Linux-Advocacy Digest #47, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Gnome or KDE (Tom Eastep)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Spud")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:26:42 +0200
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Chris Wenham wrote:
>
> "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > How does this change the point that most Linux applications are
> > > copies of something else?
> >
> > "Copies" in what sense? Did anyone say that they weren't similar?
>
> This branch of the thread openend when I observed that many Linux
> programs appear to copy something else, then I listed examples.
>
> I'm conveying an /impression/, a subjective opinion that has been
> inspired by and supported with examples.
>
If I may be allowed an observation?
It seems to me that in Softwareland, everybody copies the best thing
that's around at the time. This has been going on for quite a long time
now. The trick seems to be: "Copy and Enhance", meaning that you take
your competitor's (or mentor's or different platform developer's) piece
of work and add stuff you think your customers/users are going to like.
This is apparently considered the Right Way to do business.
So merely stating that Linux apps seem to copy existing Windows apps is
kicking in a door that's not only open, but already thoroughly rotted
away.
The right question to ask, IMHO, would be: Do Linux apps _only_ copy
their Windows examples, or do they add things to them their Windows
counterparts don't have?
Example: StarOffice is obviously written with Microsoft Office in mind,
but the StarOffice User Interface of the Integrated Desktop is something
you will not find in Microsoft Office. It is clearly an enhancement (I'm
not saying it is necessarily a _good_ enhancement - personally I can't
stand it).
More example: KDE copies Windows Explorer - fine. It's not like it the
biggest secret in the world. But Windows doesn't come with multiple
desktops (out of the box that is), and KDE does. An enhancement.
So how many Linux apps are nothing but blatant copies of their Windows
counterparts then?
[I snipped the stuff about OpenDoc, the Next Generation, not because it
wasn't interesting, but because, after reading it, I discovered there
was absolutely nothing I could sensibly say. Too bad you're not in
charge of a major software development house. OTOH, odds are you'd go
bankrupt in a fourthnight. People _are_ stupid, you know; to paraphrase
Heinlein: They don't want a better word processor, they want a better
dressed typewriter.]
--
Karel Jansens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:44:55 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> You're one of those people who thinks that the U.S. Government is
> >> perfect
> >Absolutely not. it's FAR too socialistic.
>
> In what way?
AFDC
Social Security
WIC
HUD
Dairy price supports
Food Stamps
>
> >> Sounds to me like your representative republic is 4 wolves deciding
> >> what 12 wolves and 240 sheep will have for dinner.
> >Note if we returned to a Constitutional Senate (where the
> >state legislators elect the Senators, not the common people,
> >which merely turns the Senate into a 2nd House of Representatives
> >full of political careerits.)
>
> So you don't think that the present Constitution is completely
> legitimate?
The CONSTITUTION is legitimate.
The problem is that Congres is blatantly operating outside of it.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:40:14 GMT
In article <8lolvl$4bg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
> In article <8lo8l4$m1g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >Yes and no. Predecessor systems were an abominable mix of
> >inhomogeneous, one-of-a-kind, sole-purpose, pork-barrel projects that
> >were so incompatible that they couldn't cooperate well enough to
crash
> >each other. As for entire specialized shipboard subsystems going
> >out-of-service, it happened far too often, and the Navy's Smart Ship
> >program was conceived to address that deficiency, among others.
>
> However, why WinNT and not some Unix-like OS or OSes?
This is a fiasco of extraordinary dimension with its roots in budget
cutting, pork barreling, empire building, and self agrandizement. Did
the Navy need a modernization programme? Yes. Did they fuck it up
beyond belief? Yes. Would UNIX have helped? No. If they had chosen
UNIX instead of NT for the integrated bridge controls, the Yorktown
would be just as dead in the water and the NT newsgroups would dump on
us in perpetuity for the screwup. Like we do to them....
http://www.usni.org/Proceedings/digiorgio.htm
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Eastep)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Gnome or KDE
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:32:28 -0700
Jimmy Navarro wrote:
>Pig wrote:
>
>> Hi All:
>>
>> I am a newbie of Linux and using the SUSE linux 6.3.
>> I've tried different GUIs.
>> I think the Gnome and KDE are the best.
>> So, which one is better? Pls. suggest.
>
>I like KDE in my Thinkpad because GNOME is too ugly in my 12.1" viewable
>Active Matrix screen, the bottom horizontal bar to can not set to tiny
>or thinner like in KDE.
>
It can in Gnome 1.2.1...
-Tom
--
Tom Eastep \ Eastep's First Principle of Computing:
ICQ #60745924 \ "Any sane computer will tell you how it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ works if you ask it the proper questions"
Shoreline, Washington USA \___________________________________________
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:51:00 -0700
[snips]
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Leslie Mikesell wrote:
> > No it won't, any more than it would be when delivered by
> > a web server on the same machine. Writing to a tape is
> > the same as writing to a socket.
>
> Try writing a tar file to an 8mm tape on an HP PA-RISC machine,
> and reading it on a SUN Sparc, and get back to me.
If it treats the data as anything other than a *byte* stream, it's
broken.
If it *does* treat the data as a byte stream, your JPG files will work
just fine... because JPG files use a specified format which can be
read by any platform.
Try this:
Write the data...
unsigned long x = 0x12345678;
fwrite( &x, sizeof(x), 1, file );
Read the data...
unsigned long x;
fread( &x, sizeof(x), 1, file );
Whoops - if you wrioe the data on a little-endian machine but read it
on a big-endian machine, you're hosed. Of course, you're hosed
because you're *stupid* for doing it this way when the data is
intended to be portable. Now try this:
unsigned long x = 0x12345678;
unsigned char b;
b = x & 0xff;
fwrite( &b, 1, 1, file );
b = ( ( x >> 8 ) & 0xff );
fwrite( &b, 1, 1, file );
b = ( ( x >> 16 ) & 0xff );
fwrite( &b, 1, 1, file );
b = ( ( x >> 24 ) & 0xff );
fwrite( &b, 1, 1, file );
Hmm... now the data is written out in a specific order: DCBA. To read
back:
unsigned long x = 0;
unsigned char b;
fread( &b, 1, 1, file );
x = b;
fread( &b, 1, 1, file );
x |= (unsigned long)b << 8;
fread( &b, 1, 1, file );
x |= (unsigned long)b << 16;
fread( &b, 1, 1, file );
x |= (unsigned long)b << 24;
x should now == 0x12345678
Note that between the write and the subsequent read, you can copy the
fool thing from _any_ endian machine to _any_ other endian machine.
The only assumption involved is that you're only using a maximum of 32
bits worth of the long, and even those assumptions can be dealt with.
Needless to say, floating point has to be handled somewhat
differently, but that doesn't matter here. Voila; one neutral format
which can happily survive your little copying process. You were
saying?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
