Linux-Advocacy Digest #38, Volume #29 Sun, 10 Sep 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (sinister-catsup)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ("David Sidlinger")
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Chad Myers")
Re: Windows+Linux=True
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Re: Popular Culture
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Dave Martel)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Grega Bremec)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (robert w hall)
Vs: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ("Ville Niemi")
Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised.... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Test: Dial-up Connections (Jerry McBride)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (Jerry McBride)
Re: Windows+Linux=True (Jerry McBride)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
From: sinister-catsup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 12:40:31 -0400
Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2000 19:27:57 +0100, jabali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>=20
> >IBM has stopped its development and no further versions will be issued=
=2E It may
> >remain around for years to come, just like Atari-TOS is still around. =
But you
> >would not advise anybody to take it as a viable alternative, would you=
?
>=20
> From watching the news it kinda looks like IBM wants linux to take the
> place of OS2?
I've thought that once or twice. Sad thing is that if you gave OS/2 a min=
or
facelift and a working TCP/Ip stack, you would likley have a contender wi=
th the
right sales effort.
------------------------------
From: "David Sidlinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:40:29 -0500
If I had written a very poor emulation of an OS that hadn't done anything
new in the past twenty years, I'd give it away too. This brings up another
beef I have with Linux. If it's supposed to be free, why do I have to pay
RedHat $2500 to get an Oracle-optimized version, and then pay them another
ten grand a year just to get some real support for the thing?!?!
- David
"MrTroll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8okgtu$kl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : Here's the problem. Each version of Windows gets better and more
powerful,
> : and, yes, more stable, in general. But then Microsoft crams more into
the
> : package... more processes and threads (in NT, anyway) running. So more
> : likelihood of a mistake in their interactions.
>
> Not to mention the $200 - $3,000 to upgrade Windows. Linux - FREE
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Joe Otterson | When walking in open territory, bother
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | no one. If someone bothers you, ask him
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
> | -Anton Szandor LaVey
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:52:14 -0500
On Sat, 09 Sep 2000 14:44:06 -0500, Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>The Amiga was WAY ahead of its time.
Yep. IMO, that still doesn't mean it's up to date with
current times, but it was way ahead.
>Commodore designed the most wonderful machines despite the limited
>technology of the day but kept throwing it all away with some of the
>worst marketing mistakes I've seen in the history of technology.
Commodore didn't design the Amiga. Someone else (I forget who)
developed it, and Commodore bought it from them. That's why it
has so little resemblance to their earlier machines. Myself, the
computer I first learned to use and program was a Commodore 8032,
which was out well before the Vic-20 and C-64.
--
Stephen Whitis
Email replies should go to...
scw120198 (at) whitis.com
The address in the header is not valid.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:16:02 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said David Sidlinger in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>If I had written a very poor emulation of an OS that hadn't done anything
>new in the past twenty years, I'd give it away too. This brings up another
>beef I have with Linux. If it's supposed to be free, why do I have to pay
>RedHat $2500 to get an Oracle-optimized version, and then pay them another
>ten grand a year just to get some real support for the thing?!?!
Because you want an Oracle-optimized version and support for it, I would
presume, which is to say that you don't *have* to do any such thing.
Since the OS itself is free, you're entitled (and hopefully able) to
purchase such services elsewhere, or hire someone to do it as
work-for-hire, if you like. Its only the code that's free, not the
services which might make that code useful to you.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:19:47 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
David Sidlinger wrote:
> Unix can be broken just as easily as Windows. It's just
> that a lot of unskilled developers write apps for Windows that don't behave.
> I can crash a Unix machine with C++ just as easily as I can crash Windows.
>
Really? Please explain how a C++ app can crash Unix.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 17:23:48 GMT
"MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pg143$8e0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP: commentary on the sad state of the Linux community attitude>
> Sorry state of affairs. Not Linux itself, I rather enjoy using Linux.
> It's Linux advocacy I think is a complete mess.
I agree. I use it at work for quite a few things. Granted it's unstable
most the time and locks up almost every night (poor i810 drivers, perhaps?)
but in general, it's quite useful for a number of things. I can't do
half the stuff I can do on my Windows box, but it's still handy to have
around.
It's a big disservice to Linux that it's advocates are such arrogant
pricks and seem to think that they are somehow superior to "M$" or
"Windoze" users when, in fact, their OS is a hobbled piece of crap with
no real focus or area of excellence. Perhaps they should be more humble,
earn the respect of the other communities, establish some area of
dominance, then get cocky.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 10:19:47 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ingemar Lundin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:BgKu5.2270$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > No we have not. Windows GUI is slow, illogical and inconsistent. Look
at
> > the fancy newer stuff like Actide Desktop ans Channels.. nobody uses it
> and
> > if one does it just causes irritation. Look at dialogs like "Search" -
> > pretty messy for i dialog dont you think? (unfortunattely KDE emulates
> it).
> > Look at the "Start" button: You click on that one to close the system..
> > dont you think this is confusing? Try to make a new user right-click
with
> > their mouse on a icon.. They just dont get it. Try to make them resize
or
> > move a Windows. Doesnt work.
>
> Active desktop is a MS thing and can hardly be incorporated in to Linux...
>
> Exactly why do you think thats confusing?
>
> confusing for new users? well for a Linux user perhaps...
No, to a new computer user. Have you ever tried to teach someone how to use
the Windows user interfaces to a brand new adult computer users? I have, in
displaced workers retraining. They were taught graphical user interfaces
and command line interfaces, they invariably caught on to the command line
interface faster and were more productive sooner with it than the graphical
user interface.
We had to use the highest resolution mice available and had to be very picky
about the shape of the mice, to reduce the various problems they were having
in learning how to handle the devices. Some of the problems included:
Moving the mouse cursor to the right location without overshooting or
missing the target. The timing of double click so that the system will
interpret them *as* double clicks. Clicking without moving the mouse and
missing the target.
Some of the hardest question to answer in a way to make the user interface
sound sencible to them have been. If all these little picture (icons) are
so good and everybody is supposed to understand them why do they have those
names and descriptions under them? If the meaning of this picture is so
clear to everybody I guess I am the only one who can not understand it, but
why does it have those word (tool tips) come up when I leave the mouse
there? This is supposed to be easier, so why do I have to do all that with
the mouse to see the files on that floppy when could have just typed in "dir
a:\ /s"?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 08:51:48 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Kenny A. Chaffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> There are no alternatives,
>
> Bill is a jealous god.
True! But a teams of warriors from the Ta'Re with help from a independent
Ja'Fa can defeat him.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Popular Culture
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:40:54 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pg3ig$no$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8pboij$mup$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >A wonderful musical score, that fists in that catagory of music I
mentioned
>
> interesting metaphor 8^)
>
> >above, by a contempory group was for the movie Dune. I think the group
was
> >Devo?
>
> Toto
YES! Toto, that was the one. I suppose I should have rewatched the tape
before making my statement, but I didn't have the time. :-(
>
> Original music by
> Brian Eno (prophecy theme)
> Roger Eno (prophecy theme)
> Daniel Lanois (prophecy theme)
> Steve Lukather (as Toto)
> David Paich (as Toto)
> Marty Paich (additional music)
> Jeff Porcaro (as Toto)
> Mike Porcaro (as Toto)
> Steve Porcaro (as Toto)
> Joseph Williams (I) (as Toto)
>
> Dune (1984)
> http://us.imdb.com/Soundtracks?0087182
>
> Superb movie and music! Like much of Frank Herbert's work,
> it's about becoming *fully conscious*.
Strange thing is that the movie Dune was a film adaptation of Frank's book
from the 1960's and yet George Lucas tried to prevent the relase of the
movie claiming that the story was stolen from Star Wars. When in fact he
was already on the record of having based Star Wars partily on the Dune
novels.
I just which that the entire series of movies would have been converted to
film as it was first planned. A story that spanned 15,000 years! The only
character who was in every book was Duncan Idaho.
>
> "The sleeper must awaken!"
>
> I like the director's original version, with the intro by
> Princess Irulan (Virginia Madsen). It's her best scene, too.
Yes, in the books, the princess became the wife of Paul in a loveless
marriage for political reasons and Chani who became Paul's beloved concubine
and the mother of his childern. The princess came to love Paul belatedly as
so became the author of his history and as such the the early books were her
writings of Paul. Which of course is why she introduced the beginning of
Dune.
>
> In fact, there are a lot of strong female characters:
>
> Francesca Annis .... Lady Jessica
> Linda Hunt .... Shadout Mapes
> Sian Phillips .... Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam
> Sean Young .... Chani
>
> and at age 8 or 9,
>
> Alicia Witt .... Alia (as Alicia Roanne Witt)
Ah, Saint Alia of the Knife! The think on that the Reverend Mother was
correct, Alia was an adomonation. The Lady Jessica's was a Harkonan,
because her father was Baron Harkonan, and therefore he was the grandfather
of Alia and Paul. When awakened by taking the waters of life before birth,
see was unable to resist the memories and personalities of her ancestors
trying to life through her. The the Baron's personality came to the fore
and defended Alia from their onslaught. The personality then became her
mentor and then took her over entirely.
>
> http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Witt,+Alicia
>
>
------------------------------
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 17:31:25 GMT
rpm is not Linux alternative to winzip thats gzip/gunzip, rpm is the
alternative for .msi -files or rather .msi was invented by MS after rpm had
been around for awhile....strange he?
/IL
" (I know some hate rpm, but that is Linux's alterna=ive
to winzip, and does help newbies shy away from the tedium of compiling c
=ode.)"
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:24:06 -0500
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 12:26:26 -0400, sinister-catsup
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>not to be a negative nelly (Sorry, I hate flanders to) but,
>coulda-shoulda-woulda: You can argue the same thing towards Mac, if jobs had
>aggressively pushed the mac when he had his window of oppurtunity, we'd all be
>using macs now, but Mac never did get pushed, OS/2, same thing, technically the
>superior product of it's time, but IBM is a hardware company and lacked the
>ability to push it's poduct. Amiga is before my time.
Yep, Apple's another sad case. They were in the market before IBM/MS
and with a much better OS. Apple could very easily have been where MS
is right now if they'd just learned to stay focused on the
here-and-now instead of trying to be so far-future visionary and
artsy-fartsy.
They're still doing it, too. The art crowd may like the new
translucent Mac look, but to me it makes an otherwise nice machine
look like a cheap toy. They're probably also losing a lot of business
sales because the appearance clashes with standard corporate office
decor.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grega Bremec)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 17:30:49 GMT
...and Dave Martel used the keyboard:
>
>Commodore designed the most wonderful machines despite the limited
>technology of the day but kept throwing it all away with some of the
>worst marketing mistakes I've seen in the history of technology.
Same as with ARM and the Acorn/RiscOS thing. An excellent machine in
all points - performance, software & resource optimization, OS
interface, all flawless. Yet the marketing killed the cat once again...
--
Grega Bremec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gbsoft.org/
------------------------------
From: robert w hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:16:54 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Ghost
In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>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]
>
But, long before, there was OS9 level 2 on the 6809 - a system not to be
surpassed by Intel until the '386 (and Linux) ...
and coming up to date (well fairly) - what's wrong with keeping the
horrible M$ stuff but running it under win4lin under linux - thus
keeping windows 9x in its right place as an ordinary task in linux
user-mode - see enthusiastic thread on alt.os.linux
--
robert w hall
------------------------------
From: "Ville Niemi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Vs: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 17:43:03 GMT
I applaud your courage. Or is it just total indifference to the opinions of
others?
Seriously, the main problem is Microsoft's marketing strategy. Which
involves telling people how Win is better, easier to use, more advanced,
more innovative etc. This is of course typical marketing language, but it is
really irritating if you are trying to read the documentation. Or trying to
compare Win to some other platform. Or you get it repeated to you by someone
who doesn't know a thing about computers.
And yes Unix can be BROKEN down, but it isn't BROKEN and in need of fixing
from the beginning.
And yes, once (if) you get Win properly setup and stable it will run quite
nicely. Until you install something new, that is. When you do the system
once again might become unstable without you having any way to prevent it,
and nothing to do about except to try to fix it. (Uninstalling usually
doesn't help.)
And yes, this is mostly because application developers write substandard
code.
BUT... Microsoft is one of those application developers. And Microsoft
tries to make you use their applications as platform standard, which reduces
you're chances of shopping for quality software.
So your attempt to defend Microsoft against the 'lame' and unreasoning
whining on these newsgroups is a dud. People here have justified and
reasonable reasons not to like Microsoft and Windows. If you don't, it's
good for you, but has nothing to do with these NGs.
Still, its nice of you to point out that some people have no problems with
Windows, makes a good sanity check. Some of the people here propably need
it.
Ville
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised....
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:53:53 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Keith T. Williams in alt.destroy.microsoft;
[...]
>> >Then let me point out that since Stuart has done what he has claimed and
>> >since you have never provided any evidence of anything that you claim,
>> >your postings don't even reach the level of pathetic pablum, merely
>wishful
>> >thinking and rudeness.
>>
>> Sorry, no, *that's* post-modern thinking. Stuart has *claimed* that he
>> has done what he has claimed. If he wants to reduce his claim to 'it
>> didn't crash the computer every time I tried to use it', then we might
>> be close to getting to where his claim is not contradictory to the
>> facts. The facts are (I don't think you realize how broad and
>> substantial my experience is in this matter) that any implementation of
>> this kind of 'featuresome' Microsoft technology which doesn't
>> drastically reduce its scope of work all through the development in
>> order to satisfy any and every redefinition of 'success' necessary to
>> claim it, they fail. ALL of them.
>>
>Well, since we don't know what the original scope of the work was, nor
>do we have any great knowledge of the people involved, we are not fit
>to judge either way then are we.
You might not be. You may find this argument from ignorance sufficient.
I happen to deal with these issues (on a discouragingly frequent basis)
professionally, and cannot afford to simply say "we cannot know."
>It is entirely possible that the tasks that
>they set themselves, and their implementation of them entirely meet your
>standards of success.
If they had sufficiently narrowed down what they call 'success' to
something less than actual operational functionality, that is true. But
any measure of success which includes operational functionality (not
just having it work, but having the reason you want it to work
implemented and providing benefits on a routine basis which outweigh the
cost, including time and effort and also including modifications and
ensuing limitations to all other network systems) is simply not going to
be met with Microsoft systems.
>As for your statements regarding "post modern thinking", I read it, which
>is giving it more credence than I think that it deserves.
You stated that his claiming that he did something was proof it was
done; I pointed out that it was merely a claim, not proof he had done it
to any degree that anyone else would be happy with, or that it provided
any benefit other than his being able to claim to have done it.
If I took people's word for whether they had 'successfully' implemented
Microsoft crapware, I'd be a very ignorant and naive technologist.
People have been claiming that for fifteen years, based solely on the
fact that there is no alternative which would allow for comparison; in
those few cases where such an opportunity exists, Microsoft software has
routinely been shown to be crap.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Subject: Re: The Test: Dial-up Connections
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:02:18 -0400
In article <8p012v$jjs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>OK, so I finally did it... Tested two machines, one Linux and one Win98
>SE.
>
Your tests echo my experiences with other OS's. You could very easily subsitute
os/2 for win98 and the results would STILL be farily accurate.
--
*******************************************************************************
> A clean desk is a sign of a cluttered desk drawer. <
*******************************************************************************
> 1:05am up 0 days, 0:39:02, load: 22 processes, 83 threads. <
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
* ICQ# 76727806 *
*******************************************************************************
* Registered Linux User Number 185956 *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:18:55 -0400
In article <zFtu5.43236$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS7572420206.html
>
>Real preemptability (not the fake they have now),
>somewhat less than laughable SMP (as opposed to the
>laughable MacOS 9-ish SMP they have now)
>
--- snip ---
>Shall I go on?
>
>It's sad, really. It's sad that they bash on Microsoft for
>the same things they try to emulate (and do a shitty job
>of, BTW).
>
So... you felt COMPELLED to come down here from the windows groups to enlighten
us? Give me a break... go back and crawl under that microsoft rock, that you
so love...
--
*******************************************************************************
> A clean desk is a sign of a cluttered desk drawer. <
*******************************************************************************
> 1:05am up 0 days, 0:39:02, load: 22 processes, 83 threads. <
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
* ICQ# 76727806 *
*******************************************************************************
* Registered Linux User Number 185956 *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:21:56 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ingemar Lundin wrote:
>
>> Know what i would like?
>>
>> Linux kernel and shell plus Windows 2000:s GUI
>>
>> Yeah thats right....easy enough for inexperienced users, and still the
>> possibly to do some good ol' fashion die-hard nerd work in the shell (or
>> "behind the GUI", whatever you like)
>>
>> KDE and Gnome? well version 1.2 of Gnome comes a long way, but still not
>> easy enough for millions of Window users that Linux (hopefully) will
>> attract... still no gnome windowmanager and a whole lot of inconsistencies
>> in the GUI.(AND rather buggy still)
>>
>> there you have it
>
>I'd rather see OS/2's workplace shell than windows desktop. I could drag
>proggies to another folder and all the system configuration info would
>automatically follow them around (except entries in the config.sys file);
>another point windoze disappointed me on (crap multitasking being another)
>when I found it did not have it. Still I suppose these arguments could go on
>forever.
>
Now you're talking! The WPS on Linux would be terrific! But... have you ever
used the gui on NEXT? That might, just might, be more port-able than the wps
and thus more likely to appear on Linux.
--
*******************************************************************************
> A clean desk is a sign of a cluttered desk drawer. <
*******************************************************************************
> 1:05am up 0 days, 0:39:02, load: 22 processes, 83 threads. <
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
* ICQ# 76727806 *
*******************************************************************************
* Registered Linux User Number 185956 *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
