Linux-Advocacy Digest #30, Volume #29 Sat, 9 Sep 00 22:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Metcalfe on Linux (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds this just
a little scary? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic
Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating) (The
Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Vs: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised.... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Epson 460 ("ostracus")
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they go...?) ("Erik
Funkenbusch")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: ms image change ... micro-er soft-er
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:08:48 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ingemar Lundin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:56:49 GMT
<RJvu5.2186$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>you cant be for real...are you really pushing for a OS that has been
>STONEDEATH!!! for at least 10 years now???
AmigaOS wasn't horribly bright, but the machine itself was impressive.
Note the difference.
Actually, the lower parts of AmigaOS weren't bad, either; they were
OO before OO became a buzzword, and fit neatly into 256k of
KickRAM, later KickROM. The DOS part of AmigaOS was fairly stupid,
but worked (using BCPL didn't help, either -- those pointers were
just flat-out weird).
All in all, a nice little system, doing things which OS/2 had
problems in < 4 meg of memory at the time (and DOS couldn't do
at all).
But Commodore dies, and Windows wins out over all. Go fig.
[snip for brevity]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Metcalfe on Linux
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:11:42 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Marshall Price
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 9 Sep 2000 22:00:57 GMT
<8pebup$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm afraid that would require the services of a real humorist.
Worry not; I'm not quitting my day job(s). :-)
>
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>: Should the user experience anything other than a mild euphoria...
>
>--
>Marshall Price of Miami, Florida I'm voting for John Hagelin
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] : "Oh, to unfree one's heaven!"
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random sense of humor here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds
this just a little scary?
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:14:11 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 09 Sep 2000 14:55:03 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snip]
>Experience; NT is a flaming pile of crap.
The Blue Flames Of Death? :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- *somebody* had to say it
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: 10 Sep 2000 00:18:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: For the most part, the Linux crowd are not bashing the Windows UI, so this
: claim is blatantly false.
I find many parts of KDE in their *default* configuration to be a
little more 'Doze-like than I'd prefer.
But folks like me can configure it to be more to our liking, while
newbies (99% of whom will be coming from the 'Doze world) will find
its familiarity to be reassuring. So I definitely can understand why
they do it this way.
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and
Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth
stagnating)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:20:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Donovan Rebbechi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 9 Sep 2000 21:23:46 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sat, 09 Sep 2000 19:41:29 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>>dodecahedron -- a "ball" comprised entirely of 12 pentagons. While not
>> a soccer ball, it's vaguely similar (the old-style soccer
>> ball has both hexagons and pentagons).
>>icosahedron -- as stated above, a "ball" of 20 triangles.
>
>Actually, the soccer ball is an application of the icosohedron ( it's
>an icosohedron with the corners chopped off )
Interesting; it might be worth trying to compute the coordinates of
that, as well, now that I know this.
>
>--
>Donovan
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- here, solid, c'mere so I can trim off your corners... :-)
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Vs: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised....
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 20:27:26 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ville Niemi in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>> Explain to me exactly how you can monopolize without, um, being a
>monopoly?
>
>Easy. In fact, if you ARE a monopoly you can no longer monopolize, because
>monopolizing is action designed to GAIN a monopoly status. You might as well
>ask 'How can one die without being dead'. The dead can't die, monopolies
>can't monopolize. Of course, being a monopoly is a less definite state than
>being dead, which is where the confusion comes in.
>Other words you don't understand? I'm good at definitions.
No, monopolization is also the act of *maintaining* monopoly power.
Without monopolizing, a monopoly disappears, destroyed by the free
market, just as, without monopolization, it could never appear to begin
with.
"Section 2 of the Sherman Act declares that it is unlawful for a person
or firm to "monopolize . . . any part of the trade or commerce among the
several States, or with foreign nations . . . ." 15 U.S.C. § 2. This
language operates to limit the means by which a firm may lawfully either
acquire or perpetuate monopoly power. Specifically, a firm violates § 2
if it attains or preserves monopoly power through anticompetitive acts."
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f4400/4469.htm
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 19:46:11 -0500
"Peter Ammon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In general, I hate toolbars. They take up lots of screen space, the
> icons are generally unfathomable and require hovering the mouse over
> them to see what they do, and they're usually no faster than a menu
> choice, since they're such a small target. They only work effectively
> in web browsers...and I assume the dock in OS X will add to that list.
Toobar buttons are designed for speeding up certain activities. Those
activitieis still occur on the menu if you are so included (in most cases),
but once you become familiar enough with the application and know what the
buttons do then they can make you more productive.
In other words, they don't slow you down if you don't know them, since you
can just as easily hit the menu. But they can speed you up since you need
not open a menu, track through the menu (and possible submenus) to get to a
function.
------------------------------
From: "ostracus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Epson 460
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 19:35:09 -0500
In article <8pdujt$cqnar$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Nigel Feltham"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From the specification on epson's uk website they claim it offers Epson
> ESC/P emulation. If this is done in the printer's internal firmware then
> it may work with the Linux Epson 400 driver.
<snip>
I believe that it is in the firmware. From memory I believe there's
another emulation as well.
--
There was once a young man who, in his youth, professed his desire become
a great writer.
When asked to define "great" he said, "I want to write stuff that the
whole world will read, stuff that people will react to on a truly
emotional level, stuff that will make them scream, cry, howl in pain and
anger!"
He now works for Microsoft, writing error messages.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they go...?)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 20:03:41 -0500
"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Uhh.. Linux did not implement Plug-n-Play until the 2.0 kernel IIRC.
Even
> >today, Linux still does not implement Plug-n-play in the way it's
intended
> >to be (plug in a USB or PCMCIA card and have it prompt you for drivers,
> >rather than forcing a manual driver install and load).
>
> Odd, I swap out PCMCIA cards all the time on my linux laptop. In fact,
> when the machine was a dual-boot with win/98 (it was my wife's machine at
the
> time) plugging in a new PCMCIA 10baseT card caused windows to bitch about
> needing a new driver, linux? it simply autoloaded the driver and continued
on
> without a hiccup. Now, I only have 2 USB devices, a handspring Visor, and
a
> Fuji digicam, but neither have given me any trouble under linux. Can't say
for
> any M$ system as I don't use them.
And what happened the first time you plugged in the PCMCIA card? Nothing,
right? You had to manually install the driver for it, correct?
> >At the time that Novell acquired USL, Novell and MS were barely on
speaking
> >terms. Novell refused to support NT with a working client, so MS
eventually
> >was forced to reverse engineer the client and build a much less
functional
> >one into NT. This infuriated Novell even more, causing Novell to release
> >sub-standard clients for NT which they blamed on MS in order to alienate
> >pontential NT customers from buying NT (since most companies had large
> >quantities of Novell servers).
>
> Interesting question, since M$ forbids others from reverse enginneering
their
> stuff, weren't they being just a little hypocritical?
Most companies are.
> >Yet despite all this, Linux is somehow not "competition" to Microsoft in
the
> >eyes of Judge Jackson.
>
> Wasn't the whole M$ trial about what was happening a couple of years ago
and
> further?
You misunderstand the purpose of an anti-trust trial. An anti-trust trial
is not about punishing past wrongdoings, it's about correcting behavior so
that they do not occur in the future.
Claiming that MS is a monopoly because no other competitor exists is
different from saying it's a monopoly because it did not allow other
competition to exist. Clearly MS isn't "allowing" Linux to exist, yet it's
getting stronger and stronger. This suggests that MS doesn't have the
stranglehold on the market that everyone claims they have.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:09:27 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[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:
> >> >> Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >> >On Mon, 04 Sep 2000 00:26:52 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> >>
> >> >> [...]Does an application developer who is developing a KDE
> >> >> application (let's just say its a customer requirement, OK?) have to
use
> >> >> Troll Tech's QT tool?
> >> >
> >> >Tricky question. The answer is yes and no. It depends on what
precisely
> >> >is meant by "developing a KDE application", for which there is no
precise
> >> >definition.
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Need we go on? I think not.
> >
> >Then why do you post? Or you had something worthy to say and
> >pressed post too quickly?
>
> I was pointing out that your thinking that there is some need for
> arbitrary precision in the phrase "developing a KDE application" is
> empty posturing, not a response.
>
> >Just in case you believe what I write is somehow bizarre, let
> >me tell you that there are varying degrees of KDE integration
> >a app can achieve, and there is no "designed for KDE" seal,
> >so how much of a KDE application a piece of software is,
> >is really open to interpretation.
> >
> >For instance: an application that follows KDE2's resource
> >layout on disk, but doesn't do Xdnd, is more or less of
> >a KDE app than one that does Xdnd and uses another layout?
>
> Is that a question? I'm not talking about imaginary things and special
> cases.
>
> >Neither can be described as "a KDE app", IMHO. And then,
> >as you start adding more and more agreement to the KDE
> >"standards", it becomes more of a KDE app. It's a
> >spectrum.
>
> So in the huge middle ground of that 'spectrum' where a *reasonable*
> person would expect to find the actual KDE applications which are KDE
> applications and not merely labeled KDE applications or look like KDE
> applications, would a developer of KDE application have to use the QT
> tools from Troll Tech?
>
> The answer, in case you're still flopping around on the deck, is "yes",
> which is why TT GPLed QT.
May I offer this simple but effective criteria to determine if a given piece
of software not a part of a KDE release is or is not a KDE program.
(Please, let us not debate on what does *is* mean.) Does the software as
written need access to *any* KDE development support to compile or does the
software as compiled need *anything* supplied by The KDE project. If the
answer to either is yes, then it is a KDE program. If the answer to both is
no, then it is not a KDE program.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ms image change ... micro-er soft-er
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:49:44 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I Still agree with Dennis Miller, Bill Gates is a persian cat away from
> being a Bond Villain.
There is one major difference, I don't recall any of the Bond villians every
having been arrest records in their past.
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 01:20:51 GMT
Sorry... IBM has killed OS/2 for good.
get a real OS (i can recommend both SuSE Linux 6.4 and Windows 2000
Professional)
/IL
> Don't care much for OS/2 or BeOS, do you? Well, BeOS may not be viable
> in the long term, but OS/2 will be around for years to come.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 21:57:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Pshaw; 'because Netscape engineers were too incompetent'. You really
>> don't have a clue, I'm afraid. Don't you understand that when you have
>> an anti-competitive (illegal) monopoly, *everybody* becomes 'too
>> incompetent to do this...'? That's why they call it a 'monopoly', see.
>> You know, the ol' 'one company controls the market'?
>
>Please explain to me why, if a componentized browser architecture is so bad,
>Netscape 6 has gone to a completely componentized version (that is already
>being used in at least one 3rd party browser, kmeleon). And guess what
>else? It's based on COM. Not COM itself, but what they call a cross
>platform COM (or XPCOM) that is virtually identical to COM in most ways.
And guess what else? There's still a monopoly, which means whatever way
the monopoly does it is a 'good idea'.
COM sucks, 'componentized' applications suck, but I think you'll find
that if you pay attention to what I'm saying, you'll see that there's a
lot that sucks. None of it sucks worse than Microsoft software, but
just about all of it sucks a little.
Componentized is a great idea. For developers. For operational
functionality; it sucks. Shared libraries don't suck (much).
Componentized applications do.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 22:06:09 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >> Software licenses are never non-transferable. You cannot be prevented
>> >> from selling what you own.
>
>> >Well lets take a look at a licenses shall we?
>
>> >Battlezone II - non-transferable.
>
>> You misunderstand the usage. You cannot transfer the license to anyone
>> else (granting them permission to use the product) without transferring
>> the ownership to them. When you lend someone software, you transfer the
>> ownership of the license along with the license; same when you sell it.
>> You just can't assign that 'license to use' to anyone else while
>> maintaining ownership of it, you see what I mean? IOW; its a bullshit
>> word.
>
>Of course if you read the licence then you realise that you
>have not bought anything:
>
> "This program is licensed, not sold, for your use. Your license
> confers no title or ownership in this Program and should not
> be construed as a sale of any rights in this Program."
No, you just haven't bought anything but the license, and a copy of the
software. Note that regardless of the license and what it might *seem*
to say, you *own* that copy of the software. You haven't bought any
rights to the program, and you haven't bought the author's original
code, but you have bought a copy.
> "YOU SHALL NOT: Sell, rent, lease, license, distribute, or otherwise
> transfer this Program, or any copies of this Program, without the
> express prior written consent of Activision."
>
>So I cannot (apparently) sell or give away my copy of the program
>to anyone (giving away would be covered by "othewise transfer").
This is the same problem with the 'non-transferable' bit. You can't
sell your copy of the program, nor transfer your license for it. You
can, of course, sell what you bought; the license *and* the program,
otherwise known as 'the package'. You bought it; you can sell it.
Nobody can ever stop you, unless they provided *you* with some
compensation to agree never to sell it to anyone else, even if you don't
want to own it anymore.
>Of course IANAL. And, of course, disagree that a license should
>be able to be written is such a manner.
Well, that's encouraging. Overreaching really has become an epidemic.
DVD, for example...
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 22:09:04 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> Sorry for the confusion. You are allowed to sell any software you
>> bought to anyone you want. I'm not a lawyer, but that's still the legal
>> truth.
>
>Wrong.
>Your allowed to agree to the EULA or not. That's it. If you don't agree you
>don't get to use the software.
Tell that to Lasercomb America. They'll be happy to hear it.
http://www.urich.edu/~jolt/v1i1/liberman.html
The question, BTW, 'J', is on what the EULA says, not whether you have
to agree to it to legally own your copy of the software product.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
