Linux-Advocacy Digest #61, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Pestov digest, volume 2451736 (Pestov) (tholenbot)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) (tholenbot)
Re: Good Free VCD/DVD Player & Questions about the "mount /cdrom" (Daniel Kasak)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept? (Roberto Alsina)
VCD/DVD Player and Question about the cdrom ("Pig")
Re: Slipping away into time. ("Mike")
MSN Drops Newsgroup Support ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Chris Wenham)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (John Sanders)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Rich Teer)
Re: Can Linux get the job done? Are there Linux apps for.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pestov digest, volume 2451736 (Pestov)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:02:41 -0400
"Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The thread branched in two, Eric. I merged the two branches, Eric.
Illogical, given that you admit both branches were part of the same
thread. Therefore, your action was not a "merging of the two threads".
Liar.
> Typical invective.
Incorrect. See above.
> Irrelevant.
How ironic.
> Incorrect.
Typical pontification. Where is your substantiation? Why, nowhere to
be seen!
> How typical you resort to invective when faced with a logical argument.
Non sequitur, given the absence of a logical argument on your part.
> Irrelevant.
How ironic.
> Irrelevant, given that none of the material was relevant to proving the
> claim in question.
Incorrect.
> I see you still haven't noted the difference between implication and
> inferrence.
Illogical. It is because I recognize the difference that I asked the
question, Slava.
> No.
Typical pontificiation.
> > The proof is your claim that my answer was incorrect.
Note: no logical response.
> Still unable to answer a simple question logically, Eric?
See what I mean?
> On the contrary, my claim is quite correct. Of course, anyone with
> open eyes would recognize that fact.
On the contrary, many people worldwide have their eyes open and do not
recognize this fact.
> How ironic, coming from someone who routines fails to pay attention.
"routines fails to pay attention"? How rich!
> Feldercarb.
Typical invective.
> My eyes are already open, Eric. How predictable you fail to comprehend
> that fact.
On the contrary.
> More lies.
Prove it.
> On the contrary.
Illogical.
> Do you always get your enlightenment from illogic, Eric?
Also illogical.
> Incorrect. It is evidence to the contrary.
More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
> On the contrary, quite logical. Of course, someone who takes logic
> lessons
> from Ian "master of illogic" Haakmat would not know that.
Typical invective. Does the use of incorrect names "entertain" you,
Slava? Taking posting lessons from Mark Kelley again, Slava?
> Reading comprehension problems, Eric?
Obviously not, Slava.
> Irrelevant.
Why?
> Illogical, given that you haven't identified the "claim".
Irrelevant, given that you made the claim.
> Illogical.
See what I mean?
> I cannot answer an illogical question, Eric.
Non sequitur.
> I wasn't trying to surprise you, Eric.
I never claimed that you were, Slava.
> You just replied to the evidence. How predictable you fail to see
> that fact.
Impossible, given that you never provided any evidence.
> See above.
Hypocrite.
"Classical circular reasoning. I have already seen the above, and it
contains nothing of relevence to the current argument."
> More proof by irrelevant reference, Eric? How typical.
See above.
> You, Eric. How ironic you fail to recognize that fact.
Incorrect.
> Where?
"Your continuing illogic is indeed predictable, Eric."
Having reading comprehension problems again?
> How predictable you answered the question incorrectly, given your
> lack of basic logic and relevacy skills.
It's too bad you still fail to recognize how your behavior is perceived,
Slava.
> No.
How predictable. Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> Incorrect, given that I have not "deleted" anything.
Incorrect.
> What you think is shameful is irrelevant, Eric.
I see you finally admit that you are irrelevant, given that I think you
are shameful. Common sense makes a cameo appearance.
> 20 lines above, Eric. You made the following claim:
>
> EB] Illogical.
Irrelevant to your claim, Slava, as you made an illogical statement.
There was no logic to recognize.
> Which is a perfect demonstration of your inability to recognize logic,
> given my claim above was completely logical.
You didn't even made a claim, logical or otherwise, Slava, you asked an
illogical question.
> On the contrary.
Typical incorrect pontification.
> What you think is vague is irrelevant.
On the contrary. What you think is irrelevant is irrelevant.
> How predictable, coming from someone with serious logic recognition
> deficencies.
Who?
> Illogical, given that my claim was quite correct.
Incorrect. Taking posting lessons from Chris "Roscoe and Flash" Pott?
> What's so obvious about it, Eric?
Self-evident, by definition, Slava.
> How ironic, coming from the one exhibiting reading comprehension
> problems.
See what I mean?
> Illogical, given your remark above.
What alleged "remark"?
> On the basis that you have failed the prove a logical answer.
Typical circular reasoning. Ineffective.
> Of course,
> if you had used the scientific method, instead of erronously pressuposing
> that it is illogical, you would have recognized that fact.
Circular reasoning is not part of the scientific method.
> More evidence of your reading comprehension deficencies.
I see you didn't answer the question. How predictable.
> No.
See what I mean?
> Who is this "someone", Eric? It isn't me.
On the contrary.
> Prove it, if you think you can.
The proof is in three parts. First, if I'm not who I say I am, what am
I doing here, what can I possibly hope to gain? The rescue of an
imposter, the exposure of three spies? Who to? To the very people this
was to have been working for. I have nothing to gain.
> On the contrary.
Argument by repetition, Slava?
> Unlike you, Eric, I only write 'see above' when the material above is
> relevant.
Obviously not.
> How typical, coming from someone with serious logic recognition
> deficencies.
Who?
> The fact that my remark was logical.
Balderdash, Slava.
> What alleged "Curtis Bass"?
The one you obviously fail to recognize, Slava.
> Incorrect. See
>
> http://x55.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=650187557&CONTEXT
>=964791392.1436352594&hitnum=0
>
>http://x55.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=648816277&CONTEXT=
>964791392.1436352594&hitnum
>
>http://x55.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=648816277&CONTEXT=964791392.
>1436352594&hitnum=1=1
Illogical, given that in those posts Eric Bennett was posting as Eric
Bennett, as clearly show in the headers. Have you ever seen Batman pose
as Michael Keaton, Slava?
> Illogical, given I proved otherwise above.
Incorrect, as shown above.
> More evidence of your hypocrisy.
Impossible.
> I wonder how Joe Malloy would react to the news of your allegation that
> his "reactions" are "irrelevant", Eric.
What you wonder is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant.
--
Prove that African swallows are non-migratory, if you think you can.
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:04:02 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> tholenbot wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > tholenbot wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >> > tholenbot only has one identity, Slava.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Incorrect, Eric.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Prove it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Identity #1 - tholenbot
> > > > > Identity #2 - Eric Bennett
> > > >
> > > > Eric Bennett is not an identity of the tholenbot, Slava. Hava you
> > > > ever
> > > > seen the tholenbot post as Eric Bennett? No. Only the reverse
> > > > occurs.
> > >
> > > Incorrect. No one but tholenbot posts as tholenbot, just as Batman
> > > recites Batman's lines in the Batman movie, "Batman".
> >
> > Illogical, Marty, given that Batman was reproducing someone else's
> > script.
>
> Illogical. The script was copied well in advance of the filming of the
> movie. It need not be copied subsequent times by the actors unless they
> were
> careless and left their copies at home. Of what relevance is this latter
> case
> to Batman reciting Batman's lines in the Batman movie, "Batman"?
Typical obfuscation tactics. Do you deny that Batman was reproducing
someone else's script, Marty?
> > > > Of course, it takes decent reading comprehension skills to
> > > > recognize
> > > > that fact.
> > >
> > > How ironic, coming from someone who failed to comprehend the facts.
> >
> > Who?
>
> Don't you know?
Why do you think I asked, Marty?
> > > > > I wonder how Joe Malloy would react to the news that you've been
> > > > > making allegations about him giving "posting lessons", Eric.
> > > >
> > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Slava?
> > >
> > > Frankly, I don't care
> >
> > I see you didn't answer the question, Marty.
>
> On the contrary, I see you have failed to comprehend my answer.
What alleged "answer"?
--
Prove that African swallows are non-migratory, if you think you can.
------------------------------
From: Daniel Kasak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Good Free VCD/DVD Player & Questions about the "mount /cdrom"
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:52:54 +0000
"Colin R. Day" wrote:
> Pig wrote:
>
> > Could anyone suggest me a good and free vcd/dvd player?
> >
> > I am now using the "mpegtv" to play a vcd.
> > Once I mount the cdrom, the "/cdrom" must be belongs to the "root"
>
> You have to mount video CD's? That's odd, you don't have
> to mount audio CD's.
>
> What file system does a Video CD have?
>
> >
> >
> > Q: Is it normal?
> >
> > As the software need to do streaming of the my cdrom,
> > I can only play the vcd by "root".
> >
> > Pls. Help!!!!
>
> Colin Day
Yeah, it has one, and you have to mount it to play the stuff. I haven't
yet worked out how to copy (backup of course) one either. I've found a
couple of VCD filesystem creation tools, but they all seem to require
more intelligence / effort than I can muster.
On a similar topic, does anyone know of an MPEG encoder that actually
compiles?
Dan
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:05:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> ...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.
And you say *I* misrepresent stuff. Amazing.
You know, Jedi, every time you say this kind of crap, I will
post to correct you.
* There are already three KDE beta releases that use Xdnd.
* There has not been a release that used anything else for over a year.
* There has been ongoing work on Xdnd and not on the other protocol
for over a year.
* The change of protocols caught us in the middle of a major release
development cycle. Bad luck.
* We expected to have KDE 2 released much earlier, but we decided to
make it cooler, so it took longer. That delayed Xdnd, obviously.
* We commited ourselves to Xdnd as soon as it was created, unlike
other desktop projects.
* I bet you would have made it happen faster. You can still join
the effort.
* Making Xdnd work on KDE1 was much work. Work we deemed not worth
doing, and noone else volunteered to do. So it was not done.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Pig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: VCD/DVD Player and Question about the cdrom
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:23:31 +0800
There are 2 things I need help. Hope you can help me.
Q1
Could you suggest me a good VCD/DVD player in Linux?
Q2
When I mount the cdrom by a user account, the directory "/cdrom" still
belongs to the "root".
Is it normal?
If "Yes", how the application "mtv" and "mtvp" (they are a kind of vcd
player) can be used in a user account?
If "No", how can I fix it?
Thanks for your help.
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Slipping away into time.
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:29:04 GMT
"Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:h88g5.9947$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [snips]
>
[more snips]
>
> Somehow, I can't see an ad campaign reading "Use Linux! Tested by a
> farting chimpanzee!" as being overly good from a marketing
> perspective. :)
Sir, my monkey would beg to differ.
Hmmm... I'll bet Charlie would too...
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MSN Drops Newsgroup Support
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:16:07 GMT
Dealing with those pesky Internet standards the Microsoft way. Hmmm...
I wonder if MSN will offer a Linux advocacy message board?
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1555559.html?tag=st.ne.ni.rnbot.rn.
ni
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:30:57 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you an 'average' user?
No, I'm not. But I am finding myself using more and more programs
with features and User Interfaces designed for avarage users. That
could be lack of good keyboard control because it's assumed you'll
use the mouse and menus.
Even when menus have keyboard shortcuts it's not quite what I mean by
keyboard control. If I need to press Alt-F to get the "File" menu and
then Alt-A to select "Save As" and then somehow remember the keyboard
commands to manipulate a Motif/GTK file selector dialog, then I
haven't really transcended the beginner's UI very far. It's not like
"Cntl-X Ctrl-W".
> That was my main point. A lot of people in businesses are set in front
> of a computer and tossed the mouse and keyboard with a pat on the back
> and a "There you go!" and that's the training they get.
Indeed, proper training would not be absent from my "ideal world".
But even once trained, over-customizable UIs can result in a lot of
wasted time. Futzing with desktop wallpaper and tweaking overlapping
windows are my favorite bugaboos. And ironically a more abstractly
customizable UI would help those who are knowledgable enough to
understand the consequences of incessant tweaking. If I could switch
from a "floating windows and palettes" interface to one that
intelligently tiled and organized windows automatically, I'd waste
less time futzing with window positions and grabbing the corners to
resize.
(Someone please whisper this into the ears of GIMP UI developers
who've designed a UI with way too many floating palettes and
toolboxes)
And yet why not also provide to the supervisor the option of locking
down an interface? OS/2's Workplace on Demand lets an administrator
lock the positions of icons and other customizable UI elements to
stop "futzing".
Then on the company's disposable R&D budgets they can set up labs and
play with alternate UIs on "unlocked" machines, to roll out later on
their own schedule should any of their experiments reveal a true
benefit.
This would not be unlike the progress seen in factories in the early
part of the century, where efficiency experts studied how people
operated a machine and proposed changes to the procedure or the
machine to make the workers more productive. (This was also abused by
companies bent on turning their staff into robots themselves, but I
also think they'd be trying to do that anyway - with efficiency
experts, customizable UIs or whatever)
> > It sounds like you've seen examples of power without knowledge being
> > abused, specifically in user interfaces. Can you provide some of
> > them?
>
> Absolutely.
[examples snipped]
These were all very good, I'll dwell on these.
> I'm guessing you were asking for a standardized way of making
> customizations.
I know of two programs that fit my idea. They are Mozilla and
SawFish. Mozilla's a browser that uses XML to define how its user
interface works. I am /really ignorant/ about the details! But I
think it means that I'll be able to adapt it to anything I want.
Even the existance of the menus as well as their structure is defined
in XML, which means I should be able to /remove them/.
SawFish is a Window Manager and it is configured utterly through
Lisp. SawFish is like a Lisp Interpreter with functions that are
really useful for implementing a Window Manager. It comes packaged
with Lisp programs that provide a standard "Enlightenment-ish" window
manager that you can use out-of-the-box.
Lisp for behavior, XML for appearance and organization.
Both programs come with pre-packaged templates and scripts that any
average user can apply (and are already applied by default, so you
don't even have to consciously install them). Additional behaviors
can be supplied as packages that could be installed with a very
simple front-end - much like the vanity-theme selectors.
But an experienced user who knows what he's doing can modify them
directly, and get exactly what he wants.
The important thing is that if it's Lisp then it's Lisp everwhere, if
it's XML then its XML everywhere. And they should use similar enough
APIs and DTDs from program to program.
Then all we need is a "panic button" to reset a hopeless mess back to
the default arrangement, a locking option for admins, and we're good
to go.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:35:42 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1$Worth <"1$Worth"@costreduction.plseremove.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "1$Worth" <"1$Worth"@costreduction.plseremove.screaming.net> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > So why is "Ease Of Use" a dirty concept?
> > >
> >
> > "Ease of use" is a purely subjective measurement.
> >
> > If you type 65 wpm and have the manpages committed to memory, the mouse
> > is an impediment in Linux. Its like having a keyboard with only two
> > keys; eight otherwise useful fingers are completely idle.
>
> I can type faster and remember (most) of the important stuff, yet if I
> were moving say 20 different files from one location to the next it
> would be faster using GUI (assuming these 20 files have different
> names+extentions and there is no logical pattern which may be applied).
What about MC the Midnight Commander? A character mode program that will
perform the file copy or move from your example as fast or even faster that
a GUI file manager. It has a smaller foot print, and it can operate on just
about any terminal. A local console, telnet, rlogin, etc, a dialup shell
account, a hard wire serial link, all no problem. It can take advantage of
a mouse or work without one.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:44:39 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[blah....blah....blah....]
You continuous quest to prove what an asshole I am is starting to do
more than get on my nerves.
FUCK OFF!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:38:56 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On or about Tue, 18 Jul 2000 17:16:35 GMT, Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scrivened:
> > On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, KLH wrote:
>
> >> If Unix is an open technology, then how come we must call GNU/Linux a
> >> Unix-like OS rather than an actual version of Unix?
>
> > Others have addressed this, but basically, Linux doesn't conform to the
> > UNIX standards, and so can't be called UNIX. It uses a lot of the good
> > ideas from UNIX, hence is UNIX-like.
Linux has ENABLED the embracing and extension of different ways of
doing things: packages or shells or whatever. Package managers don't
define what UNIX is, nor does the shell you run, or the window manager,
or if you use a "desktop" thingy.
In fact, LINUX IS UNIX. System4, UNIX98, etc., etc. are not UNIX.
This happened overnight, last night while you were not looking. Of
course, this comment is toung-in-cheek. But one day it will be true.
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:51:27 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> How does SystemV relate to POSIX? And do any other SystemV Unixes have
> package handling similar to Solaris?
I don't know the definitive answer to your other questions, but to answer
your last one: yes, pkg* is a standard part of SVR4 - possibly earlier.
--
Rich Teer
NT tries to do almost everything UNIX does, but fails - miserably.
The use of Windoze cripples the mind; its use should, therefore, be
regarded as a criminal offence. (With apologies to Edsger W. Dijkstra)
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Can Linux get the job done? Are there Linux apps for.....
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:04:00 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:23:53 GMT, John Becich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I know nothing about Linux. I'm using Msft Word 2000, Excel, Quicken2000,
>etc., etc., under various Msft OSes. I'd like to know if I can get the job
>done under Linux.
Replacing the Quicken tools will likely be your trickiest bit.
The Linux counterparts are all relatively new free software
projects. Whereas Office equivalents of one form or another have
been on Unix since before Linux existed.
There are also some older, more 'large scale' accounting
systems for Unix/Linux. Although they don't appear to be
what you are interested in.
[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.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
