Linux-Advocacy Digest #62, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 14:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature (Sitaram Chamarty)
Re: Can Linux get the job done? Are there Linux apps for..... (Aaron Ginn)
Re: MSN Drops Newsgroup Support ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: God damm Microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Re: Slipping away into time. (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Slipping away into time. (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Re: Good Free VCD/DVD Player & Questions about the "mount /cdrom" (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:09:39 -0500
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> "Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <SNIP>
> > > The common defense of name-calling libel or slander litigation is
> > > linguistics. If you libelled or slandered someone in Latin then you
> might
> > > have a case. English is dialectic and regional, they would have only to
> > > prove that the word "geek" could be considered a compliment in some
> circles
> > > to have the case dismissed. That's would be fairly easy to quote
> numerous
> > > print sources to show.
> >
> > Do African Americans consider nigger a compliment? Some of them do when
> > it is uttered by other African Americans, but when someone outside of
> > them calls them the same thing they are offended. (Note, I do not think
> > this is right, it is just an example.)
>
> The DIFFERENCE here is that using that word CAN and frequently DOES result
> in sucessful litigation but under completely different laws. Slander and
> libel are FALSE statements intended to bring harm to the target. Racist
> remarks are by definition TRUE remarks intended to bring harm.
>
> > I agree with mjcr on this
> > point. Geek can sometimes be used as a sign of respect, but it was
> > obvious by the way it was worded that it was meant entirely as a
> > negative remark on computer literate people.
>
> That would be your interpretation of the wording. It can be taken both
> ways.
>
> > Geek as used in this context, and as used by countless other Windows
> > advocates is used as a completely derogatory remark towards those of us
> > that are computer literate. They have no respect for us that are, and
> > insist that being computer literate is somehow a "failure" on our part,
> > something wrong with us.
>
> You appear to think that you are more computer literate just because you
> have knowledge of a comparitively unimportant operating system. You also
> seem to think that everyone who runs nix is an expert. I thnk you are wrong
> on both points. Consider basic computer knowledge irrespective of OS and I
> think that there are numerically more Windows users who are "computer
> literate" than nix users.
OK, I know *nix + Windows. You know Windows. I say that means I am
computer literate in more than one way. I don't consider that a
failing. By the way you worded your response, apparently you do. In
other words, when Windows advocates call me a geek for knowing *nix, it
is not meant as a compliment, but it is meant to deride me for knowing
something that is a "comparitively unimportantant operating system".
So, by trying to argue against me, you prove my point.
>
> > While I would not be offended enough normally
> > to speak up about this, seeing it argued that it 'can' be used as a
> > compliment is not enough proof that it 'was' used as a compliment. See
> > the remark itself and the context. It was meant as a negative comment
> > on those of us that understand the "geek code"
>
> From the context of this remark I gather that you yourself consider
> knowledge of the so-called "geek code" something to be proud of and by
> derivation that being a "geek" is a good thing.
Where did I say that? His term was "geek code." By his definition,
someone that understands it is a geek. I did not proclaim that I was
proud of being known as a geek. But I am proud of knowing the code.
That does not mean I am proud of being thought of as a geek. Twist my
words however you want, I am not proud of being known as a geek. I am
proud of the knowledge I posses wich makes others think of me as a
geek. I don't like that they think of me as a geek. But I like what I
know that makes them think it. The two are not the same.
>
> > If we understand it, we
> > are somehow inferior to "normal" people in Steve/Simon/whatevers
> > opinion. While it doesn't bother me that terribly much, I feel that if
> > someone is offended, they deserve an apology.
>
> This newsgroup is not exactly about apologies. If you want that then there
> are other venues for your desire for congeniality.
In other words: FUCK SOCIETY WHEN I'M ON USENET! I don't think we have
to give up on being curteous to eachother. Obviously the overwhelming
majority of people here enjoy being assholes whenever they can and will
not apologize for anything they say or do, but that doesn't make it
right.
>
> > We treat women this way, we are taken to court. We treat African
> > American's this way, we are taken to court. We treat other ethnic
> > groups this way, we are taken to court. We treat computer professionals
> > this way, and we (the computer professionals) are further ridiculed for
> > being "too sensitive" and told to deal with it.
>
> I am a Windows 2000 engineer. Being called "geek" makes me think feel warm
> and fuzzy. A career choice is not exactly handled the same in the courts as
> a God-given attribute.
Yeah, well not everyone feels warm and fuzzy when they are called geek.
If you do, fine, but if someone is hurt by it, they deserve an apology.
Look in the dictionary (or in the above thread) and I don't think that
warm and fuzzy feeling will stick with you. Believe me, geek is not a
term of respect. And I get the feeling it isn't meant as such when
uttered by those that do not understand computers (in any form, Windows
or *nix).
>
> > If society is going to
> > cater to the other groups, and force everyone else to, why not apply the
> > same philosophy to us? After all, most of us went through an awful lot
> > of training (self taught or not) to be proficient with computers, why is
> > that something to be ridiculed?
>
> Because you chose your path knowing full well that some people might make
> fun of you. Consider that these other groups don't have that choice.
> That's why they are handled differently. Consider "exotic" dancers. They
> are not afforded any special protections under the law yet they deal with
> the social stigmata because of their choices and values.
OK, if I choose to do something immoral and something lude (like exotic
dancing) that means I should be ridiculed. And if I decide to do
something lude and immorral like learn computers I should be ridiculed.
Yeah, I get your point perfectly.
>
> > Someday us 'geeks' will get tired of being ridiculed for our knowledge
> > and 'revolt'. Of course, no matter what form that revolt takes, we will
> > once again be told we are over-reacting. We respect doctors. We
> > respect sports figures. We respect any other profession that requires
> > great amounts of training.
>
> Attorneys come to mind as an exception you your rule.
>
> > But somehow computer professionals are not
> > deserving of respect. We understand these things because we took the
> > time to learn about them. This means we are inferior to some. I'm one
> > that feels it doesn't matter that much. I'll just keep doing what I
> > do. But if it does bother one of my fellow 'geeks' then by god I will
> > stand up with them and help them gain the respect they deserve.
>
> You seem to have an inferiority complex, Mr. Lee.
Not really, I'm happy with my position in life. But the person above
that was offended has the right to get an apology. And my arguments are
based on that. And believe me, I know damn good and well that I am
looked down upon by the people I work with every day because of the
computer knowledge that I do posses (and let's not bring back up that "I
know more than you because I know Windows" bullshit from above). I am
the person that they don't want to have others see. I'm the one that's
supposed to hide in my computer room. It doesn't bother me, cause I'd
just as soon not be bothered by them constantly. But some people in our
profession are bothered by it. And in today's fucked-up world, only
certain groups deserve to be heard when they are bothered by something.
This is what I am arguing against here.
>
> > What's so wrong with asking for an apology when you are offended? Legal
> > or not, I see no problem with being polite, and asking for apologies
> > when you are offended. Especially when you explain your position. And
> > I believe mjcr did just that. He gave the definition of geek and why it
> > offends him, and asked for an apology.
>
> Read the thread's history you will see that may people including the
> "offended" party made statements worthy of an apology at a tea party. I
> don't see any tea here. I don't expect apologies. With some of the
> profanity I've seen used and the ad hominem attacks here I think there are
> many others who are due apologies before someone termed "geek".
>
> > Yeah, I'm an idiot. I already know that. But I'm an idiot with
> > principles.
>
> I think you really need to have that self-esteem problem worked out. I
> never said you were an idiot.
No, you in particular didn't. I tend to put that little tag on my posts
because it's easier than having the ten to twenty "You fucking idiot
moron bastard" posts show up after I post something that may not be
popular. I get to vent, and I am able to go on with other things. You
consider that a self-esteem problem. I consider it a way to deal with
the fact that others see me in a completely different way than I see
myself. It's my way of dealing. If it bothers you, well sorry (see
apologies aren't that hard). That wasn't my intention.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sitaram Chamarty)
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature
Date: 28 Jul 2000 17:14:57 GMT
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 00:35:02 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>get over me.
Easy for you to say. You have always seemed a highly intelligent,
rational, person (in my book, anyway!) so I do sometimes wonder,
idly, exactly what you are trying to prove with that 29-line sig.
It doesn't even make sense to me, but that could be just me, since
I'm sure I can find some newsgroups where, if I lurked long
enough, I'd figure your sig out.
Meanwhile, it's kind of sad to see someone whose posts have
technically always been sound, behave like a petulant child who
will not let go of a loud noisemaker. Long after the party has
ended and the other kids have gone home :-)
It's not even the length of the thing that bothers me ("that's
what *she* said" :-), but I wish you'd at least change it using
some .sig-mangling program or something. Get a little variation
in it, man!
------------------------------
From: Aaron Ginn <[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: 28 Jul 2000 09:53:05 -0700
"John Becich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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.
>
> I've heard the most popular word processor under Linux is Corel Word
> Perfect. What happens if I'm exchanging email with a word processor
> attachment that originated under Word 2000? Can such a file be passed back
> and forth with full editability between a Linux/WP user and a Win2K/Word2K
> user?
I'd say the most popular office suite is Star Office from Sun. I
don't use office suites at all so I can't say how well it groks MS
Office. Supposedly, it can read and write Word and Excel documents
fairly well. If you really need MS Office though, you're better off
using a Windows platform. Why do you _need_ MS Office? Do you have
customers that rely on MS products, or do you simply want to use MS
products? There are alternatives that would be sufficient for most
users, IMO.
> Ditto question about spreadsheet app. What spreadsheet would I use under
> Linux? Corel Quattro Pro for Linux? What version?
Well, there's SO again, or there's gnumeric which supposedly does a
decent job reading and writing excel, and is totally free. I don't
use it, so this is second-hand info.
> Then there's the all important bookkeeping. I like Quicken. Using
> Quicken2000 now, upgrade every year or two. What would I use under Linux?
> I haven't called Intuit to ask if it supports Linux. (I can sure expect
> that Microsoft doesn't make a Msft Money version for Linux!) What would I
> use for bookkeeping under Linux? Can I migrate my Quicken files?
>
> Ditto tax preparation. I use Turbo Tax. What would I use under
> Linux?
There's gnucash which has some Quicken import functionality. Again,
if you really want Quicken, use it on Windows. There is no Quicken
port for Linux. Gnucash is probably good enough for most people who
want to manage their finances. It doesn't do online banking, however.
As far as TurboTax; well, most linux desktops come with a handy desk
calculator. ;-)
> Address book. I have an older version (5) of Parson's Address Book, which I
> love. (Didn't care for the upgrade at all!) There is a ton of work in my
> address book database. It can be exported in various file forms. What
> address book app should I use under Linux, and can I import a file from a
> Microsoft operating system?
Don't know anything about this. Sorry.
> Email. I use Outlook Express 5. I love POP3 email. Don't care for web
> mail at all. What would I use under Linux? Will my OE
> data migrate? (Not vital)
There's lots of email clients. There's no OE, however. I use gnus
under xemacs. There's pine, mutt, elm, etc. If you want html mail,
there's always Netscape. A new app called evolution is in the works
which will have all the functionality of outlook. It's still months
away from being ready, however.
> Ditto internet surfering, browsing. What to use under Linux? Will my
> (extensive) favorite place collection migrate from Internet Explorer 5?
There's no IE, of course. Despite what everyone says, Netscape is
still the best browser for linux, IMO. There aren't a wealth of
plugins for it, however. There's no Quicktime, Windows Media Player,
Shockwave. There is a RealPlayer plugin, however.
Other browsers include KFM on KDE, lynx, mozilla. None of these
options are as nice as IE. I still use IE on Windows for much of my
browsing.
As far as reading Outlook data, I think you can forget that under
Linux.
> Ditto newsgroups. I love my OE5 newsgroup reader. Don't care for web based
> access like Deja. What would I use under Linux? Will my data migrate from
> OE5?
There's lots of great newsreaders for linux. The two best, IMO, are
slrn and gnus. I use gnus and I've yet to find a better client, on
Windows or anything else for that matter. It does have a fairly steep
learning curve, however. These are text-based newsreaders, not html.
I think that's a good thing; you may not.
There's also PAN, which is a clone of Forte Agent. Agent also works
well under WINE, a tool that allows you run many Windows apps under
Linux.
> It is thus important for any new competing product to be able to co-exist
> with a de-facto standard product like Word 2000. It is important for any
> new competing product to support migration from de-facto standard products
> like MSWord, Quicken, Turbo Tax, etc.
These are de-facto standards to you. I have little use for any of
these things. My needs are quite different than yours. I suppose you
meant to say it was important for _you_ to have any competing product
support migration from these other tools. Many of us here have found
other (i.e. better, for us) ways to do things. Others have no need
for some of the apps you're refering to. Use what works for you and
meets your needs. Linux may not do that.
> Closer to the OS....I have many files saved under Windows NT. Can I migrate
> them to a Linux platform, or must they remain behind?
Linux can read and write Win98 files. It can read NT files as well.
Whether you'll be able to do anything with the data is another story.
Take it up with Microsoft. :)
> Networking. Do most 100 Mbit Ethernet cards function, and function well,
> under Linux? I presume the hubs would work, as that functionality is quite
> removed from any operating system.
Of course. Linux is based on UNIX; the OS that made LANs famous! :)
It sounds to me like you want Linux to be Windows. It's not, and it
shouldn't be like windows. Linux is a UNIX-like OS, and, as such, has
all the features of a multi-user, server-class OS. It can be made to
look like Windows, and in many cases, even _behave_ like Windows, but
it's not ever going to _be_ Windows.
You may want to check out VMWare at http://www.vmware.com. This
software will allow you to run Windows in a virtual machine from
within Linux. You can run Linux and still be able to use all your
Windows applications. It's $99 for personal use. This is a very nice
piece of software, and well-worth the price.
Good luck,
--
Aaron J. Ginn Motorola SPS
Phone: (480) 814-4463 SemiCustom Solutions
Fax: (480) 814-4058 1300 N. Alma School Rd.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Chandler, AZ 85226
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MSN Drops Newsgroup Support
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:34:23 -0500
That's a 6 month old article. Most services have moved to web based message
boards these days. Consider that Slashdot is such a service.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8lsbk2$mgb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:12:27 -0500
Courageous wrote:
>
> > > But somehow computer professionals are not
> > > deserving of respect.
>
> > You seem to have an inferiority complex, Mr. Lee.
>
> And furthermore, he's woefully out of date. The computer profession
> is highly respected these days, and furthermore, certainly one of
> the best professions.
>
> C/
I'd like to know where you live. I certainly don't get respect for my
computer knowledge from people that aren't already in the computer
business (in one form or another). I get respect from my peers, but
people that I work with (in the wood working business) don't respect my
knowledge.
I'm a woefully out-of-date 26 year old living in a state that is at
least 20 years behind the rest of the world in trends. I already know
that. But until I make enough money to get out of this state (South
Dakota), I'm stuck here.
Although I will agree with you that the computer field is the best place
to be for job security at the moment. It's the field with the most
potential for future employment as well.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:14:36 -0500
Courageous wrote:
>
> > I have yet to see one single definition for "geek"
> > that has a connotation that is not negative.
>
> Your lack of exposure to this particular usage is your particular
> lack. The usage human beings put words to frequently precedes
> definition in textbooks, which, after all, are populated by stodgy
> old academicians who struggle very hard indeed to keep up with
> a highly dynamic language.
>
> C/
Very funny. I have yet to see the term "geek" used as a term of respect
by anyone in the real world. It is used to deride those in the computer
field in the area I live and work. If there is some magical land where
this isn't so, the promised land for us "geeks" then please, lead the
way.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: God damm Microsoft
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:38:17 -0500
"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ls76f$2b3k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Untrue. You only need to shutdown and reboot (on Win9x machines) when a
> >file is in use when you try to patch it or replace it. If the file is
not
> >in use, replacing it does not require a reboot.
>
> How do you know whether the patch includes a dll that is in
> use by the system or not?
Ideally the install program will know and tell you when to reboot.
Unfortunately, most install programs take the approach of forcing a reboot
even when unneccessary "just to be safe".
The reason for this is, unlike Linux, Windows uses a paging system for
executables. Windows treats an executable as a small (or not so small in
some cases) extra paging file. This allows the OS to simply discard
infrequently used pages without having to first page them to disk. Since
the executable image is a paging file, Window need only use the same
mechanism it uses for it's general paging file to reload a page when a
paging fault occurs.
This however, has the drawback that files that are loaded in memory are also
locked on disk.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:25:38 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:05:15 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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.
Then I should be able to grab a year old copy of Redhat or Suse
and use KDE and GNOME components as if they came from one desktop.
Mind pointing out a few examples of how I might go about doing this?
Those that actually use KDE around here seem to have a different
impression of the situation than you do.
[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]>
Subject: Re: Slipping away into time.
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:25:31 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> It's not a winning team for me, not yet. I found yet another sound card
> unsupported by Linux.
>
> --
> ------------
> Pete Goodwin
Might I make a suggestion Pete?
I believe the above statement is indicative of the additude that has
bothered so many of the Linvocates in here. Your statement that you
have 'found' another sound card unsupported by Linux seems to come
across as you 'went looking for' another sound card that was unsupported
by Linux. Not to be nit-picky, but that could offend someone that is a
Linux supporter (if they get upset easily).
While you may not have actually 'went looking for' a card that wouldn't
work with Linux, it could be easily miscontrued that way.
Hope this doesn't bother you. Honestly, just trying to help.
BTW, don't listen to Charlie. Most of the rest of us in here have
learned he is full of it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[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 12:27:35 -0500
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> This is typically the most powerful argument the Windows community can
> produce in favor of their OS.
>
> But let me assure you that even a person such as yourself can install Debian.
>
> The Debian install script was tested in a zoo in Europe by 100 chimpanzee's.
>
> 97 of the 100 chimpanzee's succeeded in installing Debian successfully.
>
> Of those who failed. One forgot you need to plug your P.C. into a power
> source before using it. Another died shortly after relieving himself upon
> a brand new 17 inch monitor. The last chimpanzee was disqualified when
> it was discovered he was using his feet instead of his hands to run the
> keyboard
> whilst passing gas.
>
> So you see, there's really nothing for the windows user to fear in learning
> Linux.
>
> Thank you sincerely for you comments.
>
> Charlie
While this is funny, do you really think it wins over people? I mean,
seriously equating Windows users with chimpanzees? Come on, we can
remain somewhat civil, can't we?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:04 GMT
On 28 Jul 2000 14:01:18 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>: On 28 Jul 2000 05:45:06 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: >The problem I'm describing is how to keep the interface from changing for
>: >greater spans of time, and to make it more tollerant of small changes.
>: >As an example, the industry-wide fascination with XML is based upon the
>: >expectation that a parsed-text interface will be longer lasting than a
>: >binary one ... especially a binary one tied to specific languages or
>: >toolkits.
>
>: Again: just sounds like Unix.
>
>I guess we're making progress. A day or two ago it was 'flim-flam', now
>it's just somehting UNIX already has. Even that sounds like a
Trying to sell you something you already had is also flim-flam.
It also rather negates the need of 'research' pretty much.
>simplifiaction though, UNIX certainly has parsed-text files, but I'm not
>sure that they are often used for component communication.
That's all Unix is at it's core: a bunch of components
operating on loosely structured text files.
>
>: >: This stuff seems more like an attempt to remedy problems with
>: >: C++ and component standards that are entirely too low level
>: >: in terms of what the calling application needs to be aware of.
>
>: >This stuff seems more like an attept to remedy problems with language
>: >indpendant messages, and to make low level component structures irrelavent
>: >to questions of interoperability.
>
>: Yeah, as I said: it's an attempt to solve the problems cause
>: by C++ an the insistence on having your components interact
>: in terms of a relatively low level internal structure.
>
>I read "with C++" as "using C++" above, rather than "caused by". You can
>certainly use C++ to build a fragile interface, but I don't think the
>problem is limited to that language.
C++ is a preprocessor built on top of a macro assembler. Far
more interesting, and perhaps more appropriate technology has
been available for some time.
>
>: IOW, it's attempting fixing the mess caused by the last batch
>: or two of OO 'trend followers'.
>
>I've maintained some traditional C on UNIX client/server applications.
>Those apps took the approach of sending C structures over the wire. This
>allowed the earlier designers to rapidly build an effective application,
>but to me the interface looks as fragile as any that hypothetical "OO
>'trend followers'" might have concieved.
>
>Beyond that, OO trend followers are out there and they are generating a
>lot of code both in C++ (KDE) and in C frameworks (GTK+). The balance of
>what is effective OO has certainly changed over the years. As an example,
>there has been a reduction in emphasis on inheritance and an increased
>emphasis on interface. Perhaps we can dismiss that as a trend as well ...
--
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:
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: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:30:19 -0500
"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?
I'm not 100% certain on this, but I thought when VCDs were released they
were just regular CDs (ISO format) with a big MPEG file on them for the
movie. At least, that is what I remember of it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
