to take huge capitalization to
| write software, according to Ed)
[...]
| The actual interview with Muth by ZDNet is
| http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,1014079,00.html
[...]
That is some amazing FUD there. I figured I'd blast a few holes in it
while I have the time.
"First, a broad base of support for applications -- especially
off-the-shelf, shrink-wrapped applications -- is necessary for a
modern operating system, he said."
Doesn't Slackware weigh in at about 6 CD's full? Is that no enough
applications?
"On the server side they want strong queuing and security. This is all
done through integration."
Integration actually hurts security. Examples: IE/Explorer
integration. Outlook/Word integration. Separating things offers more
security. That's why my web server runs as nobody.
"Muth next turned to the economics of Linux. He said his preliminary
cost analysis showed Linux actually costs end users more than Windows
NT."
Let's see how he supports this, shall we?
"Let's say, for discussion, they are equally scalable,"
Not true. Linux is much more scalable.
"And let's assume applications are available for both, . . ."
True.
". . . and setup time is the same."
Not true. I speak from experience in saying Linux is a lot easier to
install and set up.
"Given all these factors as equal, the best you could hope for is
about the same cost per transaction between servers."
But he's ignoring the fact that Linux can serve a lot more
transactions on the same hardware, so it looks like they win there
too.
"I find it hard to believe that some of the best computer scientists
in the world will want to do their work for free. Without a long-term
technical road map, without multimillion-dollar test labs, someone
wants me to believe these visionary programmers and developers will
want to do the best work of their lives and then give it away. I do
not believe in that vision of the future."
Well believe it. The evidence is all around you.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:08:26 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
> Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Tim Palmer wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >
> >> >Yes, but removing the old version (minus config files) is not too much of a
> >> >hassle normally, unless of course it's got no uninstall program or
> >> >installed a lot of files so takes a good while to remove them.
> >>
> >> ...which is normly the case on UNIX.
> >>
> >
> >You haven't used RPM, have you, Tim?
> >
> >Colin Day
> >
>
> You Lie-nux iddiot. UNIX is crap.
No, it isn't. It is a brilliant OS.
Colin Day
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451753
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:15:27 GMT
Here's today's Malloy digest. Once again he ignores all the unresolved
issues, such as his alleged reciprocation, his illogic regarding his
frequenting of "these precincts", how he tried to speak for everyone
else, his parroting, the nonexistent chat with the "TPTB", his use of
the word "necessarily" inappropriately, and so on. It must be a cold
day in Hades because the fact is that there was no "chat with TPTB".
There is no "TPTB" at UofH to have a chat with, Malloy's pontification
to the contrary notwithstanding. Notice how he never produces any
evidence.
128> Tholen doth thole:
128>
128> Typical invective, and rather ironic, coming from someone who advocate, but
128> hangs out in an OS/2 newsgroup to entertain himself by spewing invective.
128>
128> Typical for Tholen and rather ironic again.
128>
128> Classic pontification and an erroneous counterclaim.
128>
128> Classic pontification and an erroneous counterclaim.
128>
128> Classic pontification and an erroneous counterclaim.
129> Oy vey! Tholen gets on his high ass and tholes:
129>
129> Tholen = Truth? I've not laughed as much as I did upon reading this example
129> of Tholen's claptrap!
130> Ugh, the Tholen tholes:
130>
130> To you, Tholen, perhaps, but you're a lo[n|s]er; to many other readers, it
130> is not at all irrelevant, twit.
131> The Tholeman tholeth:
131>
131> You have to ask? Poppycock! You are often digestified because you write so
131> much claptrap to so many different, uh, "admirers," Tholen.
132> The Tholen tholens:
132>
132> Hoist by your own petard, you naturally pretend it's not significant for
132> you. But tinman's right, you *tried* telling a joke but failed, for the
132> same reason that you always do.
132>
132> And what you can do here is also irrelevant, Tholen. And not much, besides.
133> "Little man" Tholen tholes:
133>
133> You want to see a good example of "invective," "little man" Tholen? It's
133> the first indented line of this posting. Hypocrite.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451753
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:19:15 GMT
Here's today's Tinman digest. Note how he can't even keep track of
who he's responding to.
1> You, Lazarus.
1> The one that keeps skipping, Ian.
1> No, I admit to writing somethign ungrammatical. ('
1> It's grammatical.
1> You aren't you? My oh my!
1> You, Davie.
1> Obviously I do.
1> Why do you care if I'm not talking to you? Oh, that's right, you _like_
1> jumping into conversations.
1> So you (pre)suppose.
1> If not you, why do you ask?
1> That's a what, Bruce.
1> No, only sad that you keep getting stuck.
1> See above.
1> See above.
1> Incorrect.
1> The voodoo that you do so well.
1> An identity relationship is illogical. Interesting.
1> Isn't that obvious, Bunkie?
1> What, not who, babykins.
1> Where I wrote what, Davie?
1> Incorrect.
1> Incorrect.
1> (' Really?
1> What, not who, pumpkin.
1> By your actions.
1> What, not who, bobo.
1> What alleged "you"?
1> Incorrect.
1> Incorrect.
1> Reading comprehension problems, Davey?
1> No, who is who, not that, snookims.
1> I am, even now.
1> I am, even now.
1> Why do you care, if I'm not talking to you?
1> Why, my widdle Davie-bumpkins, my widdle Davie-bumpkins.
1> Indeed, I'd have thought you'd know better.
1> Incorrect.
1> Reading comprehension problems are a what, not a who, Bennett.
1> Really? Oh, I guess experience has taught you to know better than to try
1> to tell a joke for entertainment purposes.
1> No, what I can prove is irrelevant, sweetie. ("
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clell A. Harmon)
Subject: Re: Another one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:18:33 GMT
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:31:33 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Denial ain't just a river in Egypt....
>> >>
>> >> I suppose you wrote this joke too Aaron?
>> >
>> >Are you an idiot
>> >
>> >a) no
>> >b) yes
>>
>> Oh no, now he thinks he's invented the dumb-fuck poll joke.
>>
>> Put your shrink on danger money Aaron...
>
>How much are you willing to pony up?
Are you claiming to have invented the dumb-fuck poll joke
Aaron?
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:23:25 GMT
It was not directed at you, or anyone specific in this forum so you
will see no apology from me.
As to your lawsuits?
Good luck.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:52:58 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I expect your appology offered in the same forum as you made your insult.
>Using such language, you could yourself in court.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451753
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:26:02 -0400
In article <7eLf5.49$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here's today's Tinman digest. Note how he can't even keep track of
> who he's responding to.
>
Aw, pookie, did I say something wrong? ("
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation
Date: 27 Jul 2000 00:32:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Loren Petrich
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Pedant point: the Amiga variant was at one point called
>AutoConfig(tm). (Yes, that's right, it was in fact trademarked!)
> ... Never really had to concern myself with
>interrupt assignment or DMA channels or anything like that;
>the software just worked.
>And that's how it should be. :-)
>I have little experience with the Mac, ...
From your description, Macintosh plug-and-play is much like the
Amiga's -- auto-detection that works essentially all the time.
>> How close can one get with Linux-x86? How do non-x86 Linuxes
>>fare? How far do BSD, Solaris, etc. go?
>PnP is a hardware function, not a software one. While an x86 variant
>of the OS in question would probably be expected to support PnP
>in some form (Linux uses the utilities pnpdump and isapnp), it's
>not clear to me how well a non-x86 variant would be required
>to support PnP, as it is rather dependent on the specifics of
>the x86 microprocessor and supporting hardware. (It's not
>clear to me whether ROMware gets involved, either.)
However, I meant plug-and-play in general (Mac, Amiga, etc.), and
not simply that specific variety of it.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: Smitty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc
Subject: Re: If Linux, which? If not Linux, what? NOT flame-bait!
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:40:49 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> First, I have a laptop I want to install "Unix" on. I've installed Linux
> on desktops several times in the past (starting with Ygdrasil), but I have
> the feeling I may have fun with the BackPack parallel port CD-ROM drive.
> So, question 1: which of the modern releases is likely to install easily on
> a laptop with about 0.5GB of disk space, 24MB of RAM, and a parallel port
> CD-ROM drive?
>
> Secondly, about free "Unix"es in general... I'm a very busy systems and
> networks consultant. I want it to work; I frankly don't have the time for
> a voyage of discovery (and no, I don't indend to pose as a Unix "expert").
> Maybe some day when I retire...
>
> Anyway, one of the thing that bugged me the most about Red Hat the last two
> times I tried it (4.x and 5.x distributions) was the fragmented and
> incomplete state of the documentation. I'm no newbie -- I've worked with a
> number of Unix variants over the years. I am kinda rusty, though; these
> days, I mostly do non-Unix systems administration. I have no problem
> getting down and dirty, but I've got no time to play hide-and-seek with the
> docs. If it's not in the man pages, it's not in the right place, dammit.
>
> I hear Slackware is a favorite of relatively knowledgeable Linux users. Is
> it really any better documentation-wise?
>
> And what about the BSDs? I'm a "BSD" guy from way back in the days of
> SunOS, and I still think Sun sold out to AT&T on SVR4. But preferences
> aside, how do the free BSDs compare with Linux? I've heard it said that if
> I like Slackware, I'll like BSD...386, I think they said. I'm not sure
> about the difference. I've never installed any of them. And I don't have
> the time to try them all.
>
> Anyway -- comments? Please?
>
> /kenw
> Ken Wallewein
> Calgary, Alberta
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The RedHat distrib is very well documented by RH as well by IDG Books.
The most versatile BSD is FreeBSD and it has the most documentation. I
would learn Free before attempting Open as you are correct about the
lack of documentation. BSD does not have the wide range of applications
for it that Linux does. The BSDs are good where security is important
and range of applications are not.
Smitty
p.s. Skip the BSD Linux emulation. It is not reliable and is more of a
gimmick.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 24 Jul 2000 12:56:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for running for office myself, only the most corrupt get enough
> "support" to make it far enough to "make a difference".
[...]
Bah. The only reason the corrupt get away with it is because people
like you won't get your asses in gear and vote them out of office.
Don't like any of the political platforms out there? Then set up your
own party. Campaign. If your position is one that other people
support, you will get votes, and if you get enough of those you will
get elected. That's what a representative democracy is all about.
And if you're too lazy to do that, or even to exercise your franchise,
why should *anyone* bother to listen to your moaning? Do you have any
idea how many people have *died* so you can have your franchise?
[...]
> Why do we have to continue to put up with leaders that make the
> rest of the world see us as a laughing stock? I sure as hell don't
> know, do you?
'Cos the majority of people who felt like voting voted the current set
of clowns in. It could be worse. Small-minded corruption is better
by far than power-hungry megalomania and dictatorship...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 24 Jul 2000 12:14:06 GMT
In article <8laa27$15u3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah, so you never really did anything back in those days, since the
> only way to do MOST things was to poke around into live memory.
It depends on the platform. On some, you had to print strange
characters instead.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 24 Jul 2000 12:23:11 GMT
In article <8l9ki4$k9e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You proceed from the false assumption that "Adminstrator == root".
I proceed on the assumption that a priviledged program making random
system calls could cause all (virtual) hell to break loose. Which is
a good argument for running with the minimum privs needed to achieve
the task in hand, and no more...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 24 Jul 2000 12:19:40 GMT
In article <8l9k9i$k9e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : Frankly, every one I've seen (and yes, that includes IE5, recentish
> : Netscrapes and recent Lynx browsers) has been filled with annoying
> : misfeatures (font legibility and formatting being major factors here.)
>
> Opera may very well alleviate some of that. http://www.opera.com/
Bah. My money is on finding some new way for software to suck instead.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 24 Jul 2000 13:02:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>> Suppose an x/0 caused stack corruption (it could happen,) this
>> could then lead to a series of pretty-much random system calls
>> (believable) and demonstrating that that sort of thing would cause
>> no problems is not easy.
>
> I believe this is essentially the Halting Problem??
Nothing so intractable. You just have to be nigh-on religiously
devoted to not trusting any data coming across any security boundary
(like the OS/user-layer division) without checking it out carefully
first. Software running with elevated permissions needs to be
especially cautious (which it is tough to do right when you're working
with languages like C, whereas others are better at it...)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
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: 24 Jul 2000 15:31:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...I'd like a HELP and UNDO key too... '-)
You want a Sun (119-key) keyboard? (Actually, they're quite nice...)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 24 Jul 2000 12:57:41 GMT
In article <8la8t0$k90$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One would certainly be hoping such "incorrect" system calls wouldn't be
> crashing the OS.
Definitely...
Donal (now why am I thinking of CrashNT?)
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:55:46 -0400
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> > Said Florian Weimer in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> There are many broken incarnations of make(1) out there. No surprise
> >> that sometimes, developers say "we don't care about that, take GNU
> >> make instead, it works".
> > And its free. Where's the surprise? I would think "it works and its
> > free" would be enough to convince anybody to use something, wouldn't
> > you?
>
> Nope, because it also has the negative side of "it's not included with
> the system." Because it's not included with the system, and because it
> can't be bought from a large vendor, it can't be supported -- and
> there's no one to lay the blame upon if it does cause failures.
I take it that they don't buy software from Microsoft.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:54:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
>
> > >I'm not knocking Feeble Virtual Window Manager's flexibility. I am
> > >knocking the alarming tendancy of Linux programs to want to look
> > >like Windows programs.
> >
> > Just how do you propose to distinguish them without that
> > distinctiveness being entirely gratuitive? Besides, there
> > are plenty of applications and window managers that chose
> > to follow some other path.
>
> I don't know about Window Managers, I can change those and still use
> the same programs. But the programs are a different story.
>
> AbiWord is a clone of Word.
> Gnumeric is a clone of Excel.
> StarOffice is a clone of Office.
> Gnome and KDE are heavily copying Windows Explorer.
> Evolution is a clone of Outlook.
> GIMP is busily cloning Photoshop.
> XMMS is a clone of WinAMP.
> Killustrator is a clone of Corel Draw and Adobe Illustrator.
>
> It goes on and on. I haven't seen any true originality or creativity
> expressd on the Linux platform /anywhere/.
>
> It's as if Free Software was good for only one thing: Copying the
> Proprietary.
Well, hold on. There is a lot of FSF and GNU software that was written
before Windows stole the desktop, and Windows has copied a lot of
concepts/features from UNIX/GNU/FSF, so your observation seems
backwards.
Also, consider that, for the past couple of years, we've been hearing
how "the only way for Linux to succeed is to 'be more like Windows.'"
Perhaps a lot of the recent development is simply pandering to those
demands.
For better or worse.
Yes, trancending the Windows Mediocrity would be "better" but it may not
win the hearts of Joe and Jane Consumer (even if it were free). Perhaps
the desktop needs to be taken first, and then the real innovation can
begin.
Yeah, I'm just dreaming, but I can admit it up front . . .
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[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: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:59:06 -0400
Mike Stump wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Oh, I dunno! What's so hard about:
> >>
> >> format C:
> >> <insert UNIX CDROM>
> >> boot cdrom
> >
> >Hmm. I would feel a little weird doing that on my machine at work.
>
> Oh, just be sure to ask before you do it. Tell them that if they
> don't let you do it, that you'll walk.
Goodness, it's not that serious! I'm a math instructor, not a
programmer.
Now if I to sign NDA's it might be a different matter.
I have Linux at home.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:09:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said The Ghost In The Machine in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, T. Max Devlin
>>Said The Ghost In The Machine in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>> [...]
>>>It's the same sort of illogic that permeates Quicktime 4's interface,
>>>which actually looks like a physical product. But why use a
>>>thumbwheel with a mouse? It makes little sense.
>>>
>>>(Have I been an engineer too long? :-) )
>>
>>NO! No! I say. "Why use a thumbwheel with a mouse?" <Guffaw! It's
>>true!>
>
>Ack...that's not *quite* what I meant; I'll have to amend that
>to "why rotate a pictorial representation of a thumbwheel with
>a mouse"?
Yes, I knew that is what you meant. After all, its *Quicktime*, not the
mouse, which has a thumbwheel. ;-)
>(The few times I have used mouse thumbwheels, they hurt my wrist
>slightly so I'm not sure I'd want to use one, but at least it
>appears slightly useful...)
It would be even more useful, I figure, if it didn't double the cost of
the mouse. :-(
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:07:36 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
> >installation of KDE, GNOME, fvwm, fvwmnf, motif, etc., etc.,
> >
> >I spent YEARS learning how to do it... NOT!
>
> Getting it's instaled is one thing. Try using it evry day.
>
I do. No problem.
> >>
> >> For some reason, regular tellevisions don't work in the Lixnu Apt's. Only the
> >> Netscape TV will work. Unlike
> >
> >Lynx, Arena.
>
> ...a black-and-wite TV and a TV that can't except cabal.
>
I don't want cabal TV, I believe that the media should not be
controlled by cabals.
Colin Day
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
