Linux-Advocacy Digest #32, Volume #28 Thu, 27 Jul 00 15:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Chris Wenham)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Chris Wenham)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: If Linux, which? If not Linux, what? NOT flame-bait! (alex)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept? (Steve)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Chris Wenham)
Re: M$: Real Capitalists? ("John W. Stevens")
Caldera Technology Preview (Cihl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 27 Jul 2000 13:37:15 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8loo9h$30l5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8lomgp$da$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> kfm isn't distributed as a product. IE was and is and so is Windows.
>> >
>> >IE and Windows are distributed together. IE for Windows is also
>distributed
>> >seperately, and when installs upgrades parts of the OS.
>>
>> Everyone who bought Win95 as it was distributed originally
>> without IE and paid extra for the separate Plus pack containig
>> IE knows this is a lie.
>
>Why would you buy the Plus Pack? Just type in the fricking MS or Netscape
>url and download either browser, or press one of the millions of idiotic
>buttons that were (for some reason) at the bottom of every single Web Page
>of that era.
I'm fairly sure there was a time when IE was only distributed
in the plus pack and OEM distributions. Regardless, I
don't think you considered the chicken and egg problem here.
If you didn't already have it, you would have to use ftp
to get your initial copy. I remember getting my first
Netscape versions that way but can't recall ever being
able to ftp a copy of IE. Could you?
Les Mikesell
[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!
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:42:18 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> Try having a look around gimp.org or one of the websites
> that use gimp as a server side rendering engine.
Okay, I see how it can be done.
Now how do I do the same for AbiWord, StarOffice, Gnumeric, Netscape,
Evolution, Sketch and GNOME?
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:43:00 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> ...another good counterpoint to your claim that you actually
> research things before spouting off about them.
Ah, so your entire counterpoint was based on a semantics issue? No
problem.
> Whining about a GNU based system being too derivative is a hoot.
Why?
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:43:06 GMT
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:25:33 +0100, 1$Worth <@costreduction.plseremove.screaming.net>
wrote:
>
>
>Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>>
>> "1$Worth" wrote:
[deletia]
>> are going to have a reaction when we are told that we need to make the
>> system 'easier to use' because what is really being asked for is a
>> Windows clone. This is also why Corel has gotten such a negative
>> reaction from some in the Linux crowd. Many Winvocates have claimed for
No. Corel has gotten a negative reaction because of it's
employment of XiG style FUD, unfullfilled promises and
general mediocrity.
>> years that Linux is just a cheap knockoff of Windows, Corel is doing
>> everything in their power to prove those people right.
>
>Corel has done no favours for Linux at this time, and the last thing
>that I would like to see is another "windows".
[deletia]
>Thanks for your comments.
>
>The thing is that I don't accept that *if* there is a common standard
>(risky to say I know) for GUI that makes a Gnu-Linux system easy to use
>that it logically follows that:
>1. The standard will be like windows (we already have windows thanks)
>2. This standard will mean that we are precluded from the use of our own
>window manager or xserver or technologyX.
>3. This "standard" means that we have to follow it.
Actually, none of these are necessary. Standards need not be
so coarsely defined.
Xt apps can quite happily interact with WINGs apps and gnome
apps so long as the basic interfaces are adhered to: much
like network applications.
>
>Let's just say for argument that there is a windows like interface that
>comes with easy to use configuration. Let's call this interface "KDE 5"
>and assume that this will cater for all the people who are stuck on
>windows and wish to transfer to Linux. I don't see that this will
>prevent me from running Gnome, or you from running the fab 3d thingy.
...depends on what sort of network effects are involved.
KDE has been dragging their feet getting Xdnd support in,
so that is one network effect to deal with already.
[deletia]
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[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 13:39:21 -0500
Chris Wenham wrote:
> So tell me what new software for Linux has come out that doesn't copy
> another program in one way or another?
I've done this before, but allow me to jump in. ThreeDSIA:
http://threedsia.sourceforge.net
Not really a program, but a whole new user environment. Everything is
3D and based on the idea of 'walking' through halls and rooms (folders)
and picking up objects (files) and manipulating them in the 3D
environment. You may meet others and 'talk' (through chat) with them
along the way. There are a few utilities available for this new "shell"
but most are on the way.
Now, tell me where that one is copied from?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (alex)
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:45:22 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:08:25 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 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?
>
>Above all else, stay away from Corel Linux. I doubt it will work on your
>hardware. If you are a long time unix user then you would dislike that
>distribution. If you have been a sysadmin on any unix at any time, you
>would just HATE Corel Linux.
>
>
True. If you hated Redhat, you will want to burn the Corel CDs.
However, Slackware could install on your laptop w/o serious problems.
The space might be a little problem but if you've used unix for a
while, you'll know what packages you need and will only install what
is needed. An older Slack distribution will take up less space.
On the documentation side, there are two places to look. First, the
man pages are pretty good(I think they are the same on all
distributions). Also, the linux-howtos are a great help. In slack,
they are automatically installed in /usr/doc/Linux-HOWTO (that may be
HOWTOs ; I always just type L*) Some are are also in the
/usr/doc/Linux-mini-HOWTO A quick grep will help you find what you
need in case you do not know what man page to look at.
I do not know enough about BSD to comment on it. I've got FreeBSD
downloaded and burned but haven't installed it yet. Sorry.
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:48:05 GMT
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:57:53 +0100, "1$Worth"
<"1$Worth"@costreduction.plseremove.screaming.net> wrote:
>
>
>Mikey wrote:
>>
>> Thus Sprake "1$Worth":
>>
>> > "Ease of use" means that Linux can be accessible to people whom
>> > otherwise would be locked into closed source for-profits-only solutions.
>> > It also means that the MARKET will take Linux as seriously as it does
>> > with a Microsoft or an Apple. It means that even more device makers will
>> > positively want their hardware to work to its fully optimised potential
>> > under Linux.
>>
>> You could be talking about "Like Windows" in some cases. That's because
>> people are have used windows for years and that's all they know and
>> they're not real keen on change. OTOH, I set up a small network for a
>> "Mom & Pop" local business. The server is Debian, gateway is FreeBSD,
>> *and* the clients are Caldera with StarOffice. These people had minimal
>> computer experience and it took a bit of instruction but they caught on
>> and are very happy with their sophisticated & in-expensive network.
>>
>> My theory behind this is that they never had computers there before, so
>> there were no predefined ideas of how to operate a computer. Or, they
>> didn't have to un-learn the Windows concept of computer operation.[1]
>>
>> [1] I'm not against Windows. Use whatever operating system you want.
>> --
>> Since-beer-leekz,
>
>
>Thanks for your comments.
>This is a great case in point! Linux provides the simplicity for the
>"mom & pop" local business. This shows just how well Linux has
>progressed that you can use Linux in this way.
Set up and maintained by a knowledgeable Linux person, Linux is just
as easy to use as Windows overall.
>But what happens why they want to buy a scanner, a new modem or a USB
>video unit? They will probably ask you of course, but what about people
>who don't have advice on hand?
Here is where the major problem with Linux will arise IMHO. Again IF
they have access to the Linux person they should have no trouble at
all in selecting the correct hardware. If however, they follow the
masses and head for the nearest chain store it will be much more
difficult for them, but again if they are lucky enough to find a
sympathetic salesperson with a knowledge of Linux they should have
little trouble.
I managed to find just such a person when I purchased my daughters
iMac last month. He knew Mac's inside out and gave me very valuable
advice.
>Without "the market" behind you as we know it is difficult to keep up
>with all the exotic hardware coming into the market, also some
>manufacturers seem not even to want drivers written for them for free
>and withhold product information. Unfortunately these backwards thinking
>companies only look at popularity and hard demand.
>From the hardware point of view it is all about money. Drivers will be
written for the OS that provides the most return on the dollar for the
hardware manufacturer.
There are exceptions of course, but big business runs the market,
which is unfortunate.
>Then the installation of hardware follows wildly different paths.
With supported hardware Linux is generally just as easy a platform to
get the hardware working in.
If explicit instructions are included (word for word follow the
bouncing cursor), anyone should be able to make it work.
Mandrake 7.1 did just as good a job with my hardware as Win98se did.
The hardware that Mandrake didn't recognize required driver disks from
the manufacturer for Windows 98SE as well.
>There are many people that will be happy to let you set things up and
>not worry about adding hardware or software without asking you, but I
>suspect that there are many more people who would be willing to try.
>That's why I think that ease of use is a real and important issue.
In my experience, Mom and Pop business's tend to be pretty stable.
Once something works, they leave it alone. I see many places still
running DOS applications on very old hardware and they are perfectly
happy.
A home/family PC is a different story, getting software installed and
de-installed all the time as well as the latest and greatest hardware
complicates matters un Linux and even more so under Windows in some
cases.
>I agree that much of the fuss of "ease of use" may be more to do with
>what people have been habituated to rather than an objective reason. But
>I would put it to you that subjective reasoning ships boxes.
Yep.
I kept closing Windows on the iMac by clicking in the upper left hand
button like I do with Windows. My daughter however figured out that
this leaves the program still running and that the menus bar changes
with each active program.
Silly me.. :)
>p.s. There is of course no pre-defined requirement that Linux should
>even be "popular", but it seems such a unique opportunity to make the
>world that little bit better. This does require some hard thinking as to
>what path is best trodden. I sure don't want another version of windows,
>just something that "normal" people can use, not just us geeks ever
Be careful using that word Geek around here. Somebody is liable to try
and sue you :)
>quick to fire up vi for that quick tweak, or to debate long and hard as
>to the "best" shell (naturally bash of course).
Even the Windows world is getting a little bit tired of paying $89.99
for bug fixes.
Linux has a great opportunity to gain some major home market share,
like it has in the server world, if it stops trying to be a better
Windows and starts concentrating on what it does best and caters to
the folks that appreciate that characteristic of the OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 27 Jul 2000 13:52:19 -0500
In article <8lopm2$l06$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Which other OSes provide such a mechanism, anyway ? What stops me
>> >overwriting a Linux shared library with one of the same name ?
>>
>> Instead of explaining unix's shared library technology to you, I'm going
>> to ask you to supply a single solitary example of this kind of thing
>> happening on unix.
>
>I find it difficult to believe you've used Linux or Unix for any legnth of
>time and never had any sort of shared library problem.
And I find it difficult to believe that someone who knows about
specific and unusual problems of certain Linux releases would
have asked the initial question above. RedHat made some
mistakes affecting backwards compatibility in a few releases
that were mostly fixed in the next upgrade versions and some
people ran into trouble when they assembled their own mix of
libraries and programs instead of using a distribution. However
that kind of trouble is almost unheard-of in a commercial
unix distribution built and tested by a single team. For
example, I was able to run the same binaries for the entire
life-span of an AT&T 3B2. I started with SysVr2.2 but I
believe some apps had been compiled for something earlier
and they continued to run as the machines were upgraded
through SysVr3.x (I forget the final sub-release but there
were massive changes along the way).
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:50:59 -0500
Steve wrote:
> You're wasting my time...
>
> ******PLONK****************
>
> Welcome to Agent's somewhat limited, but effective killefile.
> You won't have anyone to talk to though because you are the only one
> in it.
>
> >
You'd just as well add me in there too. After all, you're plonking
someone because they disagreed with something you said, and were
offended by it. I think that pretty much means everyone in cola should
be in your killfile. Hmm, of course, it would be tougher to annoy
people if you ignored all of us.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:58:12 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chris Wenham wrote:
> > So tell me what new software for Linux has come out that doesn't copy
> > another program in one way or another?
>
> I've done this before, but allow me to jump in. ThreeDSIA:
>
> http://threedsia.sourceforge.net
>
>
> Now, tell me where that one is copied from?
I've never seen this applied to shells before (except maybe in the
movies :-)
It looks like the first good example so far, even if I'm dubious of
its practical value (which isn't applicable to this argument anyway,
I just don't see myself using /that particular program/). Thank you.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: M$: Real Capitalists?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:05:13 -0600
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
>
> The free BSD's have the same advantage, so it would be interesting
> to try to find out why Linux has succeeded in overshadowing the free
> BSD's.
Have you read, "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"?
If so, in what way do you disagree with it?
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Caldera Technology Preview
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:08:43 GMT
Has anybody here tried it? I have.
Watch out for it a little. It's only to show what's coming in a few
months, and NOT stable. AT ALL!
Make one wrong move and *bam*, you're bombed out.
It's nice though that you can now fill in a bug report automatically
and mail it to the KDE people. Really nice indeed. I saw Konqueror
too, and it's nice and speedy (not like Netscape). Tried KWord and
KSpread, and they look nice as well, although unstable just like the
rest of course.
I suggest you get it and try it if you have some spare room on a HDD
somewhere. At least you can see all the new features and improvements
at once, instead of downloading them all separately.
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
