Linux-Advocacy Digest #52, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 03:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Marty)
Re: If Linux, which? If not Linux, what? NOT flame-bait! (Albert Ulmer)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Marty)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Will Linux Dominate the Desktop Future? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marty <[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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:19:52 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:50:38 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:11:12 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:40:50 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 03:16:38 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:46:02 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:11:26 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >Chris Wenham wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >> [deletia]
> >> [deletia]
> >> >> Pretty much all GUIs have a fairly similar scheme for
> >> >> communicating between applications and windows, even
> >> >> including GEM.
> >> >
> >> >How is the socket-based X even remotely (pun intended) similar to entirely
> >> >local PMSHELL or Explorer in terms of communications between applications and
> >> >the window manager? Your "declarations of fact" are worthless.
> >>
> >> You're simply fixating on a lower level mechanism.
> >
> >You're the one who brought up "communicating between applications and
> >windows".
>
> There's more than just the 'bit banging' perspective on that.
How do "applications and windows" communicate with one another, if not through
a programming interface? Those are your words. Live with them.
> >> >> >> What Fvwm95 does reflects interface elements present in X
> >> >> >> since 1990 and a little bit of dressup to make it look more
> >> >> >> superficially like explorer.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >And it's that precise "dressing up" that nauseates me so. Why bother trying
> >> >> >to look like Explorer when it can have its own unique and respectable
> >> >> >interface?
> >> >>
> >> >> Then dress it up differently.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is what distinguishes actual Linux and FreeBSD users from
> >> >> posers and whining Lemmings. If you don't like fvwm95, at the
> >> >> very least bother to crack open .fvwm95rc and do something
> >> >> about it.
> >> >
> >> >Geez you are thick. I'm not saying I *can't* do it. I'm merely mentioning
> >> >that there is an alarming trend in a lot of Linux software to produce a
> >> >Windows-like environment on Linux.
> >>
> >> Why should it alarm you? What network effects do you think are
> >> going to force you to suffer a 'bad windows clone interface'?
> >
> >It alarms me because I see effort wasted on cloning something that sucks when
> >brand new concepts can be introduced instead.
>
> You are actually quite pathetic.
Right back at ya.
> You drone on and on
I mentioned one thing in passing and you got a bee up your ass. If you'd back
down a few notches, I'd have nothing to say.
> about gratuitously new ideas
That phrase makes no sense.
> yet provide none of your own, not even slight modifications
> realative to older interfaces.
I wasn't aware that I am obligated to fix all user interface problems because
I criticized a trend that I saw.
> You don't really demonstrate what is wrong with what is being
> cloned,
I don't have to. I merely mentioned that many Linux things are looking like
many Windows things and I didn't like that. You are the one trying to make
something out of that fact. You started by denying that Linux things are
looking like Windows things on the grounds that Windows copied it, and
sidetracked further toward oblivion.
> which covers just about everything and not just Windows, and
> offer no clue as to what would be gained.
I wasn't aware that this was a requirement for stating an opinion. What have
you been solving in the meantime?
> It's not at all clear that you would be able to handle a genuinely
> imaginitive interface given your own apparent lack of imagination.
I already do. I use the OO WPS as more than just a program launcher.
> >> Those of us with a clue just continue on using alternate
> >> interfaces or even build alternative interfaces that can
> >> interoperate with common (or even uncommon standards).
> >
> >How would you know what those of us with a clue do?
>
> What is this 'we' dellusion.
Nothing delusional (or dellusional [sic]) about it.
> You aren't even aware of the basic details of the few things
> you have demonstrated a vague awareness of.
Talk about vague. How ironic! Read that back and listen to how stupid it
sounds. That'd make a good tagline.
> >> [deletia]
> >> >> >vomit.
> >> >>
> >> >> The user shell is typically not the worst aspect of any
> >> >> Microsoft Operating Enviroment.
> >> >
> >> >But why make software that mimics it at all?
> >>
> >> Why not?
> >
> >Because you can spend your effort making something better. Why create a Pinto
>
> You are going to do this either way, if you are fixated on
> gratuitous diversity.
I'm not fixated on anything. You're the one with the bee up your ass over a
casual comment I made. Don't project your own psychoses (plural) onto me.
> However, in your case: other people woudl be wasting effort on
> your behalf.
I'm not asking "other people" to do anything for me.
> >with a big block engine when you can throw that same engine into a Cobra?
> >
> >> This is the important part of your rant that is missing.
> >
> >All of my alleged "rant" is missing because it is non-existent. I mentioned
> >in passing (to someone else) that Linux apps which imitate Windows apps
> >nauseate me. You then got your panties in a bunch and took it as an attack on
>
> Linus has nothing to do with that part of Unix.
Linus has nothing to do with Unix. Linus has only to do with Linux.
> What I objected to was your gross misrepresentation of the available
> options.
And what I object to is your continuous stuffing of words in my mouth. WHERE
HAVE I MISREPRESENTED THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS? Show the quote or STFU.
> >Father Tourvalds, putting words in my mouth as if I said that I couldn't
> >possibly avoid using applications that imitated Windows apps. Anything for
> >the sake of arguing, eh?
> >
> >> [deletia]
> >
> >Maybe if you left more of the post intact, you'd understand what was being
> >said. But I understand it's much more convenient to delete passages and
> >substitute in any words you like.
> >
> >> As far as why goes: function before form would be the
> >> obvious practical reason.
> >>
> >> Although, in terms of function: why be limited to the way
> >> that Unix does things?
> >
> >I'm not suggesting that limitation, contrary to what your limited mind read.
>
> If it's not there then how can I take it for granted?
Of what relevance is this remark?
> Besides, once you go on a crusade to rid us of MacOS
> derivatives, there isn't that much left in terms of interfaces.
Why would I bother? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything I've
said. I'm not surprised that this fact is lost on you.
> >> Why simply whine about the derivative nature of end user
> >> interfaces? Why not go after the whole kit & kaboodle?
> >
> >I've made it clear that I have no problem with the "kit & kaboodle".
>
> Exactly. If anyone is exhibiting myopia and platform centrism
> here it is you not I.
"Bullshit." You're the one telling me that I'm not good enough to use Linux
and should use a Dreamcast instead. Quit being an asshole.
> >> Wake us when you've got some code to show us.
> >
> >I've been a little too busy to play with Linux:
> >http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com
>
> Cute 'claim' for someone whining about derivatives.
No "claim" about it. What I've posted is for real.
I'm too busy developing software for the platform I like the best. Sorry, I
can't take the time out to solve all the problems on your favorite platform
like you wanted me to. I guess it's up to you to get off your ass and do
something about it.
> >http://seal.netlabs.org
> >
> >So where's you resume'?
[note: no response]
> These claims have no relationship to the failings you
> seem comfortable in finding in others yet you yourself
> possess in a greater abundance.
How does either of those links represent a failing of mine? Furthermore, how
do any of those apps represent me making OS/2 look like Windows (which was my
actual complaint about some applications in Linux, before you started merrily
stuffing words into my mouth to make yourself feel better).
> If you can't contribute some ideas of your own, nevermind
> an implementation, no one should take you seriously when
> you level claims regarding originality.
By that logic, no one should take you seriously. I'll bet dollars to donuts
that you haven't developed jack shit for your chosen platform. You just
strike me as being too much of a flaming elitist asshole to actually
accomplish anything. I'd be happy to be proven wrong on that, by the way.
---
Pontification of the day:
"You aren't even aware of the basic details of the few things you
have demonstrated a vague awareness of."
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Albert Ulmer <[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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:23:44 +0200
"David C." wrote:
> > If not, IMHO you can also try Mandrake Linux, which is said to be
> > quite good as well.
> Mandrake is RedHat, plus some customizations.
I am fully aware of that. But it is those customizations that make
Mandrake a better choice than Redhat.
Albert.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:22:17 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:16:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:50:38 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:11:12 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:40:50 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 03:16:38 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:46:02 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:11:26 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >> >Chris Wenham wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> >> Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [deletia]
> >>> >Geez you are thick. I'm not saying I *can't* do it. I'm merely mentioning
> >>> >that there is an alarming trend in a lot of Linux software to produce a
> >>> >Windows-like environment on Linux.
> >>>
> >>> Why should it alarm you? What network effects do you think are
> >>> going to force you to suffer a 'bad windows clone interface'?
> >>
> >>It alarms me because I see effort wasted on cloning something that sucks when
> >>brand new concepts can be introduced instead.
>
> If aren't at least capable of expressing an intermediate step in
> terms of a 'fixed' version of the interface that vexes you so then
> it is not clear something 'truely interesting' would not be a waste
> on you.
>
> [deletia]
>
> It is time for me to do for Windows what I often do against it.
>
> You can't seem to support your criticisms of the Windows
> user interfaces with actual details.
Why does "I find it nauseating" need to be backed up with facts? Those were
the words I actually wrote. What does that translate to in your mind? You've
got a serious problem there guy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:23:46 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Nathaniel Jay Lee in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>I can't believe people still feel this way. Just because *most* women
>choose to use/display their intelligence in different ways than *most*
>men does not mean they are incapable of using/displaying intelligence in
>the same areas.
Look, Nathan, nobody said that no individual, or even population, is
incapable of anything. Quite getting your egalitarian hackles in a
bunch. We aren't saying "just because" anything. We're saying that it
is, indeed, a fact that most women choose something that is ascertably
distinct from most men.
It's like the "are blacks more adept at athletics" argument. I gets
hyper, but any reasonable person has to agree that biology has a very
strong part in determining who we are and what we do.
> have to agree that for the most part the way we use
>our brains depends on our environment. Women are *trained* from the
>time they are little to be nuturers, care-providers, in other words,
>qualities befitting a mother.
Yes, and they're trained that way by both men and women. It isn't a
method of oppression, goddamn; its an efficiency of social design.
>If you know very many women raised in a
>house with all guys (mother left of died and they were raised by father
>and/or older brothers) you would see that these girls tend to head
>towards fields that are usually considered "boys only" areas.
And the very fact that you must qualify the argument with "tend to"
indicates that while environment is important, biology is very integral,
if not deterministic, in determining our personalities and choices.
[...]
>To say this is just from political correctness seems an attempt to blur
>the real issue. Men and women are *different* mentally because they are
>*trained* to be different.[...]
That, I'm afraid, is simply an attempt to circumvent the issue. That,
after all, seems to be the argument we've hit upon. Are men and women
different *at all*, and merely diverge in typical response due to social
conditioning, or are they fundamentally different, but amorphous and
flexible in their response to social conditioning?
Are you familiar with the Margaret Mead/Richard Feneman (sp?) debate?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== 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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:33:02 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >> Maybe you're the exception here, Aaron.
>> >
>> >Are you saying that most people place political ideology ahead of
>> >scientific research? In that case, maybe I am the exception.
>>
>> No, most people use the results of whatever scientific research is handy
>> to support their political ideology. Like rampant profiteering, just
>> because its common doesn't mean its good.
>
>Precisely.
Well, I'm glad you think so, because I was refuting your point at the
time. People do not base their ideology on research; they base their
choice of research on ideology. This tends to lead to confirmation
bias, which you seem to be evidencing.
If it is at all helpful, I'll point out that I agree with your original
characterization of "the differences between the thinking of men and
woman similar to the differences between KDE and GNOME; not very
interesting and far too slight to really matter". And I find it ironic
that the reason this subthread has blossomed is to refute your supposed
premise that women and men think differently, and not anything
concerning your actual remarks. Obviously, if treated as an
abstraction, men and women do think different, but if identified as
individuals there is barely a deterministic inference which might be
made.
But you did say you place scientific research ahead of your political
ideology, and that isn't, I think, the case. It was your claim as
somehow exceptional which prompted me to reply, of course. That isn't
so much evidence that you transcend the problem as that you are evidence
of it. Most people *do* place ideology ahead of fact, by nature. We
can't ever be as sure of our facts are we are of our ideology.
Having the political ideology of a rationalist moderate, I don't see
much good use of scientific research on either side, TBH.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== 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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will Linux Dominate the Desktop Future?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:36:42 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Keith T. Williams in alt.destroy.microsoft;
[...]
>Keith.
>loving English to the Nth degree, but unable to master it.
LOL. Have fun. "Third person plural present indicative". <G>
Math is hard, said Barbie.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
