Linux-Advocacy Digest #386, Volume #29 Sun, 1 Oct 00 20:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: what happens when an old programmer dies? (Thomas Tonino)
Interesting Document. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (dc)
Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51???? ("Philo")
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! ("Ingemar Lundin")
What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Linux RedHat 7.0 or Win2000? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51???? (test@nospam)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Thomas Tonino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.life.internet,alt.obituaries,alt.society.funerary,alt.windows98,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.society.futures,gnu.misc.discuss,sci.geo.satellite-nav
Subject: Re: what happens when an old programmer dies?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 00:04:16 +0200
Dan Jacobson wrote:
> So that's what I was telling my ~60 year old GPS [you know, the handheld
> navigation thing] programmer pal. I said [Bob], you've got a great package,
> you even allow folks to download it and use a limited set of features if not
> registered yet. However, if one day you um, kick the bucket, all I see is
> that effort going down the drain. Sure you've made a buck you can give your
> kids, but it sure seems a waste to see all that software go down the drain:
> you won't be around to add the features that will keep it competitive next
> year; you won't be around to port it to Win2001.5, you haven't got a vice
> guru or student primed to carry on your legacy, and I don't suppose your wife
> will be any good at helping netters if one day you aren't around to hit the
> power on switch.
>
> Comments? Have I said anything out of date as usual?
Well... if your project is teamwork you can be sure the team mate will
continue development. It is also the only way - it is unlikely that
someone will just pick up the package and continue, unless there is good
reason and the copyright situation is entirely clear to everyone.
One possibility is to put the software in your deed and say domate
source to public domain. That assumes that the source can be found in a
comprehensible state after you passed away. It may help to put the
source of every realease version with your notary.
But that doesn't assure someone is going to help with the code. So the
best bet would be to find a team to work on the software before it is
too late. Whether that is a GNU/OpeSourceish team or just someone who
takes care of some details doesn't matter - as long as he has a feel for
what everything does, how it is built, and what the intricate parts are.
Followups set as this is one CRAZY crosspost.
Thomas
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Interesting Document.
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 22:40:28 GMT
Come read a document which has the correct answers.
It will definitely help you clarify your thought process when
it comes to the purchase of software.
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
------------------------------
From: dc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 17:50:02 -0500
On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 16:42:40 -0500, Bryant Brandon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dc
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>@>@> The choice is not mine--I don't own/run the machines. Why does
>@>@>Windows need a third party utility to do something that makes perfect
>@>@>sense?
>@>@
>@>@You don't. In a real enterprise system (like I've seen, but you
>@>@haven't) typically software to do that is at the very bottom of the
>@>@food chain - ie unimportant.
>@>
>@> Seems to be rather important if it can render the machine unusable.
>@
>@Do you have any proof that it can do that?
>
> Machine #21, AUDB room #307c, UNT campus, Texas. IOW, the very
>machine we've been discussing this entire thread.
The *ONLY* thing we know about the machines in question is that you're
getting a disk error @ login. Aside from that, *EVERYTHING* else
mentioned in this thread is pure conjecture.
>@>@>@>I'm trying to find out what you
>@>@>@>really meant to say.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@I think it's been very obvious to anyone with even passing knowledge
>@>@>@of 9x/NT.
>@>@>
>@>@> Well, it's not.
>@>@
>@>@It is. It's merely that you don't have that passing knowledge that
>@>@you find it difficult.
>@>
>@> That's unprovable. Also, you are not a very good writer. It isn't
>@>my fault I can't understand what you're trying to say. Unloading the
>@>blame on me, and accusing me of just being ignorant doesn't change the
>@>fact that your articles are sometimes poorly written and very confusing.
>@
>@You are very nontechnical and you're asking me to explain some very,
>@very technical items. Hence, my suggestion to you is to read books on
>@the subject, so that you can become familiar with the terminology.
>
> Actually, I can read technical writings quite well. And I am quite
>familiar with many of the terms tossed around here. But you have been
>giving contradictory information, which no amount of experience on my
>part will get around unless I just flat out tell you that you're
>lying/misinformed. Hell, you can't even ask a simple question: see
>below.
I haven't given contradictory information. I've given information
that could apply in a variety of different scenarios, and you got
confused.
>@>@>@>@>@Do you have any administrative experience at all?
>@>@>@>@>
>@>@>@>@> Yes.
>@>@>@>@
>@>@>@>@At what, exactly?
>@>@>@>
>@>@>@> My stuff. Net BSD on my IIci talking to my Quadra. Two machines.
>@>@>@>
>@>@>@>Two users: root, and me.
>@>@>@> Therefore, I have administrative experience.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@Not even close. You've set up a single BSD machine, something that
>@>@>@typically takes about 30 minutes to a few hours and requires no or a
>@>@>@very light technical skillset; administrative experience would be
>@>@>@doing that for a job (say, during summertime) 40 hours a week, setting
>@>@>@up 20 or 30 users a day and doing permissions, NFS, CIFS, YP, and
>@>@>@other 'stuff' day in and day out.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@By that logic, one can be an administrator because he's set up OS X
>@>@>@beta. That's silly.
>@>@>
>@>@> You asked: "Do you have any administrative experience at all?" I
>@>@>said, "Yes." Did I lie? Nope, you just asked a bad question. How am
>@>@>I
>@>@>supposed to know you meant, "Do you have any administrative experience
>@>@>that I would consider impressive?"
>@>@
>@>@Don't be silly. By that logic anyone running Windows 95 is an account
>@>@operator / administrator (because hey, you can have a "multi-user"
>@>@(heh) Win95, too!)
>@>
>@> Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer....
>@
>@You were being stupid. The question was perfectly valid.
>
> The question: "Do you have any administrative experience at all?"
> The answer: "Yes."
> You didn't qualify it, but you meant to. Hence, it's a stupid
>question.
You were being stupid, juvenile, and a smartass. "Administrative
experience" means administering systems, not setting up a single OS on
an old machine with "Root and me" as two users.
>@>@>@>@No, you're more than qualified to call your desktop support staff
>@>@>@>@'shit'. Since you have no idea what's wrong with the machine, any
>@>@>@>@other analysis you could make would be silly.
>@>@>@>
>@>@>@> 1. My support staff IS shit.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@That, folks, is the root of the problem.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@> 2. They did just fine with 95/98.
>@>@>@
>@>@>@Immaterial. See #1.
>@>@>
>@>@> Very material. 95/98--OK, w2k--failure. Staff hasn't changed,
>@>@>hardware hasn't changed, usage hasn't changed, even the damn weather
>@>@>hasn't changed. All that's changed is the OS.
>@>@
>@>@...according to you, who isn't an administrator, can't look at the
>@>@machine in question, and generally is clueless about NT / Microsoft
>@>@OSs. Sorry, but that's not an authoritative answer.
>@>
>@> Umm, nope. That has nothing to do with it.
>@> DC, is it just me, or has out conversation slipped away from
>@>hollering at eachother? It's a nice change, don't get me wrong, but
>@>it's still a little odd.
>@
>@I'm trying to have a technical discussion with someone who is quite
>@non-technical AND is assigning blame left and right to a machine which
>@may or may not have a problem with quotas, profiles, or disk space -
>@but we don't know - and may or may not have other problems - which we
>@also don't know - and you refuse to get desktop support out there to
>@fix it - and you're calling THIS odd?
>@
>
> You make far too many assumptions. I've been bugging the support
>staff for the entire semester. Unfamiliar with windows' methods != lack
>of technical knowledge. The issue long ago turned from broke machine to
>bugging you about your continual contradictions. Then, even when by all
>common sense, what windows is doing is stupid, you accuse me of not
>understanding, yet you don't explain why, you accuse my support staff of
>being incompetent, then you turn around completely and accuse me of
>assigning blame willy-nilly?
> I don't mean to be rude, but you sure do seem to be an asshole.
...because:
A) You can't be bothered to try to go to someone to fix the problem
(like, say, the dean of com-sci departments, for example)?
or because
B) Everything we've said here is a guess based on the slim
information you've been able to provide?
Which of those? Without an admin password, I really can't help you.
Hence, I suggest you bother someone who can - like the abovementioned
dean. If you're paying for the course, you should have a working PC.
------------------------------
From: "Philo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51????
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:48:22 -0500
all right...i'm up to the challenge...
so i'll tell you what you can do in NT that you can't do in Gnome...
ahh...just a minute now...
don't rush me because
i will tell you something you can do in NT that you can't do in KDE
uuum
well..
urp
a......
well i'll tell you what you can do in NT that you just can't do in Linux
at all '''so there'''
ah...
you can't click on a start button with the little Microsoft flag on it...
see smarty;;;
i told you so
--
Philo
website: www.plazaearth.com/philo
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 22:57:50 GMT
"George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
news:jBKB5.1559$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yes... If that is what you are saying. That's not what I'm saying though.
>
> Windows 3x and 95 were considerably more stable for the average consumer
> than 98 and above... 98 was fair. SE STINKS!
>
> --
> George
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "Bruce Malmat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:WyuB5.308$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > When declaring a Microsoft operating system to be unstable, it is not
> > necessary to include the suffix.
> >
> > For example, one need not say that Windows 98 "SE" is unstable, or the
> > Windows "98" is unstable.
> >
> > Simply say "Windows is unstable". This applies to all flavors, all
> versions,
> > all releases.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > --
> > George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:nIpB5.4060$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I don't know about Linux, I have never tried it.
> > I'm a very small business and really don't need anything other than
> > something that will run my simple Quick Books business program, an Email
> > program, and a web browser. W98 did a fairly good job, but had problems.
> SE
> > crashes 5 times more than 98 did. When I use Netscape rather than IE, I
> have
> > considerably less crashes unless I crank up an MS application such as MS
> > Word .
> >
> > The bottom line is that SE is simply unstable. I don't care what anyone
> says
> > in it's defense. When you can't run a simple home based business program
> on
> > a OS without it constantly crashing, there is something wrong.
> >
> > When I first purchased my new Dell Inspiration 7500 series lap top, the
> only
> > software it had other than Norton AntiVirus, which I immediately removed
> > without even once using it, was MS software. Even before I installed
> > QuickBooks 6, the system locked up while I was using IE5.
> >
> > If Linux or someone else had an affordable OS for the general public and
> > "could market it," I'm sure that I'm not the only one who's business
they
> > would have.
> >
> > I agree totally that if an OS can't run well written software
> "particularly
> > it's own," it isn't a very good OS...
> > --
> > George
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > "Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blacknight) wrote in
> > > <lq1B5.3924$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > > >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.
> > >
> > > What you're saying then is that you shouldn't run too many
applications
> on
> > > Windows 98 SE in case they crash it? Isn't that the whole point of
using
> a
> > > computer?!?
> > >
> > > Our Linux Advocate friends here would say that Windows 98 SE can't be
a
> > > very good operating system if it can't hack it running a few
> applications
> > > in the background (something Linux does very well).
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pete Goodwin
> > > ---
> > > Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> > > My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
> > >
george....?....win95 more stable than win98???
you must have really fucking it hard with notepad then?
;)
/IL
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 23:08:57 GMT
Today, we live in a world where Windows occupied around 1.2 billion
computers world wide.
Linux occupies only 200 million or so computers world wide.
Yet, despite these figures there have been a number of Wintroll idiots
constantly jabbing
away at Linux advocates as if they were trying to save their lives.
I ask the question, once again, WHY BOTHER!
If they truely are a dead species then why continually come over to
C.O.L.A. and take
a leak!
Your not going to convince these people they need to leave and further
your not going
to convince me I need to leave Linux either.... Linux is the forfront
of software evolution.
I'm not going back to the cave known as windows.
I'm not going to do it. To do so would be stupid.
Right now we have some of the most hidious, rediculous crap going on by
Wintrolls
I've ever seen on the linux advocacy group.
Why? If Linux will never be a global dominate operating system they why
bother.
In the words of the Wintroll we're all dead already.
So why bother? Windows is the obviously the winner in their book and
Linux simply
doesn't have a chance.
Why all the spam.
The spam is occuring because Linux is winning and they don't like that.
They have Microsoft stock or they've invested too much money in
Microsoft software and it's pissing them off.
Linux is the future. Microsoft is the past.
And I don't care if you want to accept it or not.
You opinion will not change the facts.
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 1 Oct 2000 23:20:21 GMT
On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 13:48:08 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>And cost of living in NJ is almost TWICE that of Texas...
>so...quit your belly-achin'...
Hogwash. Austin TX where I was is not at all cheap these days. Rents
near campus are about $400-450 for a small one bedroom apartment. In Jersey
city NJ, I'm in a two bedroom apartment that costs $690- a month.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[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: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 23:24:58 GMT
"Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> chrisv wrote:
>
> > "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >My bet is that the legal conduct of Microsoft will be found to be
> > >stellar and perfectly "pro-competitive", once it's heard by a panel of
wiser
> > >judges instead of a clueless and collusive lower court judge.
> >
> > Yech. Scum. Let me guess, you make a fat living with Microsoft
> > products somehow?
> >
> > Anyways, I've had lawyers tell me that findings of fact like those
> > that were made in the Microsoft case are almost never overturned.
>
> You know lawyers of the caliber of David Boies (no longer doing the
Microsoft
> case)? Have you heard that the Federal anti-trust lead has stepped down
too?
> How about Reno? How long will she last? Understand that no matter how
corrupt
> Microsoft was it was their further corruption at the behest of the US
government
> that will get them out. Microsoft had virtually no cash contributions to
the
> players in DC a few years ago. Now they are like #5 (an appropriate
position
> considering their wealth). The anti-trust case came about for the reasons
that
> Jackson's conviction did -- Microsoft refused to play ball with the
bureaucrats
> and pay their lunch ticket like McNealy, Ellison and Case did. That's
what left
> them open. Now they have adapted and are countering the case on it's real
> ground. Microsoft scared Washington and Washington listened to
Microsoft's
> competitors. They worst that could happen is that the scared bureaucrats
would
> get their palms greased. So government wins by corrupting Microsoft even
more.
>
not a us resident i cant claim to know that much of american politics (other
than thru media here in sweden, and thats alot ;)) but please tell me that
its LITTLE more honest and straightforward than that??
.....someone?
/IL
> --
> Mike Byrns
> Microsoft Windows Software Engineer
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 1 Oct 2000 23:26:51 GMT
On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 13:47:03 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>Then why the fuck did you accept such a lousy deal?
It's difficult to properly appraise the deal. I didn't know
exactly how much it cost to live, and it's difficult to tell
when you're in another country. ( I was *not* in the US when I
accepted )
As soon as I realised that it was a lousy deal, I got out and
got out quickly. I started applying to other schools at the
end of first semester.
>Good God man, did someone put a gun to your head, or are you just
>whining
>because you agreed to an idiotic deal.
I got out of the deal as soon as I realised that it was idiotic. As
did a lot of the other top students. Of course, they're not obliged
to make effort to draw good grad students ( and good TAs ) to the state
of TX. I guess it's OK if they don't
take education very seriously in texas, but I don't see why GWB is
pushing himself as a pro-education guy after presiding over such a
system. It's a charade.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 1 Oct 2000 23:28:23 GMT
On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 13:43:36 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> And why has the economy been so good for the last 6 years??
>
>Correction: 17 years!
Reagonom^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HRevisionism at its finest
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Linux RedHat 7.0 or Win2000?
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 23:37:33 GMT
Today I tried to upgrade Linux RH 6.0 to Linux RH 7.0.
Already from the beginning I couldn't use GUI mode (the screen was
full with overwritten picture), so I switched to text mode.
Upgrade was very smoot, except that when it start in KDE, GUI is
unreadable again. Just a big mess on the screen.
Someone have an idea how to start Linux without X-Win?
Zalek
------------------------------
From: test@nospam
Subject: Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51????
Date: 1 Oct 2000 15:39:49 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charlie says...
>Show me one thing you can do with NT 4.0 you can't do with KDE or
>GNOME folks!
>One thing....
>
the problem with some of the linux advocates is that they are so
arrogant.
I use linux for 5 years now, it is my main platform, but the windows
desktop is still easier to use for 95% of the people.
I have tried all the file manager on linux. from kde to gnome to
ezel and others. They are all still years behind the windows file
manager.
for me this means nothing becuase I use the command line for everything,
but many people do not.
when a file manager becomes as easy to use on linux as the one on
windows, I'll say linux has arrived to the desktop. Untill that day
comes, windows will remain dominant on the desktop.
I guess a file manager must be hard to write, else we would had decent
one on linux.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
