Linux-Advocacy Digest #748, Volume #28 Wed, 30 Aug 00 07:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux support for IntelliEye (Ajeroth)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451787 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (D. Spider)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (javelina)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: businesses are psychopaths (Grega Bremec)
Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum? (Grega Bremec)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:12:32 +0100
From: Ajeroth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux support for IntelliEye
Ta all for your help.
Ta, Lee
--
Systems Software Engineer, BAE SYSTEMS
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451787
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:13:00 GMT
Here's today's Malloy digest. Notice how he's ignored the evidence
for the fact that he likes to "hear" himself, and keeps talking about
how I've allegedly ignored his evidence, yet he hasn't presented any
(indeed, he's so intent on using "parrot" mode that he's made several
ridiculous claims). He's also ignored the evidence for his reading
comprehension problem (and uses "parrot" mode to talk about some
nonexistent evidence for my alleged reading comprehension problem).
Nor did he explain why he's ignored Slava's question; indeed, he
continues to feign ignorance about Slava, despite the inclusion of the
relevant quotation from Slava, complete with message ID.
189> Here's today's Tholen digest. Notice how he's ignored the evidence for the
189> fact that he likes to "hear" himself, and keeps talking about how I've
189> allegedly ignored his evidence, yet he hasn't presented any (indeed, he's so
189> intent on using "parrot" mode that he's made several ridiculous claims).
189> He's also ignored the evidence for his reading comprehension problem (and
189> uses "parrot" mode to talk about some nonexistent evidence for my alleged
189> reading comprehension problem). Nor did he explain who "Slava" is. Typical.
189>
189> The digest improper:
189>
189> [Wake me when Tholen says something that rises above the less-than-mundane!]
Illogical, given that you're wide awake, waiting in anticipation , Malloy.
189> Thanks!
==========
Malloy likes to hear himself. The evidence:
"I take it Tholen has attempted to digest me, but since no message
to that effect appears on my newserver today, I present an oldie:"
--Joe Malloy
Maybe it's because he has trouble seeing. The evidence:
"Where does he say anything about clergy, Tholen?"
--Joe Malloy
"It follows from your pontificating actions and the discussion
of the clergy..."
--Eric Bennett
And the question of Slava's that he continues to ignore:
Message-ID: <N8On5.61$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +1000
"Why do you post exactly the same thing in each one of your
'digests', and then hypocritically accuse Tholen of not saying
'anything of value'?"
--Slava Pestov
"[who is this "Slava," Tholen, one of your sock puppets?]"
--Joe Malloy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. Spider)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:06:48 GMT
It appears that on Wed, 30 Aug 2000 05:10:31 GMT, in
comp.os.linux.advocacy "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 21:04:11 GMT, Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 12:03:12 GMT, Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:8oe1jv$ddc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Also, Win9x's design goal was to run on the same
>> >> >> hardware
>> >> >> > that typical Windows 3.x machines were running on in 1995 and be
>as
>> >> >> fast, or
>> >> >> > faster than Windows 3.x. All of which it achieved.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What?! I have never heard anyone claim thet win 95 is as fast as
>> >win3.x.
>> >> >> This also goes directly against my personal experience and the
>> >> >> experience of many people that I know. Try running them on an old
>486.
>> >> >> 95 is a little sluggish. On a fast pentium, win311 flies.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Win95 is about the same speed Win3.11 if you have more than 16 megs.
>If
>> >you
>> >> >have less than 16 megs, Win95 is slower than Win3.11. How many
>Win3.11
>> >> >computers had more than 16 megs? 16 megs cost over $250, in August
>1995.
>> >>
>> >> Actually, it was more like $700 for 16M.
>> >>
>> >I didn't realize it was that much, I bought 16Megs in 1996 and it was
>$240.
>> >Also thats why I said it was OVER $250.
>>
>> RAM prices dropped like a brick that year.
>
>All I remember is it was the first upgrade to my P75 and it was in 1996
>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Win 3.1 and Win 9x are BOTH painful to use in 4M or 8M. Win95 certainly
>> >> did NOT run faster than it's predecessor on the hardware in common use
>> >> when it was released.
>> >
>> >If you gave Win95 more than 16 megs it was fine, but with less, it was
>> >slow. When I went to 24 megs, Win95 almost doubled in speed. Win3.11
>>
>> When going from 8M to 32M on a 486, my wife was convinced that I
>> had gone out and bought a CPU upgrade behind her back.
>>
>I know what you mean, my friend upgraded his sister's computer, 8 megs to
>40megs. She was amazed at the speed difference.
>
>> >wasn't bad with 8 megs and a Pentium class cpu, I had a P75 with 8 megs,
>in
>> >June 1995.
>> >BTW I agree with second part but not the first part. Win3.11 wasn't
>painful
>> >to use with 8megs.
>>
>> Yes it was. It swapped like a motherfucker. That reduced it's
>> effective speed to the speed of disk rather than the speed of
>> DRAM or of CPU.
>>
>I just don't agree with you. Win3.11 was what I used for 3 months, and it
>didn't hit the drive any were near as often as Win95, 3.11 did crash about
>5 times a day, though. I also used 3.11 for 6 months before I got my
>computer at college. I guess you don't know what pain can truly be until
>you C64 GeoPublish without an REU. That is the most painful experence, I
>have ever had.
It is possible to reconcile your rememberance and his, if we assume
that he was trying to run larger apps than you were. SPSS for instance
would do exactly what he he describes on an 8 meg machine, you really
had to have 16 to run it comfortably.
#####################################################
My email address is posted for purposes of private
correspondence only. Consent is expressly NOT given
to receive advertisements, or bulk mailings of any
kind.
Since Deja.com will not archive my messages without
altering them for purposes of advertisement, deja.com
is barred from archiving my messages.
#####################################################
------------------------------
From: javelina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:02:07 GMT
Jack Troughton wrote:
> Sure, I'll keep that in mind; I think it would be fun to
> play on an IRIX. Do you have any X software I can run?
> I'd have to re-setup XFree86-OS/2, but for some of that
> 3d stuff those IRIX's got, it'd be completely worth it (drool).
Sorry, I don't do anything particularly exciting on
Irix, no 3-D modeling, etc. My typical workday on the
O2 is to launch a techno beat mp3, open up five or six
xterms, ssh into various Irix, HP, and Solaris servers, and
try to keep the users happy.
I see printouts on the walls and cubicles around here
as evidence that somebody is playing with some cool Irix
3D tools, but I've never done so myself.
> Actually, my PC is a work of art, too, as well as being
> a workhorse. Mind you, the art involved is different,
> but... Built it myself, yadda yadda yadda, and works
> very well for me. I have a lot of fun with my PC.
I'd like to build a PC someday, but usually when I'm home
the last thing I want to do is futz around with my computer.
I like to keep it simple. Some would argue that I voided
this argument when I installed linux on my iMac. However,
other than the convoluted install, now I simply boot it up,
and pretty much do one of three things; browse, email, or
ssh.
I'm a very ordinary home computer user. Probaby because
I don't play any games.
After OS X beta is released, I shall post that it's the
greatest OS ever made and that anyone not using it is
a complete and total loser. I meet interesting people
that way.
Of course, it must be OS X on a *sage* iMac. Any other
color shows a distinct lack of intelligence and culture.
Must also have a Microsoft two-button optical mouse with
scroll wheel. Only thing MS ever made that's worth
a damn. Besides their ASNTOS weapons system (Anti Ship
NT Operating System), which I hear the Navy is lining
up in droves to purchase after trial tests proved the
weapon to be 100% effective in disabling warships while
preventing extreme loss of life. Impressive.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:07:22 +0200
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
8oh0tu$rb9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > If you can install MacOS9 on a bare machine then it is indeed
> > the equivalent of a full licence of any Microsoft OS.
>
> Please show me where I can buy a bare machine that will run MacOS9, and
> which does not come pre-bundled with a copy of MacOS.
Format the HD, can you reinstall MacOS9 * WITHOUT* first installing MacOS 8
or whatever? Yes you can, there, point proven
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:17:37 +0200
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
YbRq5.36265$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:paOq5.282$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > So? Should we feel sorry for them? I'll pay for winblows when they bring
> out
> > a version i actually enjoy using...
> >
> > Amon_Re
>
> Don't use it if you don't want to pay for it. End of story. Heck - run
Wine
> or something. But if you won't pay for it, don't use it.
i don't; i don't have that shite at home, i'm writing from my pc at work
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:20:00 +0200
Robert Moir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
LIVq5.25986$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:paOq5.282$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >
> > So? Should we feel sorry for them? I'll pay for winblows when they bring
> out
> > a version i actually enjoy using...
>
> Theft is still theft. Would it be ok to steal your car if I didn't like
the
> colour?
Did i ever said i *HAD* winblows on MY computer?
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:19:01 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
8ogup2$ea4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Christophe Ochal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:paOq5.282$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > So? Should we feel sorry for them? I'll pay for winblows when they bring
> out
> > a version i actually enjoy using...
>
> I assume you mean to say, you will purchase a copy of Windows when
MIcrosoft
> releases a version that you would enjoy using; until then you will stick
> with the copies of WIndows that come with your computer(s) when you
> purchased it/them, reguardless of the version(s) it/they may be. Since
the
> fee you paid to Microsoft through the puhase of you computer(s) is already
> too much for a product (Windows) you don't like.
No, my computer at home is not even x86 compatable :) i *don't* have
winblows at home, i'm writing from work :)
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:34:01 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<cut>
> >No it's not. That's what I did. I've built machines without Windows on
them
> >too. It's easy.
> >
> >> >I was able to get a machine without Windows.
> >>
> >> ...and run what on it?
> >
> >Whatever I wanted to. At the time, it was DOS. I went out, bought a copy,
>
> Which is just another Microsoft operating system.
There were other companies making a DOS, You know, Disk Operating System :)
>
> Avoiding the forced bundling of Windows & DOS just to run DOS...
> ...talk about the choices.
>
> >and ran it. I could have bought OS/2. Heck, I could have run 4DOS or
DrDOS.
> >
> >> One was lucky to find ANY OS/2 software on sale anywhere.
> >
> >Not in 1994.
>
> Yes in 1994.
I think this depends on your location, i never had problems getting the
software i needed, even for a smaller platform like the Amiga or even the
Atari
> In 1994 one was lucky to find OS/2 software on sale.
Again, i think this is dependend of your location
> >>One
> >> simply didn't find GEM software anywhere, nor any for Geos.
> >> You would be lucky to find copies of Unix OS distributions of
> >> any kind to buy, nevermind actual applications.
> >
> >So? You said it was impossible. It wasn't.
>
> Avoiding the MS tax so that you can just run what comes
> on the GEM gold installation media is hardly very useful.
> Ditto for Solaris, SCO and NeXTstep.
I never owned a copy of ANY M$ OS, i've been running alternative systems
since 1991
> >> Plus, "building your own national phone system" is meaningless
> >> if there are other 'essential facilities' that also have to be
> >> dealt with.
> >
> >Such as? Most machines I saw at the time were running WordPerfect, and if
> >you wanted to swap documents, that's what you needed.
>
> So? Where was the GEM x86 version of WordPerfect or some
> application that was 'compatbile enough'. Who was selling
> what non-DOS applications in your neck of the woods or mine?
> like finding them for the Amiga or Atari ST and both of
There was a Wordperfect for the Amiga, (v 4 i think) and you can always use
other text formats, or even .ps files if you really wanted to (btw, i USE an
amiga, i know what's available there ^_^)
>
> >
> >> As I said before, you cheapen the term theft quite gravely.
> >
> >No, I don't. You see, there's this little thing called copyright. It
> >applies.
>
> Copyright is purely a contstruct of the public interest.
> Furthermore, an unlicenced usage of intellectual property
> does not deprive the owner of that property.
It does, you haven't PAID for the right to use it, maybe 'fraud' is a better
word for it
> Again, you less the meaning of theft by using to mean something
> other than actual theft. You are also perpetuating the propaganda
> of corporate feudalism.
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:40:11 +0200
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
NASq5.8089$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<cut>
> Do you know what "backwards compatible" means? An app can be backwards
> compatibile, meaning that it works with older OS's. An OS can be
backwards
> compatible, meaning it works with older Apps. A user interface being
> backwards compatible means what? That it works with older users?
ROTFL!
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grega Bremec)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: businesses are psychopaths
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:28:25 GMT
...and Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
<schnupp>
>Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
> The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
>the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
Point of pedantry:
I suppose it should've read:
The first ninety percent of the task takes ten percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
Just thought you might want to know.
Cheers,
--
Grega Bremec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gbsoft.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grega Bremec)
Subject: Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:48:54 GMT
...and David M. Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
>On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 03:25:31 GMT, Ingemar Lundin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Kernel 2.4, KDE 2.0, GNOME 2.0 (or Helix or whatever...), will all be
>>released at least 2-3 months from now.
>
>With a 6 month release cycle, that's too long to wait.
>
>After the feature set of a release has been frozen, it takes a couple of
>months of debugging before it's ready to go "gold", then about another month
>to prepare for general release.
You kind of have a point, but I think Ingemar was complaining about
"why call it a new major release", rather than about companies following
their regular release cycles.
>I don't see how these Linux companies are being greedy by sticking to their
>usual release cycles.
See above. The way things were going in every single software company
I worked in so far was that major versions were to indicate major
changes, which is kind of logical, if you think about it for a minute.
Of course, really radical changes (or project forks) can sometimes
justify even big leaps in version numbers, like Slackware did with
their libc5/glibc2 release fork (5.0 vs. 7.0, IIRC).
In this way of thinking, a major release would indicate at least a
major new desktop release, a libc version change (i.e. from 2.1 to
2.2 or something else that introduced serious possibilities of
incompatibility), if not the kernel upgrade itself, and Ingemar was
entirely entitled to complain about it, if you ask me.
IMO, they should call it a micro (if the changes are really only
bugfixes) or a minor version upgrade (if the release contains _some_
number of upgraded packages and some bugfixes) and not a major release.
In this way, they are fooling their customers into thinking that it
pays off to buy the new version, because by that they are gaining
some substantial improvements that will perhaps even solve some issues
they had, but didn't foresee their solutions sometime soon.
If you see it that way, then I guess it does make them seem a bit
greedy, doesn't it?
Cheers,
--
Grega Bremec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gbsoft.org/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
