Linux-Advocacy Digest #516, Volume #29 Sun, 8 Oct 00 05:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? (David M. Butler)
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Sam)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: welcome to the world of objects (FM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David M. Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 03:48:10 -0400
Aaron Ginn wrote:
> Now it's your turn. What do you use your desktop for, and why does
> you OS do the job better than the alternatives?
I use Linux for most of my stuff. Do my word processing, internet
browsing, email, usenet, a couple games (I'm not a big gamer, so I don't
mind the limited selection right now), some programming, etc. Currently I
only use windows to download the pictures from my digital camera, since
Linux doesn't work with it yet. Why does it work better? I'm not sure
that it does, necessarily, but it works good enough for what I do. I do
have my reasons, of course. First off, something in my computer dislikes
Windows and causes blue screens more than I'd like. Second, my fiance
likes to have her own "computer", which simply means having her own home
directory and settings. Third, I just bought a house, an engagement ring, a
car, and had 4 cats spayed/neutered and don't really feel like picking up
Win2k to try it out. :P
I like 'em both, just don't usually use 'em both.
D. Butler
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: 08 Oct 2000 07:45:04 GMT
>it is not too likely they'd want to supply the source code as one could
>easily disable the ad banners then...
>and to not supply the source code would be against the priciples behind
>linux (as i understand them)
People prefer open source, but they'll make do without. Corel and Loki seem to
prove this.
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
DC2.Dw Gm L280c W+ T90k Sks,wl Cma-,wbk Bsu#/fl A+++ Fr++ Nu M/ O H++ $+ Fo++
R++ Ac+ J-- S-- U? I++ V+ Q++[thoughtspeech] Tc++
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 07:52:14 GMT
Dolly wrote:
<snip>
> Only problem is, according to IDC, Windows numbers
> are slipping backward... ie: -3%, -15%, -10% (9X/ME,
> IIShit, NT/2K) or perhaps the second one was -13%
> on iDC and -15% on some web server monitoring
> and stats page... and declining.
You're going to post a link to back that claim up right? I'd be interested to see
their sources and methodologies and the sites sampled. I think it's funny that
with that kind of news to report, none of the media outlets have picked it up.
Sounds like bullshit to me but I'll retract that when that link is posted.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 8 Oct 2000 07:47:25 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I despise languages where the language designer had the hubris to
>assume that he can think of everything that could ever possibly
>be useful to do, and therefore provides no mechanism to break out
>of the limiting shell he builds for programmers.
I hate it even more when the design of a language is
made without regard to extending the language, and then
proceeds to provide extension mechanisms that so
obviously break the conceptual model of the language
(C++/Operator Overloading/Function Pointers/Etc). I guess
I can understand in case of C++, which in some subtle way
assumes that the class library designers are much better
programmers than users of these libraries and allow ways
to encapsulate much of the ugliness of the language in
classes (the process of which also happens to be ugly),
thereby freeing the less experienced programmers from the
burden of dealing with C++'s low-level details.
>(Case in point:
>Pascal with it's use of features that it refused to pass on to
>users of the language. - Note how writeln() has varying args, yet
>you can't make your own varying arg functions in Pascal.)
Actually, your real complaint in that case is that the
language has primitives with priviledges that fundamentally
distinguish them from user-defined abstractions. At some
level it's inevitable, though some languages make it far
more obvious than would be useful. It would be akin to C++
allowing something like "cout << x" and not allowing one to
use/define such operators in analogous, but distict
contexts. But on the other hand, consider the extent of
ugliness C++ went to allow this in many aspects of the
language and how that would fit into Pascal, which as far
as I know, was designed to be a rigid and simple language.
>Can you write Smalltalk in Smalltalk? If not, then it's such a
>hubris-laced language. If you can, then I'll have to consider
>looking into it.
It's absolutely trivial (from a theoretical perspective) to
"implement" a turing-complete language in another turing-
complete language. The better question, perhaps, is whether
a language can be taken down to a simple and elegant subset
on top of which the rest of it can be implemented. The most
beautiful example that I'm aware of is Scheme, where you
really need a handful of special primitives. C++ can do it
for the most part, if you accept its syntax, all sorts of
precedence rules, and most of its C-ism as given. But then,
at that level, probably any language can. All Lisp variants
have a distinct advantage in that much of the language can
often defined with respect to its meta-language which is
part of the language.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com>
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, 08 Oct 2000 07:57:58 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> Said Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> in
> comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >
> >> Said Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> in
> >> comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >> >"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >Oh, come on Erik, it's much more entertaining to get Max so exasperated by
> >> >> >constantly requesting he prove his outlandish claims so that he killfiles
> >> >> >you :).
> >> >>
> >> >> That won't get you killfiled.
> >> >
> >> >Because you fit the definition of insanity: doing the same thing, time after
> >> >time, expecting a different result.
> >>
> >> Because _I_ fit the definition of insanity, what...? My getting
> >> exasperated with trolls demanding proof of minuscule and trivial points
> >> of fact in order to reduce the discussion to ankle-biting and
> >> kill-filling them (which I've done three times in ten years) makes me
> >> insane? Boy, are you confused!
> >
> >You said "That won't get you killfiled." Instead of killfiling you choose to do the
> >same thing time after time expecting different results. [...]
>
> No, that's you trolls. I am simply consistent. Accurate and practical,
> as well, as much as I can. Its you idiots that 'do the same thing time
> after time'. I don't know if you're expecting different results. Seems
> to me you're expecting the same results; distracting discussion from
> real issues in petty ankle-biting, insults, and ad hominem. That's why
> we call you trolls.
>
> Except you Mike. I'm still half convinced you're an astro-turfer.
Thanks Max :-) That's a compliment coming from you (I think) :-)
In a way I do get paid to do this stuff. My knowledge pays my salary. If people read
every lie that's pinched from the mouths of the Apple and Linux faithful and there's no
one around to rebutt it, truth or not it might start to sink in. That's where I come
in. I've got the majority of this technical stuff down cold after over a decade of
work. I just expose bullshit as bullshit so people are not mislead.
------------------------------
From: Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 19:31:43 +1000
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Is of course Linux.
Exclusively ? I think not!
>The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
It may also be it's weakness.
>Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
>Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
>From zero it's all up from there
<snip>
>How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
If Microsoft kept growing at the rate it did for the last 5-10-15-20
years (pick one) it would soon be, not only the total IT industry,
but the entire economy. Obviously not sustainable
>
>How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
>From zero it's all up from there
<snip>
>Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
>keyboard is subcontracted out.
>They don't make anything but software.
AMD don't own a fab shop, does that make them not a threat to Intel ?
<big snip due to boredom>
Sam
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 02:53:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Matt Kennel in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:54:00 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:
>:IBM's GREATEST MISTAKE was making a machine which anybody could
>:copy in his garage.
>
>As I remember the story, they published all the hardware specification
>and BIOS disassembly assuming that if anybody tried to make a 100% copy
>that IBM could easily sue them out of business.
>
>Compaq did make a copy and IBM was shocked to lose the suit, and
>the market thereafter.
>
>:It TOTALLY blew the "IBM Mystique" when clones with BETTER SPECS
>:started appearing on the market at less than 1/2 the price.
>:
>:Up until then, IBM had a near total-lock on the computer market,
>:because NOBODY ever questioned whether all that money going to
>:IBM was actually a good performance/price ratio.
>:
>:With the introduction of clone PCs, everybody quickly realized
>:that IBM had been overcharging for dumbed-down products for years.
>
>Well, before that, there were cloned IBM mainframes that had a similar
>dynamic (and similar lawsuits and antitrust issues), but the PC did
>expose this to a much wider group of people.
I'm archiving this message. A very interesting position; quite
consistent, and practical.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 02:56:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Barry Margolin in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <8riv3k$cgd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2 + 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It's interesting to compare this kind of legal reverse engineering with
>>Netscape's copying of Moasic from the U. of Illinois's NCSA.
>
>Netscape was founded by one of the authors of Mosaic, so they could hardly
>argue that he'd used clean-room reverse engineering! And it seems very
>likely that even if he started coding the new browser from scratch that he
>would do many things the same way as he'd done them before; while this
>isn't literal copying, it's probably close enough that they would have lost
>a copyright infringement suit.
If you consider the idea of copyright, this seems obviously flawed. Are
you saying that an author can be sued for writing a similar book? I
don't think so.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 03:11:56 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"mike burrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:y%MD5.31474$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.lang.c Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Wine runs Office? Wow, what a claim.
>>
>> > A quick trip to the wine database shows that there isn't much that
>really
>> > runs under Wine. The highest rating for Office 97 is 3. This rating is
>> > described as "3 -- Sufficient functionality for noncritical work.
>Occasional
>> > crashes okay, as are weird setup problems, required patches, or missing
>> > major functionality. Alpha quality." Other reviews gave it even lower
>marks.
>> > The highest review given to Word 2000 is 1: "1 -- Loads without
>crashing.
>> > Good enough for a screenshot." And the highest review of Office 2000
>rates
>> > it 0: "0 -- Totally nonfunctional. Crashes on load."
>>
>> you have, of course, conveniently ignored that the most recent review of
>> Microsoft Word is from six months ago with a comment saying "maybe in 3
>> months it works".
>>
>> of course everybody knows that Wine doesn't run Office well, but lying
>> (albeit by omission) doesn't help anybody.
>
>Sorry... correction: latest review of Notepad (1999-08-15) says:
>
>http://www.winehq.com/Apps/details.cgi?id=1803
>
>"Works except find/find next."
>
>THe problem being that people submit sporadic reports like these and don't
>test the app in question thoroughly.
>
>Anyway... come on... Notepad is about the simplest application short of
>Hello World that you can write. If this isn't working fine, there's no hope.
Pretty pathetic, isn't it. WINE can't even get a fucking NOTEPAD to
work correctly. Sounds to me like Win32 is a complete piece of shit,
and MS ought to be taken out and shot just for pretending its a useable
API.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 01:50:01 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Pretty pathetic, isn't it. WINE can't even get a fucking NOTEPAD to
> work correctly. Sounds to me like Win32 is a complete piece of shit,
> and MS ought to be taken out and shot just for pretending its a useable
> API.
Sounds to me like WINE's developers don't know their arses from their
elbows. Win32 is perfectly usable -- you just have to take the time and
energy to understand it.
It's like the Mac -- perfectly usable APIs, but if you come from a different
part of the computing world, it'll stump you at EVERY turn, because you're
not used to the way they thought when they put it together.
Same going from Windows to Unix. And from any place to any other place, come
to think of it.
Each OS has its own paradigms in its design. Win32 is just different to what
*you* or *they* are used to -- but rather than spend the time to get your
head around it and actually try to understand *why* it was done that way,
people go "Oh God! Totally unworkable API! Argh! Mummy!"
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: welcome to the world of objects
Date: 8 Oct 2000 08:01:46 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: For example, classes are objects. And that's actually a problem since
>: classes don't exist in the physical world and humans have no experience
>: dealing with objects and classes of objects that simultaneously exist
>: as objects.
>
>False. Classes are present in human language, and while I agree that
>they don't exist physically, humans DO have plenty of experience
>with them. When I look at the thingy moving across the street I
>see an object of class "car", which is a subset of "vehicle". An
>object is a specific somethingorother, and a class is a recurring
>mental pattern that describes what objects can be like. "Reptile"
>is a class in human language, not an object. In English, if you put
>an article in front of a class, you refer to an object of that
>class "a reptile, the reptile, this reptile, that reptile." But
>the word "reptile" by itself is not a single object.
Actually that's an English-specific viewpoint. In many other
languages, the distinction between specific and unspecific
referents isn't as obvious. Generally in human languages, a
word itself is a class, whereas specific occurrences of the
word in a sentence without quotes would indicate instances
of that class. At some level, it is "car" versus car.
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
******************************
