Linux-Advocacy Digest #357, Volume #29 Fri, 29 Sep 00 13:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
("Blacknight")
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
("Blacknight")
Java (off-topic?) (Was: Re: Because programmers...) (Karri Kalpio)
Re: How low can they go...? (chrisv)
Re: programming languages and design (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (Mike Byrns)
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Chris
Sherlock)
Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within. (rs)
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: programming languages and design (FM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Blacknight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:07:43 GMT
Are you sure you don't have anything else installed on your machine at all?
I'm willing to bet that there are probably several small programs running in
the background or something like that. however this is not my point. my
point is that far to often the OS is blamed for the crash when in reality it
is the software, or some other reason (ie hardware failure). there are so
many reasons for a computer to crash. And the OS usually has very little to
do with.
"George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:v00B5.1223$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Well, it would appear that even your information isn't worth the paper
it's
> written on...
> It just so happens that the only additional software that I have installed
> is MS Word 2000 and QuickBooks 6, which I have been using since it came
out.
> My system constantly crashes. Just yesterday it started giving a Blue
screen
> error on boot down. I often get an error when closing Word. I guess you
are
> right about the poorly programmed applications. In my case they are all MS
> applications.
>
> George
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> George
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "Blacknight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:RvTA5.3419$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I'm Sorry but I disagree with you completely I am running Windows 98se
and
> > have not experienced a lock up in over a year. Believe it, it's true.
Lock
> > ups are caused by poorly programed applications, not by Windows98. The
key
> > to a stable operating system is purchasing reliable software and keeping
> to
> > a minimun the number of TSR's, and applications running in the
background
> of
> > your machine. If you are constantly installing and uninstalling
> > programs/TSR's your OS will become unstable eventually weather you are
> using
> > Windows98, Linux or even MacOS.
> >
> > "Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Malmat) wrote in
> > > <uMaA5.4594$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > > >Axiom: Real operating systems do not lock up all the time.
> > > >Fact: Windows locks up all the time.
> > > >Conclusion: Windows is not a real operating system.
> > >
> > > Which version of Windows?
> > >
> > > You do realise Windows was never designed as a "real" operating system
> > with
> > > memory protection etc.? That every process can see system space and
can
> > > overwrite it. It was designed thus to support backwards compatibility
> with
> > > older software.
> > >
> > > Windows NT/2000 is a very different story.
> > >
> > > >If you want reliability, you gotta get Unix or Linux. My HP Unix
> > > >systems, used in business and manufacturing applications, never hang.
> > > >The only downtime is:
> > >
> > > Or OpenVMS
> > > Or Windows NT/2000.
> > >
> > > >Unfortunately, Unix/Linux makes a lousy desktop. If you want fun, you
> > > >gotta have Windows.
> > > >
> > > >Tough choices.
> > >
> > > Not really. If you want fun, run Windows 98 SE. If you want
reliability
> > > (but can run most of the same software, and for the first time, a load
> > more
> > > games) try Windows 2000.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pete Goodwin
> > > ---
> > > Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> > > My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Blacknight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:11:29 GMT
Yes you are correct. Windows 98 doesn't NEED TSR's any more but alot of
computers have then loaded regardless.b Maybe the term I was looking for was
backgroup applications. Anyway the more programs you have running on start
up increases the probably of a crash. Anyway what I was getting at is that
people need to realize that the majority of time there is a crash it doesn't
have anything to do with the OS.
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blacknight) wrote in
> <RvTA5.3419$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >I'm Sorry but I disagree with you completely I am running Windows 98se
> >and have not experienced a lock up in over a year. Believe it, it's
> >true. Lock ups are caused by poorly programed applications, not by
> >Windows98. The key to a stable operating system is purchasing reliable
> >software and keeping to a minimun the number of TSR's, and applications
> >running in the background of your machine. If you are constantly
> >installing and uninstalling programs/TSR's your OS will become unstable
> >eventually weather you are using Windows98, Linux or even MacOS.
>
> After a year of running my Windows 98 SE system is starting to crack
around
> the edges. Recently, the scan registry program decided there was a problem
> and reverted my system to a configuration from several months ago. I'm
> still picking up the pieces of that one.
>
> I would not say I am constantly installing/uninstalling programs. As for
> TSR's, they went out yonks ago - this is Windows 98, it doesn't need DOS
> style TSR's anymore.
>
> As for your assertion that the same will eventually take out Linux or even
> MacOS, I couldn't say, but I doubt it. Windows 98 SE was never designed as
> a real OS - it doesn't have proper memory protection for applications,
only
> Windows 2000 does, and does Linux.
>
> My beef about Linux is the lack of decent software for it, and the desktop
> seems to be behind Windows.
>
> --
> Pete Goodwin
> ---
> Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
>
------------------------------
From: Karri Kalpio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Java (off-topic?) (Was: Re: Because programmers...)
Date: 29 Sep 2000 17:07:10 +0300
Roberto Selbach Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>>>> "Donovan" == Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Donovan> Java isn't really that much different from C++ ( in fact
> I have the same impression. Actually, a Java program is very similar
> to a good C++ program.
>
> C++ is *much* faster, though.
Actually, nowadays it's not. The new JIT compilers are quite decent.
We (== R&D staff @ More Magic) have done quite a lot performance
testing with different JVMs and Java 1.1 with a good JIT is only about
10-20% slower in number crunching (our test case being mailny
encryption speed). Granted, using the AWT is slower than Motif...
And Sun's Java 2 JVM (JDK 1.2) is noticeably faster than the 1.1.
As a side note, already 1 1/2 years ago, Symantec's Java native
compiler produced code that was about 5% faster than the test case
written in C and compiled with C++ Builder. Unfortunately, that's
only available on Windows.
--karri
--
/"\ : Karri Kalpio
\ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X Against HTML Mail : [+358] (40) 5926895 (mobile)
/ \ : [+358] (9) 75111771 (work)
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[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: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:18:19 GMT
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ohh.. and your pathetic "finding of fact" judge is going to look even more
>assinine to his superiors when they review his handling and conclusions in
>the case next year. Especially since part of his findings have already been
>ruled upon by them and ignored by Jackson in the trial.
>
>It's going to be a fun filled year, topped off with a huge victory for the
>freedom to innovate. :-))
How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
beyond me. These people are evil. Don't you know that? They didn't
get to where they are by playing fair. Do you really think that
playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time? Do
you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
anyone else's?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: programming languages and design
Date: 29 Sep 2000 08:26:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, but it's not as though these low-level features actually allow
> C programmers to do powerful things. C pales in comparison to
> languages like Scheme, ML, which are not only more elegant, but also
> much more powerful.
Depends what you mean by "powerful" since C and the other languages
you contrast it with are all Turing-complete, and hence equivalent in
terms of computational power. Which goes to show that there's more to
this business than computational power... :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- The guy who sells me my audio hardware explained that a computer will never
produce the same level of sound quality that a stereo will b/c stereo have
transistors and sound cards don't. --Matthew Garson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 09:55:35 -0500
chrisv wrote:
>
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Ohh.. and your pathetic "finding of fact" judge is going to look even more
> >assinine to his superiors when they review his handling and conclusions in
> >the case next year. Especially since part of his findings have already been
> >ruled upon by them and ignored by Jackson in the trial.
> >
> >It's going to be a fun filled year, topped off with a huge victory for the
> >freedom to innovate. :-))
>
> How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
> beyond me.
A million shareholders can't be wrong.
> These people are evil. Don't you know that? They didn't
> get to where they are by playing fair.
It's a dog eat dog world out there until the pack of mutts teams up with
the dog catcher against the Rotweiler they all aspire to be.
> Do you really think that
> playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time?
25 years? I think that's enough time when you capitalize on each
opportunity you have the vision to make for yourself.
> Do
> you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
> anyone else's?
Yes. They are better suited to the markets they targeted and
cultivated. Leave the Linux and the Mac where Jackson said -- in the
niches.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:00:57 -0500
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : True. Yes, the average american household is in debt...but, it's
> : for the purpose of paying of real estate.
>
> Most people in our line of work could afford to pay cash for a house
> if they would live within their means. So could most others in the
> middle class. When they choose not to, I conclude that they too are
> acting unwisely, and to their own detriment, in their use/abuse of
> debt.
You've been working for that bank too long.
> Doesn't hurt me a bit - in fact since I work for a bank, it helps me -
> but with just a bit more frugality and careful planning, most
> middle-class people could easily spend most of their working lives
> benefiting from, instead of being hurt by, compound interest.
What's your definition of middle class?
> : This is different than, say, going into hock to play the horses
> : for another week.
>
> I agree that they are different, but only in degree, not in kind.
Yeah, with the bank you're sure to lose :-)
> Note: for people who genuinely could not afford a home without going
> into debt, and can realistically expect to increase their earning
> potential over time so that the mortgage becomes a dwindling portion
> of their income and expenses, I don't object to their taking out
> mortgages, as long as it is for a home they can genuinely afford, and
> not one that will keep them in debt for the rest of their lives.
That's' the American dream dude. Manufactured by the banking industry.
> But for most people, loans for cars and computers and TVs and other
> depreciating consumer items are just plain stupid. These should be
> financed via savings, not debt.
While every greasy advertiser uses every trick in the book to separate
you from that hard earned cash? That might work for folks socking
greenbacks in their mattress in Montana but the media pressures on the
coasts are a full time job to combat.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 11:40:54 -0400
"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Ohh.. and your pathetic "finding of fact" judge is going to look even
more
> >assinine to his superiors when they review his handling and conclusions
in
> >the case next year. Especially since part of his findings have already
been
> >ruled upon by them and ignored by Jackson in the trial.
> >
> >It's going to be a fun filled year, topped off with a huge victory for
the
> >freedom to innovate. :-))
>
> How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
> beyond me. These people are evil. Don't you know that?
Who's evil? Is it all 30,000 of them that are evil? Just a few....what?
Could you elaborate on who is evil at Microsoft, and what they do that you
consider to be evil?
>They didn't
> get to where they are by playing fair. Do you really think that
> playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time? Do
> you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
> anyone else's?
By that logic none of the industry leaders must have played fair, because
otherwise they wouldn't be larger than their competitors. Why is Dell so
huge? Why is the CEO the richest man on earth under 40? That's not enough
time to become the most succesfull in terms of income, by your logic.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 02:42:13 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
How much do you think I make?
Common Lisp? Wooo... I've seen a bit of Lisp and it looks like line
noise :) Maybe one day when I get around to it I will have a look at
these languages. I've heard pretty good things about Scheme and Lisp,
but that's about it.
Chris
FM wrote:
>
> Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Like what? Java? Sure, I'll give it a whirl (maybe one day) but I *know*
> >that I am not much of a coder...
>
> Well I don't *code* much at all either. And I was thinking
> of languages like Scheme, ML, Dylan, and even Common Lisp.
> Java is too restrictive and not nearly powerful enough, for
> my taste.
>
> >Right now I am just a humble printer support person for Epson... :)
>
> But I'm sure you make a lot more money than I do :)
>
> Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rs)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within.
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 08:40:29 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:38:42 -0700, Lee Reynolds wrote:
>> Aaron Kulkis has a bizarre conspiracy theory. According to his conspiracy
>> theory, there is a sinister international communist conspiracy to destroy the
>> US education system by sending in communists to infiltrate the NEA.
>
>No...there's no need for direct involvement of the KGB.
>Simple mind-control techniques work... post-hypnotic suggestion of,
>shall we say...sympathetic "useful idiots" (as Lenin described them).
"Bizarre" scarcely describes such a ridiculous idea. How about "paranoid
delusion?"
rs
--
Sola Virtus Nobilitat
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 16:26:25 -0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Philo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>...don't have alife right now...
>but i had one...and probably will again soon
>
Don't count on it. Once you get into computers you are
pretty much done having 'a life'. ;-)
If it wasn't for the fact that the girl I ended up
marrying had enough guts to almost literally club me over
the head and drag me out of my computer room, I probably
wouldn't even have the semblance of a life. At least now
when I get frustrated with my computers I have someone to
complaign to about it :-).
Oh, and BTW, I'm only 26 at the moment, and gave up my
life for computers about five years ago. Before that I
was a guitar geek (and it's still my favorite hobby).
So, why are guitar geeks considered cool for their
aloofness, and computer geeks are considered outcasts and
wierd? Must have something to do with the stage lighting.
I have yet to see good stage lighting on a computer geek's
desk.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:33:39 -0400
chrisv wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>
> >>When they choose not to, I conclude that they too are acting unwisely,
> >>and to their own detriment, in their use/abuse of debt.
> >
> >For one thing, the debt to buy a house is subsidized by the government
> >through income tax deductions, lowering the effective interest rate by
> >30% or so. Further, the house and land gains value, usually at a rate
> >that's comparable to the interest. So a mortage is a decent deal for
> >most people, compared to renting for the same period of time.
>
> Exactly. "Saving up" to pay cash for a house is actually STUPID. You
> are MUCH better off to borrow the money, live in the house, get the
> tax breaks, and watch inflation reduce the value of you debt while
> increasing the value of the house.
Since Greenspan took the helm of the fed, there's been almost zero
depreciation of the US dollar.
Is there inflation? Yes...but 2% inflation with 2% growth of the
economy means ZERO loss of purchasing power
(inflation is in reference to the money supply, NOT prices).
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:34:49 -0400
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> "Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
> >
> > But for most people, loans for cars and computers and TVs and other
> > depreciating consumer items are just plain stupid. These should be
> > financed via savings, not debt.
>
> While every greasy advertiser uses every trick in the book to separate
> you from that hard earned cash?
Just say "no"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [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: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 16:36:14 -0000
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:11:23 -0500, James Stutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 14:43:22 GMT, D'Arcy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"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.
>> >
>> >Oops I didn't have to look far - that was the first one I picked off
>> >my shelf...
>>
>> Don't believe everything you read in a contract.
>>
>
>A shrink-wrapped LA isn't actually a contract. More of a threat. There's
>an
That may or may not matter as some things are simply not
enforcable even if the contract is otherwise valid. Sleazy
people put clauses in contracts in the hope that they will
be able to take advantage of the ignorant.
>arrogance toward the consumer that seems to pervade the entire software
>industry....
--
Cats are smarter than dogs. You can't make eight cats pull a sled through
the snow.
When the candles are out all women are fair.
-- Plutarch
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[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: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 16:41:50 GMT
"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Ohh.. and your pathetic "finding of fact" judge is going to look even
more
> >assinine to his superiors when they review his handling and conclusions
in
> >the case next year. Especially since part of his findings have already
been
> >ruled upon by them and ignored by Jackson in the trial.
> >
> >It's going to be a fun filled year, topped off with a huge victory for
the
> >freedom to innovate. :-))
>
> How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
> beyond me. These people are evil. Don't you know that? They didn't
> get to where they are by playing fair. Do you really think that
> playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time? Do
> you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
> anyone else's?
Having worked there, I can confirm that they go around slaughtering babies
and eating the entrails of goats. They're evil. All of them. EVIL EVIL EVIL.
There's 30,000 employees there. That's CONCENTRATED evil.
Jeez...
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 29 Sep 2000 16:05:31 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How much do you think I make?
Well you don't have to make much at all to beat me. Check where my
messages are coming from.
>Common Lisp? Wooo... I've seen a bit of Lisp and it looks like line
>noise :) Maybe one day when I get around to it I will have a look at
>these languages. I've heard pretty good things about Scheme and Lisp,
>but that's about it.
Scheme's simply awesome.
Common Lisp, I have dubious feelings about, but it
seems to allow people to get real work done, in a
portable manner.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 29 Sep 2000 16:02:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roberto Selbach Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> "FM" == FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> FM> Well I don't *code* much at all either. And I was thinking of
> FM> languages like Scheme, ML, Dylan, and even Common Lisp. Java
> FM> is too restrictive and not nearly powerful enough, for my
> FM> taste.
>What exactly do you mean by restrictive? I think Java is a fantastic
>language in terms of design. Sure it is formal (you might say it is
>_too_ formal) but that encourages good design. As for power, I think
>Java is a very powerful language. What do you feel it lacks?
Well by "power" I really mean an ability to do much with
less code. As for features, things like first-class methods,
more allowance for introspection, multiple inheritance,
multiple-polymorphism, parameteric polymorphism, etc, would
have helped out a lot. Having to explicitly cast before you
can call a method that doesn't exist for the static type of
the variable is painful too, especially since it buys nothing
for the programmer, though it makes an implementation
considerably simpler. In fact lifting that explicit cast
would bring parameteric polymorphism to Java...
Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: programming languages and design
Date: 29 Sep 2000 16:08:46 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, but it's not as though these low-level features actually allow
>> C programmers to do powerful things. C pales in comparison to
>> languages like Scheme, ML, which are not only more elegant, but also
>> much more powerful.
>Depends what you mean by "powerful" since C and the other languages
>you contrast it with are all Turing-complete, and hence equivalent in
>terms of computational power. Which goes to show that there's more to
>this business than computational power... :^)
Well, yeah, power means different things to different people.
I'd define it as ability to do complex things in a short amount
of time. Or ability to do much with less.
Dan.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
