Linux-Advocacy Digest #413, Volume #28 Tue, 15 Aug 00 01:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Damien)
So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: DMCA was(Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.) (Damien)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:08 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
>> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
[...]
>> >> >Actions are ethical when they agree with the actor's ethics. When they
>> >> >agree with the actor's scale of values.
>> >>
>> >> I disagree. Actions are moral when they agree with the actor's values.
>> >> They are ethical when the present no conflict to any other affected
>> >> individual's values.
>> >
>> >Ok, I kinda like that.
>>
>> I've found it to be accurate, consistent, and practical in discussions
>> of morality and/or ethics, if somewhat novel.
>
>Well, it doesn't seem too accurate to me, but I like it. I would change
>the ethical part, though. Ethical decisions are not always harmless.
I never said that ethical decisions were always harmless. When I said
"they are ethical", I meant "they are covered within the magisterium of
ethics not morals", not "they are consistent with good ethics".
As for its correctness, I would classify the primary reservation as
"consistency", not accuracy. An accurate definition of a word is one
that is precise for what you intend, not "consistent with official
definitions". Words don't generally have official definitions, you see.
With a word like "ethics", which has been defined and described by
countless people in countless ways, and the greatest scholars on the
subject will dispute its 'true meaning', consistency with as many
existing usages is a good thing. But it is not the only thing; accuracy
in context and practical value are also important.
It is accurate, as far as I am concerned, because it always and only
means precisely what I've stated when I use it. Whether it is
consistent with everybody else's use is a separate issue. The more
people I can get to agree to it, the better. So its accurate if *you*
say it is, to. And then its even more consistent. Sooner or later,
enough people will understand that "ethics is a public issue, morality
is a private concern" that it will be practical to assume this is what
people mean when they say "ethics".
[...]
>I can easily account for people believing in the existance of that moral
>absolute, without labeling them as heretics, so to speak. Moral
>absolutism is not capable of the opposite. I can even believe that moral absolutism
>can be a constructive thing, and that it can have good effects. You
>can't easily do the reverse.
Sure you can. Just because there is a moral absolute doesn't mean
people agree on what it is. There are no moral relativists in foxholes,
after all.
>Moral absolutism is, to me, just a theory, as good or as bad, in
>principle, as many others.
To me, it is a delusion.
>A moral absolutist has, by definition, to oppose moral relativism, since
>moral relativism implies the existance of immoral values, which a moral
>absolutist is forced to oppose.
A moral relativist by definition has to oppose moral absolutism, since
it implies that there is a moral absolute, which a moral relativist is
forced to oppose. It appears that your position is merely one of
intellectual hubris.
[...]
>> Says who? I can believe that there can be a derived ethical "truth" to
>> human activity without believing in an independent moral canon.
>
>Well, that seems contradictory to me. if it is a "truth" that doesn't
>depend on who its applied to, then it's obviously an independent moral
>canon. What else could it be?
You mistake the nature of truth. This is hardly something that will be
resolved in a Usenet discussion; philosophers have debated the meaning
of "truth" for much longer than they've debate whether there are
absolute morals, I would expect. If you're unable to grasp the
abstraction, I can see why you would insist that it must be either an
independent moral law or an entirely arbitrary and subjective opinion,
and I can understand a preference for the latter.
But it isn't that simple. There is absolute truth, and there is
relative truth, and there is no getting around that fact, including
thinking there is an easy way to tell the difference.
[...]
>> I do it quite easily, just as millions of secular humanists have done for
>> centuries.
>
>Big deal. For centuries people behaved as if the earth was flat.
C'mon, at least try to have a point. Such a silly straw man is hardly
worth the effort. Because the world is not flat all ethics are based on
moral canon?
>> There is none of the problem you have trying to argue that
>> relativism can account for absolutism, but absolutism cannot integrate
>> relativism; that is political quibbling, not honest inquiry. Perhaps if
>> you re-read the definition I gave of ethics and morality at the
>> beginning of this message and then read these two statements, you'll
>> understand where some of the problem is in your reasoning.
>
>Well, let's apply the standard you expect of others, for a change.
>Explain me! Tell me! What? You don't explain the way I like?
>Fool!
What the hell are you talking about?
>> Notice how easily you switched from ethics to morals, as if they were
>> identical or equivalent?
>
>Where?
In the two statements I asked you to re-read, where I was talking about
ethics, and you responded with something about moral canons. Right
before you starting sputtering.
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:14 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:35:02 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>>Perhaps you've never seen my definition of intuitive: familiar. And
>>BASIC is, quite pointedly, more intuitive to people who don't already
>>know programming, but use natural language. It is simple, even
>
>I disagree with this. It's more familiar to people like you who are
>already familiar with it, I mean, that's tautological. But I don't
>see how it's more "familiar" than anything else.
Well, let's put it this way: I can't find 'fi' in a standard dictionary.
>There are some things about it that are attrocious. For example,
>assignment and test for equality use the same operator.
An interesting nit to pick, I'd guess. Still, the point is that BASIC
is much closer to human languages than most other programming languages
are, by design.
[...]
>I disagree again. I don't think GOTO is something that beginners should
>be encouraged to use. Function calls / "subroutines" / "proceedures" are
>better. As for if/then, and for control structures, other
>languages have those too.
I didn't say it was a good thing, I said it was a familiar thing, and it
is. As for control structures, you're still looking at things as if we
want to program full-scale applications. The idea is simple automation
of simple processing, and the capabilities, complexity, and concise
syntax of 'real' programming languages is overkill, and makes them
inaccessible to those with limited needs and typical requirements.
Personally, I'd never consider using a GOTO for anything but a selection
statement or a subroutine; it is a primitive, if you will, of both CASE
and GOSUB. Using GOTOs 'correctly' can fulfill the requirement for
either. I don't want elegant, I don't want pretty, I don't even want
'good design' or 'semi-optimal'. I just want "works", with minimum
effort. And providing end-user languages, possibly entirely separate
from 'real' programming languages, seems to me part of the whole premise
of personal computing.
While shell scripting and Perl and such are good middle ground, the
low-end is still a wasteland, in my opinion.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 15 Aug 2000 04:50:15 GMT
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:43:44 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:31:32 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| wrote:
|
| >But part of the "code bloat" of X is that it is network transparent, which
| >makes it somewhat overdesigned for a standalone PC.
|
| In a business environment, few PC's are "standalone" any more. Even in
| the home, networking is becoming standard. And in a networked
| envoironment, this "bloat" is very useful.
Many would chalk up that bloat as a case of overengineering, but
the truth is that X was built to last. The ratio of networked to
non-networked computers is growing fast and will approach 1 in the
very near future. How will other systems handle this? Rather poorly
if VNC and PC-anywhere are any indication. X is was built for this
from the ground up.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
Reply-To: any.where.uwant
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:50:47 -0400
Want to install a video card in Linux?
Here are the steps:
Article Info
NVIDIA 3D Under Linux
Taken directly from Tom's Hardware Page.....
================================================================================
Created:
August 11, 2000
================================================================================
By:
Thomas Pabst
================================================================================
Category:
Graphics Guide
================================================================================
Summary:
It finally has become reality. With NVIDIA's latest Linux drivers for XFree86 4
you'll get powerful 3D for this free open source operating system as well. Over
are the times when only geeks were using Linux. Today even serious 3D-gamers
should be pleased with the 3D-performance offered by NVIDIA. We tested 5
different NVIDIA 3D cards on 6 different platforms and compared the scores with
the 3D-performance under Windows98.
Installing NVIDIA's Latest Linux Drivers
One thing I have to give Linux. It's still not by far as easy to install drivers
under Linux as it is under Microsoft's operating systems. Therefore I will
dedicate a rather longish and hopefully detailed enough chapter to this issue. I
have seen numerous news group postings of people who had problems installing the
NVIDIA drivers, and luckily most of them can be solved.
NVIDIA's Unified Driver Architecture
I don't know about you, but I have heard about the wonderful 'unified driver
architecture' so often from marketing people and out of press releases, that I
got almost immune to it. For most Windows users this isn't really a big deal. We
are used to get Windows98 and Windows2000 drivers for our hardware and why would
anyone care if those drivers work for other hardware as well?
Article Info
NVIDIA 3D Under Linux
================================================================================
Created:
August 11, 2000
================================================================================
By:
Thomas Pabst
================================================================================
Category:
Graphics Guide
================================================================================
Summary:
It finally has become reality. With NVIDIA's latest Linux drivers for XFree86 4
you'll get powerful 3D for this free open source operating system as well. Over
are the times when only geeks were using Linux. Today even serious 3D-gamers
should be pleased with the 3D-performance offered by NVIDIA. We tested 5
different NVIDIA 3D cards on 6 different platforms and compared the scores with
the 3D-performance under Windows98.
Step One - Install Xfree86 4.0 or 4.0.1
Here we go, we already experience the first big difference between all the
different Windows operating systems and Linux. While Windows is one package from
one software developer, Linux is a collection of software from various sources.
XFree86 is, per definitionem (yeah, that's how this Latin term is properly
spelled), "XFree86 is the underlying software that runs between the video
hardware and graphical user interface (aka gui) that people see." In laymen
terms, it's the 'thing' that enables you to see a desktop in Linux, regardless
if you are using KDE, GNOME or any other Linux GUI. It talks directly to your
graphics card and as such it needs to be of the right version for NVIDIA's
latest driver release.
In July Xfree86.org released XFree86 version 4.0.1 and since NVIDIA supplies
drivers for 4.0 as well as 4.0.1 it is advisable to upgrade to the latest
version right away. Download it from www.xfree86.org and go ahead and install
it. If you are experienced enough you might want to go for the source code and
compile it, or you choose the binaries that are already available. In both cases
the installation isn't really too difficult as long as you stick to the readme
and install files supplied.
One word of advice. If you want to make sure that you won't run into too much
trouble after the installation of Xfree 4.0.1 and you've got a Linux
installation from one of the big distributors like Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake,
Corel, ... you might want to avoid booting right into the GUI. Make sure that
you change the line 'id:3:initdefault' if you are using SuSE, or
'id:5:initdefault' if you are using RedHat or similar to 'id:2:initdefault' for
SuSE or 'id:3:initdefault' for RedHat et. al. in the file '/etc/inittab'. You
can use any text editor you're familiar with. This will boot Linux to the Linux
console. From there you can use e.g. Midnight Commander (command 'mc') if you've
got to edit '/etc/X11/XF86Config', because you've got trouble reaching your
desktop after the upgrade. With the command 'startx' you'll start the GUI. If it
doesn't start the GUI or if you get a black screen you can press
'Ctrl-Alt-Backspace' to quit XFree86 and you're back at your console prompt
Article Info
NVIDIA 3D Under Linux
================================================================================
Created:
August 11, 2000
================================================================================
By:
Thomas Pabst
================================================================================
Category:
Graphics Guide
================================================================================
Summary:
It finally has become reality. With NVIDIA's latest Linux drivers for XFree86 4
you'll get powerful 3D for this free open source operating system as well. Over
are the times when only geeks were using Linux. Today even serious 3D-gamers
should be pleased with the 3D-performance offered by NVIDIA. We tested 5
different NVIDIA 3D cards on 6 different platforms and compared the scores with
the 3D-performance under Windows98.
Step Two - Install The Basic NVIDIA Driver 'NVdriver'
The driver for your NVIDIA card is actually divided in two. There is the basic
part, which is added to the kernel via a module and there is the actual
XFree/GLX driver. Let's first concentrate on the kernel part, which is the one
that's more difficult.
You'll find all the NVIDIA drivers you need here. Grab whichever version of the
kernel driver you prefer. It's easiest for RedHat users, because NVIDIA supplies
the driver in form of a RPM. Non-RedHat users like me (I'm a SuSE-follower) can
choose between another RPM or the source code. I recommend the source code file,
which is actually less painful to install than the RPM file. I'll describe the
installation procedure for non-RedHat users. RedHat users shouldn't have any
problems.
For this procedure you obviously need to be logged as 'root'. Either you logged
on as 'root', or you type 'su' and supply your root-password. After you have
downloaded the source code file "NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-4.tar.gz" unpack it into a
directory of your choice. Before you now 'make' the code I recommend you make
sure that in /usr/include/linux is the 'autoconf.h' file that reflects your
actual kernel. This is not always the case! Both installation versions, the
source-file as well as the RPM look into '/usr/include/linux/autoconfig,h' or
'/usr/src/linux/include/autoconfig.h' to figure out your kernel configuration.
Two things are important.
Are you running an SMP-kernel? Then you should find the line 'define CONFIG_SMP
1' in your 'autoconf.h' file. If not, you should find '#undef CONFIG_SMP' there.
Make sure that this one is correct or your driver won't run!
Is your kernel equipped with the loadable AGP-module 'agpgart.o'? If not, you
should consider making and installing it. If you don't have it, don't want it or
can't make it, you want to make sure that you don't find either of those two
lines in your 'autoconf.h': 'define CONFIG_AGP 1' or, more likely, 'define
CONFIG_AGP_MODULE 1'. The second of the two lines signalizes that you've got the
loadable module 'agpgart.o' installed in your Linux box, the first one is for
the case that your system has got the AGP-driver compiled into the kernel, which
is not advisable right now, as far as I know. Check if you've got the module by
typing '/sbin/lsmod'. Maybe the module is already loaded (which is rather
unlikely) and you find it in the list of the loaded modules. If the list doesn't
include 'agpgart.o' you type '/sbin/insmod agpgart'. If the module is there you
will get the message that it loaded successfully. It is possible you get the
error message 'device or resource busy'. This rather stupid error message wants
to actually tell you that 'agpgart.o' doesn't recognize your AGP-chipset. Don't
worry about it and type '/sbin/insmod agpgart agp_try_unsupported=1'. Now it
should load in the very most cases, unless you've got a really exotic
AGP-chipset. Should you be unable to get 'agpgart.o' to load, you should delete
the above mentioned lines from your 'autoconf.h' before you install the driver,
because otherwise the driver will not work, as it will depend on the resources
supplied by the AGP-driver.
After making sure that '/usr/include/linux/autoconfig.h' is indeed showing the
configuration of your actual kernel you can finally type 'make' in the directory
to which you unpacked the NVIDIA driver source code file. If everything went
fine the file 'NVdriver' should have been loaded in your '/lib/modules//video'
directory and it should have been started. Make sure it was loaded with
'/sbin/lsmod'. It should turn up in the list.
If you have not followed my advice above you might get one of the following two
error messages and NVdriver won't load (try it again with '/sbin/insmod
NVdriver' if you can't find it in the '/sbin/lsmod' list):
You get a list of 8 'unresolved symbol agp_...'
This means that the driver is depending on the AGP-driver 'agpgart.o' which
isn't loaded. If you can, load it with '/sbin/insmod agpgart' or '/sbin/insmod
agpgart agp_try_unsupported=1'. If this doesn't work you need to make your
driver again. Erase all AGP stuff out of your /src/include/linux/autoconf.h',
clean your make directory for the driver and 'make' again. This time the driver
should load, but it won't have AGP GART support and will therefore perform
worse.
You get the error message 'unresolved symbol tqueue_lock'
The driver has been compiled as SMP-driver, but your system is not a
multi-processor system. Change autoconf.h as described above, clean the make
directory and make the driver once more. It should load this time.
You could see above that many AGP-chipsets need the setting
'agp_try_unsupported=1' for the 'agpgart.o'. This driver is officially only
supporting Intel's 440BX, 440GX, i810, i810e, VIA Apollo Pro and AMD Irongate
chipsets. If you've got a different chipset you will be pleased to hear that the
setting 'agp_try_unsupported=1' works in very many cases. I've successfully
tried Intel's i815 and i820 chipset, as well as VIA's Apollo Pro133A, Apollo
KX133 and Apollo KT133. To make sure that this setting will always be applied
when the driver needs to load, you want to modify '/etc/modules.conf'. It should
contain the line 'alias char-major-10-175 agpgart'. Include the line 'options
agpgart agp_try_unsupported=1' underneath and your AGP driver will load without
problems if you've got one of the above-mentioned 'unsupported' chipsets.
There are two options for NVIDIA's driver that you might want to include in
'modules.conf' as well. I found that the i815 chipset requires the setting
'NVreg_UseKernelAGP=1' if you want AGP to be enabled properly. Owners of
motherboards with VIA's Apollo Pro133A chipset might want to try
'NVreg_EnableVia4x=1' to enable AGP4x mode. To enable those features permanently
find the line 'alias char-major-195 NVdriver' and put the line 'options NVdriver
NVreg_UseKernelAGP=1 NVreg_EnableVia4x'. There's additionally the two options
'NVreg_ReqAGPSBA=0/1' (default 1) to toggle AGP side band addressing and
'NVreg_ReqAGPFW=0/1' to toggle Fast Writes. So far so good.
Article Info
NVIDIA 3D Under Linux
================================================================================
Created:
August 11, 2000
================================================================================
By:
Thomas Pabst
================================================================================
Category:
Graphics Guide
================================================================================
Summary:
It finally has become reality. With NVIDIA's latest Linux drivers for XFree86 4
you'll get powerful 3D for this free open source operating system as well. Over
are the times when only geeks were using Linux. Today even serious 3D-gamers
should be pleased with the 3D-performance offered by NVIDIA. We tested 5
different NVIDIA 3D cards on 6 different platforms and compared the scores with
the 3D-performance under Windows98.
Step Three - Install The XFree/glx Driver
Download either the correct RPM for your system or the source code file. In case
of XFree 4.0.1 you will require the source code file by all means, since NVIDIA
doesn't supply a RPM for the XFree 4.0.1 driver. The procedure is super easy
with the source code file, so there's no reason not to use it. After the
download unpack the file in a directory of your choice.
Before you 'make' the driver you need to check a few things. You need to remove
or rename several of the possibly installed Mesa files that interfere with
NVIDIA's OpenGL driver:
/usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a
/usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libglx.a
/usr/lib/libGL.so
/usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.*
/usr/X11R6/lib/libGLcore.so.*
After you've done that type 'make' and almost all things should be taken care
of. In my case there was one problem with the file '/usr/lib/libGL.so.1', being
a symbolic link to a Mesa file, although I had renamed it earlier. Best you
change the symbolic link to the newly installed NVIDIA OpenGL driver file
'/usr/lib/libGL.so.1.0.4' and you should be set.
If you can find any 'libMesaGL.so.*' or 'libMesa.so.*' files in 'usr/lib' or
'usr/X11R6/lib' make symbolic links out of them, pointing to the NVIDIA OpenGL
driver file '/usr/lib/libGL.so.1.0.4'.
Finally, you want to modify '/etc/X11/XF86Config'. Replace the line 'Driver
"nv"' in the 'Section "Device"' to 'Driver "nvidia"'. If it's not already in
there, please add 'Load "glx"' in the 'Section "Module"', to enable 3D!
Now start Xserver (type 'startx') and you should happily have your desktop back.
If you've got 'ssystem', the Star System Simulator installed, open a console and
type 'ssystem -bench'. Ssystem should load and you should see a high frame rate.
A GeForce 2 GTS on an Athlon/Tbird 1000 system scores about 380 fps. If you only
see 5-10 fps you have probably forgotten to remove or rename one of the Mesa
files or you forgot to make the symbolic links from the Mesa files. Check it
again, particularly the symbolic links.
Article Info
NVIDIA 3D Under Linux
================================================================================
Created:
August 11, 2000
================================================================================
By:
Thomas Pabst
================================================================================
Category:
Graphics Guide
================================================================================
Summary:
It finally has become reality. With NVIDIA's latest Linux drivers for XFree86 4
you'll get powerful 3D for this free open source operating system as well. Over
are the times when only geeks were using Linux. Today even serious 3D-gamers
should be pleased with the 3D-performance offered by NVIDIA. We tested 5
different NVIDIA 3D cards on 6 different platforms and compared the scores with
the 3D-performance under Windows98.
Testing
This is my first major Linux testing, so I hope I got it right for the Linux
community out there. I decided to run all the different NVIDIA cards in my lab
on one platform and all platforms in my lab with one 3D card. It turned out to
be convenient to use my good old and rarely used i820 motherboard, the Asus
P3C-L as basic platform for all the cards. I chose the GeForce 2 GTS card for
the platform tests.
As benchmarks I used the Linux version of Quake 3 Arena, running good old
demo001. Then I installed the brand new SPECviewperf 6.1.2 and ran that too.
Additionally I did the tiny little Ssystem benchmark too.
For comparison I ran Quake3 and SPECviewperf 6.1.2 under Windows98 on all the
cards too. You know that the scores under Windows2000 aren't any better, rather
worse.
Problems
Yes, I encountered a couple of problems too.
Problem No.1 was the fact that my GeForce MX card didn't want to work under
Xserver. As soon as Xserver started the screen went black and the system froze
completely. I am already working with NVIDIA to find the cause of this failure.
The second problem was completely crazy. On my VIA Apollo Pro133A platform, the
Asus P3V4X, SPECviewperf would simply stop in the middle of an animation and
only get back to work as soon as I moved the mouse a bit. So far nobody could
explain that to me, but it kept me from generating any SPECviewperf scores with
the P3V4X.
The third and last problem was with my Intel OR840 motherboard, which is based
on the i840 chipset. Linux preferred to give me a consistent kernel panic at
boot up with several different kernels, so I didn't test this platform.
NVIDIA as well as Asus are aware of the problems and I am working with them to
find an urgent fix.
SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Now that you have waded through all of that garbage, are we ready to install a
scanner?
Have you seen inSANE yet?
Goooooooddddddd Lucccccckkkkkk...you will need it....
Linux once again proves how much it sucks....
Linux is still the SOS, an antiquated OS that requires hours upon hours of work
just to get a simple piece of hardware to work. That is of course assuming the
hardware is even supported by Linux which in most cases it is not....
Happy computing....
Oh yea....Installing the exact same video card under Windows requires one
command:
c:\setup.exe
And it works....
SWANGO
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: DMCA was(Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 15 Aug 2000 04:58:39 GMT
Thanks for the post. Good stuff.
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:30:56 +0200, in alt.destroy.microsoft
David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Small-time pirates are not the problem (especially with the current DVD
| blank price) - even in the CD world, they are not the problem. But large
| pirating groups, especially in the far east, use bigger DVD presses and get
| their blanks for much the same price as legitimate producers.
Probably a much more effective pirating technique is to record the
movie into the file format of your choice (taking space, bandwidth,
and quality into consideration) and use that. I would think that
would be possible with any software decoded (properly MPAA-licensed)
DVD drive.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:56:42 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> An interesting nit to pick, I'd guess. Still, the point is that BASIC
> is much closer to human languages than most other programming languages
> are, by design.
Have you seen a COBOL program?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
