Linux-Advocacy Digest #180, Volume #28 Wed, 2 Aug 00 12:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (fungus)
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (abraxas)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (abraxas)
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451744 (EdWIN)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (SemiScholar)
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (abraxas)
Re: windows annoyances (again) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([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,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:41:08 -0400
Retard wrote:
>
> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:34:50 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Retard wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:07:11 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Loren Petrich wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >> Steve Chaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >On 1 Aug 2000 06:12:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >How good does a power mac work with Linux? That processor should be
> >> >> >screaming without the limitations of (pick your Apple OS of the day).
> >> >> >It sure turns out x86 screams without the limitations of Windows,
> >> >> >that's for sure!
> >> >>
> >> >> It performs excellently under the BeOS, though I haven't tried a
> >> >> PowerPC flavor of Linux yet.
> >> >>
> >> >> Apple is still too slow with MacOS X :-(
> >> >
> >> >Well, maybe if you got some hardware that wasn't stuck in the 1980's....
> >>
> >> ROTFL!!! This from a "Unix Systems Engineer"?? Hahhahahahahah!!
> >>
> >> Unix was a good idea. ... ... in 1969
> >>
> >> So you think a G4 is a 1980's processor? LOL!!
> >
> >Unix had windows before Microsoft even wrote MS-DOS.
> >
>
> LOL!
It's TRUE, it's TRUE!
>
> - Retard
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:19:05 GMT
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
> >> The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of
> >> stuff?
> > Yes, actually, it does. This is proven all the time. Benchmarks head
> > to head against the biggest iron Sun can muster is defeated by
> > Compaq and Dell boxes using Wintel.
>
> 'Scuse me while I look sceptical.
>
http://www.sgi.com/origin/3000/numaflex.html
"512 CPUs in a shared memory image"
Show me a PC with 512 CPUs trying to share the RAM
simultaneously, then tell me the PC bus is fast enough.
> parallelizing many applications is hard, especially with Real World
> data, due to your communications and synchronization overhead.
>
Hence archuitectures like the SGI Origin series (and
others as well, it's just that there's SGI machines
where I work).
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: 2 Aug 2000 15:51:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>> >
>> > Lycos switch to Wintel to improve performance and reliability. Think
> what
>> > that says about what they were using before...
>>
>> "Proof" please...
>
> go back and read the thread and see... I'm tired of doing your homework
> child.
See what? Nowhere in the thread did you or anyone else actually provide
any PROOF.
Moron.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:48:40 -0400
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" escribió:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > > > After that, he published "fiction", with character names like
> > > > > > "Simplicio" and "Intelligentsio"
> > > > >
> > > > > In fact, that was the work he was asked to withdraw. That was a
> > > > > common way of publishing theory, as dialog. In fact, I have read
> > > > > that the reason why he was harassed was that he was not impartial
> > > > > in his exposition, showing the defender of the old theory as a
> > > > > moron (which was, of course, a very stupid thing to do).
> > > >
> > > > Actually, no. His original work was a scholarly work.
> > >
> > > Care to cite the name of that work?
> >
> > I don't know, but you can contact Prof. Foley.
> >
> > Or, send e-mail to Prof. Rothenberg, his office is right down
> > the hall from Foley's ( Howard Rothenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> )
>
> Well, you know these fellows, you say the thing exists, could
> you please ask them?
OK
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: 2 Aug 2000 15:51:48 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8m7d0n$1rvd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> >
>> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Chad Myers wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >
>> >> > > it's "web search" is handled either by inktomi or Fast
>> >> >
>> >> > How do you know this?
>> >> >
>> >> > -Chad
>> >>
>> >> Because I worked at FAST and was a technical contact for Lycos.
>> >
>> > Do you work there now? I'm certain the answer is no because you would
> know
>> > that that relationship was dissolved over dissatisfaction with the
>> > reliability and performance of that "solution."
>> >
>> > Lycos switch to Wintel to improve performance and reliability. Think
> what
>> > that says about what they were using before...
>>
>> That actually has nothing to do with why they switched to wintel, despite
>> what your lying-ass has to say about it.
>
>
> oh really? and pray tell what is your crack induced version of reality
> suggest their reason was?
"I refuse to do your homework for you."
> (this outta be good)
How was that?
=====yttrx
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451744
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:49:13 -0700
Tholy Tholenfication Tholed forth:
>
Today's Tholenfication:
>
>1> The Tholy Source of All Tholenism Tholed forth:
>1>
>1> Please explain how you came to know that my sources are
>1> presumptions, erroneous or otherwise.
>
>Simple: you're not in a position to know.
Prove it, if you think you can.
>1> The prez has another little "package" for you in his office,
BTW.
>
>Incorrect, Thorne.
Were you disappointed? Had you rushed right over to get
your "package?"
>1> If I were you, I'd hold my breath... he's had beans again,
and
>1> you know how he farts after that.
>
>No, I don't know, Thorne.
Liar.
>1> No, I don't see what you mean.
>
>I'm not surprised.
The context is gone. I don't know what it was that I couldn't
see, and you haven't elaborated.
>1> You claimed that I "still haven't learned."
>
>And you verified it by stating you don't see what I mean.
There's no "verification" in this out-of-context digest.
>1> What haven't I learned?
>
>See what I mean?
No, I don't see what you mean. What haven't I learned? How
does asking me "see what I mean" answer my question?
>1> That you're incapable of answering a direct question with a
>1> direct answer?
>
>Further proof that you still haven't learned.
Right, further proof that I haven't learned you're incapable of
answering a direct question with a direct answer.
>1> Is that what I "still haven't learned?"
>
>Further proof that you still haven't learned.
That you're incapable of answering a direct question?
>1> That would be right, because I still ask you direct
questions.
>
>And you still haven't learned, Thorne.
That you're incapable of answering a direct question?
>
>
===========================================================
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (SemiScholar)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:57:10 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:58:54 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" escribió:
>> >
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>> > > >SemiScholar wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:58:09 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >Democracy is 6 wolves and 2 lambs voting on what to have for dinner.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Wrong. Democracy is 10 lambs and 1 wolf voting on what to have for
>> > > >> dinner.
>> > > >
>> > > >Oh really. Look at any democratic system,
>> > >
>> > > You can't. There aren't any.
>> > >
>> > > >> In most other systems, it's the wolf alone who decides.
>> > > >> Democracy is the only system in which lambs stand a chance.
>> > >
>> > > >Visit any high school,
>> > >
>> > > High schools aren't democratic.
>> >
>> > Wrong. They are the very embodiment of a pure democracy...MOB FUCKING
>> > RULE!
>>
>> What do you propose as an alternative to democracy?
>
>A Constitutionally-limited Republic.
That _is_ a democracy. A republic is one form of democracy.
>
>We have one in the US. Now if we could only imprison those
>legislators who insist upon passing unconstitutional laws.
>(Lets say, each federal legislator who voted for an unconstitutional
>law spends one day in jail for every day which said unconstitutional
>law was in effect. This will only have to be enforced 2, maybe
>3 times before they all get the message that unconstitutional laws
>at the Federal level will no longer be tolerated.)
Who decides which laws are unconstitutional?
>
>
>
>> What are the means you intend to use, or support using, to impose
>> your alternative way of government?
>>
>> Do those means involve violence?
>
>Of course not.
Dreeeaaamm, dream dream dream, dreeeeeeaaaaaammmmmm.
- SemiScholar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: 2 Aug 2000 15:54:42 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > Lycos switch to Wintel to improve performance and reliability. Think
> what
>> > that says about what they were using before...
>>
>> I can't speak to anything YOU think, but Lycos still uses FAST. And if
>> you happen to do a search on Lycos, you will see the FAST icon at the
>> bottom. Check your facts first.
>>
>>
>> These are facts:
>> Lycos IS a customer of FAST.
>> Lycos does use the FAST search engine for web search.
>> FAST does use FreeBSD as the search OS.
>
> RELATED TO MY PREVIOUS POST TO mlw:
>
> I stand corrected. Performed about dozen searches using lycos, FINALLY, when
> I tried "fast search engine" I finally saw the "FAST" icon at the bottom of
> the search page. Clicking on it I read a little about fast.no. Got some news
> for ya mlw - times are changing, look for that relationship to be severed
> shortly. Lycos has already begun scaling back it's use of fast and look for
> it to be 0% soon.
You're blowing out yet more shit, dresden. You have offered no proof of this,
you will offer no proof of this, yet you expect everyone around you to supply
you with all the evidence you demand of THEIR assertions.
Now come over here and unstick my backspace key, IT whore!
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: windows annoyances (again)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:55:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Steve Mading
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 2 Aug 2000 05:18:05 GMT
<8m8aud$deq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
>: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>: wrote
>: on Sat, 22 Jul 2000 16:15:31 -0500
>: <DZne5.2115$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>:>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>:>message > I think he was referring to a second CD-ROM *reader* unit.
>:>> I've had similar issues, in the case of "The Starship Titanic"
>:>> (an otherwise entertaining and gorgeously rendered
>:>> game narrated out by one of the Monty Pythonites -- John Cleese,
>:>> I think).
>:>
>:>I thought it was Douglas Adams, author of Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy.
>
>: Hm...I think you're right. :-)
>
>He wrote it, but I don't know if he voiced it. I know he got one of
>the Pythons to read for the book-on-tape version of it.
>
>I liked Starship Titanic too. It had that Hitchiker's Guide feel
>to it. Unfortunately, much like the Hitchiker's Guide text adventure,
>there was no way to logically deduce the "right" answers to the
>puzzles. For example, (WARNING: SPOILER) in one part you can intuit
>that you have to throw a TV down the well in the middle of the ship.
>But what you'll never figure out in a million years is that you have
>to ask the butler robot to do it for you, because the game interface
>won't let you do it yourself, but it won't tell you why (apparently
>the TV was supposed to be too heavy, but the game never told you that
>until after you asked the butler for help.)
Yeah, I know; that one was a little weird. Also, defusing the bomb
(not to mention setting it off in the first place!) and just getting
the bed to properly unfold in the third-level stateroom
so one can watch the 5 inch TV over one's head.
(Room? It's more like a hole in the wall with a fancy cabinet :-) ).
And then there's the endgame, about which I'll say no more except that
it actually makes sense in a way when one realizes that the robot at
the very start took something from the room...except that the something
taken makes no sense, if one thinks about it long enough. (But then,
since when did Monty Python/Hitchhiker's Guide have to make sense? :-) )
Of course, one doesn't find out exactly what the thing taken shows
until the very end of the game.
And then there was the "running gag" (if one can call it that since
it only happens twice) of the ship running into the user's house.
Still, I wouldn't mind living on a luxury liner, as long as it
gets fixed properly. :-)
It was a mildly entertaining game. I may have to reinstall it
and play it sometime. (Maybe it'll even work under WinE now. :-) )
But it still has that bug, AFAIK, under Windows95. Maybe Win98SE
fixed it. (I doubt it.)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:02 -0500
On 1 Aug 2000 17:43:52 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>> So someone points out that if it isn't compatible with a popular
>> program like Quicken, the would-be customer would move on to the
>> slightly more expensive machine that is.
>
>Note that this is a temporary situation until the popular
>programs are all ported to Linux - or they all start
>originating there.
Exactly - which is why I think Linux will take off in a few years, but
not anytime terribly soon.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:03 -0500
On 1 Aug 2000 17:52:24 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>> VMWare runs everything just about perfectly. If it were just a
>>>>> bit cheaper I could see vendors bundling it, especially now that
>>>>> most machines have plenty of disk space.
>>>>
>>>> Would Intuit provide support to a customer running Quicken in VMWare?
>>>
>>>I don't see why they wouldn't - or why any particular support
>>>would be necessary unless you lose your CD or something. If
>>>you want to be paranoid about being able to run under normal
>>>conditions you can configure VMWare to run from a partition
>>>that can be booted under its native OS. That way if you need
>>>help from someone who doesn't understand your configuration
>>>you can change it.
>>
>>But an entry level user would never know how to do that, would they?
>
>Every entry level windows user I've seen learned how to reboot
>right away. I think most could handle making one extra choice
>there.
What? To:
1. Pay $200 for VMWare.
2. Pay $100 or so for Win98.
3. Install all of it, magically telling VMWare the "right" info.
4. Get it all working
5. Be on your own as far as support goes
- or -
1. Buy a machine with Win98 or Win2k on it in the first place, for
less money, be able to take it back to the store for support, and be
able to call any of several places (and local support places) if
something goes wrong with the software.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:02 -0500
On 1 Aug 2000 17:13:54 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>> Now, do you suggest this same JoeAverage customer
>>>> would ever buy Linux?
>>>
>>>Yes, they would, when it comes pre-installed and pre-configured, on
>>>hardware integrated by the seller to run Linux.
>>
>>This I have to disagree with. I have a hard time coming up with a
>>scenario for a home user that would purposely buy a Linux box over a
>>W98 box, even if the L box were $50 less. Can you build a scenario
>>for me?
>
>But Linux distributions have much more than the bare OS. You'd
>spend a good $3,000 or so to duplicate the apps that are
>included for free if you had to buy them for windows. Soon
>the ability to include OpenOffice pre-installed is going
>to make Linux very viable for general home and office use.
>The remaining commercial apps will follow along quickly
>as soon as the market is seen.
Yep, people have been saying this for years. I'm perfectly familiar
with what's in a Linux box & modern distro, as I run two of them, I
just don't think it will make a smidgen of difference. Chris W
spelled it out pretty well - until you can do everything, or almost
everything, that Windows can do, and until you can get the
out-of-the-box experience and user experience to be easier and
'better' than Windows, Linux will not be for anything more than geeks
and the technically adept 'curious'.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:05 -0500
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:22:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On 1 Aug 2000 17:52:24 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> VMWare runs everything just about perfectly. If it were just a
>>>>>> bit cheaper I could see vendors bundling it, especially now that
>>>>>> most machines have plenty of disk space.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would Intuit provide support to a customer running Quicken in VMWare?
>>>>
>>>>I don't see why they wouldn't - or why any particular support
>>>>would be necessary unless you lose your CD or something. If
>>>>you want to be paranoid about being able to run under normal
>>>>conditions you can configure VMWare to run from a partition
>>>>that can be booted under its native OS. That way if you need
>>>>help from someone who doesn't understand your configuration
>>>>you can change it.
>>>
>>>But an entry level user would never know how to do that, would they?
>>
>>Every entry level windows user I've seen learned how to reboot
>>right away. I think most could handle making one extra choice
>>there.
>
> No, there would merely be a default configuration so that the
> end user wouldn't have to strain their brain.
>
> Unix has been automating these sorts of things before DOS existed,
> nevermind Windows.
Seems like an amazing amount of trouble when simply buying a Win98
machine in the first place is really what the customer wants....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:03 -0500
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:21:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 17:45:17 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 1 Aug 2000 12:41:11 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quicken2000 could be bundled with the machine and running
>>>>>>> via vmware or wine. Ardhi bundled a Mac version of Quicken
>>>>>>> with Executor for awhile.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>/sarcasm
>>>>>>Yeah, that would sell *really* well.
>>>>>>/sarcasm off
>>>>>
>>>>> It all depends on how transparently it is done.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Maybe in a few years, but not today.
>>>
>>>VMWare runs everything just about perfectly. If it were just a
>>>bit cheaper I could see vendors bundling it, especially now that
>>>most machines have plenty of disk space.
>>
>>And somehow you'd get it all working so an average user (remember, not
>>a computergeek) will be able to understand it?
>
> Quicken did.
An application is not an operating system.
>>
>>Again...maybe in a few years; not today.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:05 -0500
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:26:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 17:45:19 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:17:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:22:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >In article
>>>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> >> On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:09:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >-- snip --
>>>> >
>>>> >> > How are they going to tell? How would they know the difference
>>>> >> > between an efx win32 variant and some Window Manager variant?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> They'll ask the salesdroid - Can I run Quicken 2000 on this? get
>>>> >> an answer of "no" and immediately move on to a PC that can do so.
>>>> >> Salesdroid soon has enough of this and stops pushing Linux box,
>>>> >> figuring (correctly) that people would rather pay $50 more or so
>>>> >> for a WinXX box that can run their software.
>>>> >
>>>> >A "salesdroid" would probably react as you indicate, but someone even
>>>> >the least bit knowledgeable as a sales*person* would reply, "it *can*
>>>> >run Quicken using an add-on called Wine, but there are alternatives,
>>>> >such as GNUCash which may actually work better for you. For example,
>>>> >if
>>>>
>>>> ROTFL! In a consumer box? You're kidding, right?
>>>>
>>>> The "salesperson" wouldn't be a salesperson at CUSA if he knew all of
>>>> that - he'd be doing computer support and making 2x as much $$.
>>>
>>>Go ahead and laugh. The point is that a pre-loaded and pre-configured
>>>Linux box could very well address the hypothetical scenario which
>>>***YOU*** came up with, your snottiness notwithstanding.
>>
>>No way. Not in such a way that anyone new to computers could figure
>>out.
>
> Such a person would have equal trouble with WinDOS.
Already installed and configured. Nothing to do but turn it on.
> WIMP under Linux is no different than WIMP under DOS or WIMP
> under MacOS or WIMP under GEM.
Uh...no. The Macsters will strongly disagree with that one, and I've
got to also. The Linux GUI isn't up to MacOS standards, much less
Win2k standards. It just isn't there yet.
>>>> >you prefer to use double-entry, GNUCash supports it. And you won't
>>>> >have to buy a new version every year; just download a new version
>>>> >when you want for free." Then the sales*person* could do a demo of
>>>> >exporting a Quicken account onto a floppy and importing into GNUCash,
>>>> >just to illustrate how painless it can be.
>>>>
>>>> LOL. That's a riot. And you expect a normal retail customer (not a
>>>> computergeek) to use that?
>>>
>>>I see you fail to give a concrete example of why not. You just assume
>>>that Joe and Jane can't handle using a floppy disk. I can only wonder
>>>why.
>>
>>It's not the floppy disk bit that I am suggesting wouldn't be done.
>>
>>>> Where's the support telephone number when they can't get it working?
>>>
>>>In the documentation that comes with the box. Or must you always be led
>>>by the hand?
>>
>>I see. So GnuCash has a support line now? Face it - people have a
>
> Can we get a testimonial from the Intuit support line?
Can we get you to acknowledge that it exists and stands ready to help
people?
> Otherwise claiming it as a benefit is absurd.
Yes, but you're the one I see claiming that, and I see no reason for
your claim.
>>huge comfort level with certain applications, and by and large they
>>don't run under Linux.
>
> That depends on the particular situation.
>
> Besides, you started out your response speaking of a 'clean slate'
> end user and now have switched to a 'legacy' end user as it suits
> you.
Were we not talking about Quicken? Face it - no matter who you talk
about, they'll have some Windows experience, and zero Linux
experience. Linux is still an OS for the technogeek.
>>>> >The point here is that what you describe is the network effect of a
>>>> >monopoly, and what I have provided is a fresh perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Or I'm being realistic in what a normal customer would expect and
>>>> would purchase, and you aren't.
>>>
>>>No, you are locked into MS-Think and I'm not.
>>
>>Me? No. Normal retail customers. The type of people you're talking
>>about are computergeeks, and I don't suggest they can't run Linux.
>
> WIMP is just WIMP, even under Unix.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
