Linux-Advocacy Digest #651, Volume #29 Sat, 14 Oct 00 09:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Astroturfing (2:1)
Re: Astroturfing (2:1)
Re: Astroturfing (2:1)
Re: Astroturfing (2:1)
Re: Astroturfing ("JS/PL")
Re: Astroturfing (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Hotmail has been down for at least 12 hours on the East Coast
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Astroturfing ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Out perfoms Windows ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Linux Sucks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Double standards around here :( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:11:20 +0100
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JS/PL wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> > > > > What's wrong with Windows 2000?
> > > >
> > > > Stabilty.
> > > >
> > > > Still not ready for prime time.
> > >
> > > My Linux apps crash nearly every time, shit, half of them won't even
> start.
> > >
> > > My Win2K apps never crash. Who's not ready for prime time?
> >
> > Oh come on. I know how hard it is to rigorousl proove something, but you
> > don't even provide a shread of anecdotal evidence. If I complained that
> > mk Win2K apps crashed *all* the time, you would say that something was
> > wrong. Use your brain...
> >
> > -Ed
>
> What kind of proof do you need? I've got a stock Mandrake 7.1 installation
> on an Abit dual 500 celeron motherboard, with 256mb ram, supported video,
> supported sound, supported modem, supported network card etc... The system
> is a walk in the park for Windows. Linux manages to see both processors,
> 64mb of the 256mb of ram and the applications which were automatically
> installed crash regularly or won't start at all. For instance, it has three
> news readers, ONE manages to open. Another of them opened ONCE then crashed
> and now won't start. Netscapes newsreader works. A number of other apps wont
> open or crash constistently. The worst is the "file manager" or whatever
> it's called in Linux, I open it and stare at the "working..." notice at the
> bottom of the window (for hours), which is a pretty ironic message
> considering that it ISN'T WORKING!
> I have nothing against Linux, one of these days they'll be able to compete
> with Microsoft, but they've got a LONG way to go before being ready for
> primetime in the desktop market.
When I said use your brain, I meant use it, not repeat the same stuff in
detail. There is probably something very badly wrong with your
installation. C corrupted filesystem or a bad harddisk or something.
There are kernel options to allow Linux to see more memory.
Try mem=256M or something like it.
You have not actually told me the name of a single package or app that
isn't working.
This is whole thing is very contrary to many peoples experience. If I
came on the group saying stuff like this, but about Win2K, some people
would ask me for proof, some would shout at me for trolling and some
would tell me that this is unusual, and there is probably something
wrong with my setup. So I'll say it to you:
There is something wrong with your setup.
They way you keep going on about how it works so well for windows makes
me think that you are a troll.
The evidence (not even proof) is some names of applications, and version
numbers would be useful too.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:12:33 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > What's wrong with Windows 2000? Surely you must acknowledge that
> Microsoft
> > > has the freedom to innovate, building on the strengths of Windows NT
> Server
> > > 4.0, the Windows 2000 Server Family delivers three increasingly powerful
> > > products that set a new standard for reliability and scalability. The
> > > Windows 2000 Server Family also demonstrates how well an operating
> system
> > > can be integrated with a standards-based directory, Web, application,
> > > network, file and print services, and end-to-end management. This
> > > combination of reliability and functionality provides the best
> foundation
> > > for integrating your business with the Internet.
> >
> > I'm not paranoid, and I don't believe that MS needs (or does) pay for
> > people to buts, but this sounds like a sales pitch.
>
> Of course it does, It was pretty obvious to me that the poster was making
> fun of the original authors claim of anyone spouting sales jargon being a
> paid lackey.
>
> Is your sarcasm detector on the fritz? I expected Aaron to fall for it, but
> I thought most others would see the joke.
Sorry. It was late and I was tired...
%-)
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:15:52 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Under Linux I like either StarOffice or Wordperfect.
> Star is a bit bloated and WP runs under Wine, but hey, the price is
> right and they are certainly far, far more advanced than my Word
> processing skills :)
When I need office stuff, I use StarOffice. For general word processing
vi or pico and LaTeX fit my needs best. Ocasionally I need Office97 for
unusual things. Recently someone had a document with some worddraw
pictures in and wanted to put them in a LaTeX document. I needed
Office97 to get export the pictures to PS documents.
That's pretty rare, though. Other than the odd thing like that, I
wouldn't go near it.
-Ed
>
> I'll never use MSOffice under any platform.
>
> claire
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 22:24:44 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> I like your signature :)
> >>
> >> Only MS products I use are Windows and Flight Simulator.
> >> I tried Office once and spent a week trying to extract it from my
> >> system.
> >> Never again.
> >
> >If you *need* it, it runs well on wine (except printing*). Can't do any
> >damage from there...
> >
> >*I'm on a 6 month old build.
> >
> >Microft Minesweeper seems about OK :-)
> >
> >
> >-Ed
> >
> >
> >> claire
> >>
> >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:06:57 GMT,
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Most of the vocal and insulting Linux advocates don't use their real names
> >> >- are you saying they should be ashamed of themselves too?
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:17:08 +0100
Just to proove your point: I'm a linux advocate with a real name and a
real email address.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 06:38:31 -0400
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS/PL wrote:
> >
> > "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS/PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > > > What's wrong with Windows 2000?
> > > > >
> > > > > Stabilty.
> > > > >
> > > > > Still not ready for prime time.
> > > >
> > > > My Linux apps crash nearly every time, shit, half of them won't even
> > start.
> > > >
> > > > My Win2K apps never crash. Who's not ready for prime time?
> > >
> > > Oh come on. I know how hard it is to rigorousl proove something, but
you
> > > don't even provide a shread of anecdotal evidence. If I complained
that
> > > mk Win2K apps crashed *all* the time, you would say that something was
> > > wrong. Use your brain...
> > >
> > > -Ed
> >
> > What kind of proof do you need? I've got a stock Mandrake 7.1
installation
> > on an Abit dual 500 celeron motherboard, with 256mb ram, supported
video,
> > supported sound, supported modem, supported network card etc... The
system
> > is a walk in the park for Windows. Linux manages to see both processors,
> > 64mb of the 256mb of ram and the applications which were automatically
> > installed crash regularly or won't start at all. For instance, it has
three
> > news readers, ONE manages to open. Another of them opened ONCE then
crashed
> > and now won't start. Netscapes newsreader works. A number of other apps
wont
> > open or crash constistently. The worst is the "file manager" or whatever
> > it's called in Linux, I open it and stare at the "working..." notice at
the
> > bottom of the window (for hours), which is a pretty ironic message
> > considering that it ISN'T WORKING!
> > I have nothing against Linux, one of these days they'll be able to
compete
> > with Microsoft, but they've got a LONG way to go before being ready for
> > primetime in the desktop market.
>
>
> When I said use your brain, I meant use it, not repeat the same stuff in
> detail. There is probably something very badly wrong with your
> installation. C corrupted filesystem or a bad harddisk or something.
> There are kernel options to allow Linux to see more memory.
> Try mem=256M or something like it.
That's the point, my objective isn't to hack the kernel, it is to insert a
disk, hover over the return key for a few minutes and have the thing work in
the end. It's all I want it to do. If the OS won't go in and run the
hardware and manage files without me having to go in and tell it how much
fricking memory is on the board (of all things) to me that means it's not
ready for the masses.
>
> You have not actually told me the name of a single package or app that
> isn't working.
>
> This is whole thing is very contrary to many peoples experience. If I
> came on the group saying stuff like this, but about Win2K, some people
> would ask me for proof, some would shout at me for trolling and some
> would tell me that this is unusual, and there is probably something
> wrong with my setup. So I'll say it to you:
>
> There is something wrong with your setup.
Hell yes there's something wrong with the setup, this is also the third
install, and the exact same problems. There's definitely a problem. If it
is a hardware problem so be it. Windows 2000 doesn't have any problems at
all. I do not have a single problem with any of the 50 or so installed
programs. It NEVER has crashed. I am CERTAIN that when I use it, it will not
crash and I can get my work done without any problems whatsoever.
Linux (to me) is worse than Windows 98 in reliability, which is pretty bad.
>
> They way you keep going on about how it works so well for windows makes
> me think that you are a troll.
>
> The evidence (not even proof) is some names of applications, and version
> numbers would be useful too.
That wouldn't matter, the only proof that would be certain would be
actually filming the problem and uploading the 50mb file. But I'd almost
guarantee the footage would have to be edited using Win2k as an OS, or it
would never make it to the web.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:23:58 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:48:28 -0700...
...and Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
> >
> <snip my stuff>
> >
> > Most of the vocal and insulting Linux advocates don't use their real names
> > - are you saying they should be ashamed of themselves too?
> >
> > --
> > Pete Goodwin
> > ---
> > Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> > My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
>
> Like who? Rex Ballard is the greatest Linux advocate there is,
> and he is not shy about his identity.
[schnibble]
> I do not agree with Aaron R. Kulkis' flavour of politics but
> I do not doubt his identity. T. Max Devlin identity seems to
> be credible too. Most of the the pro Linux posters have
> credible identities.
Here's something to verify mine. Send me a postcard:
Matthias Warkus
Hochweg 3
66871 Körborn
F.R. of Germany
ma"I am for real"wa
--
(Warum ich gerne in Deutschland lebe:)
...aber unter diesen Bedingungen gibt es in Deutschland keinen Bill
Gates, meine Damen und Herren...
-- Edmund Stoiber
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:13:33 GMT
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
> You would, of course, be right to say that this means in fact that it
> is easy (well, not too hard) to layer OO on top of both procedural and
> functional paradigms (so long as they support the notion of a variable
> that refers to a procedure/function and structured aggregation.) This
> has been done many times in various ways. For Smalltalk, Self, and
> others to go round proclaiming themselves to be "True OO" and that the
> rest are just hacks is, frankly, just Spin Doctoring and PR.
Let's move this issue to another field. Let's say that someone invented
a product and went through a lot of trouble to establish a brand name.
Now let's suppose that someone else came along and sold a *distinctly
inferior* product under the same brand name. Setting aside all trademark
law, which is irrelevant, would you agree that 1) it is fair for the
asshole to do such a thing, 2) the inferior product "is" X the moment
most customers have accepted it as such.
Just what the hell makes people in the ST and Self camp not considering
C++ OO "spin doctoring" instead of the other way around? From a purely
historical perspective, it's obviously C++ calling itself OO that's pure
spin doctoring! C++ doesn't deliver the advances that Smalltalk showcased
and it doesn't deliver any of the productivity/reusability/comprehension
increases that Smalltalk demonstated either, the very advances promised
by "Object Orientation". Just why the fuck should anyone call it OO? Why
is that a meaningful use of the language instead of an abuse of it ???
You can have any conception of OO you like. But in the end, does it
deliver on its (implicit and explicit) promises and people's expectations
of it ? Does it make any sense to call Yak meat "beef" if people spit
it out after tasting it ??
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:08:55 +0100
>Of course, many people treat x.0 versions of all software with a little
>waryness.
I agree with this, especially windows 95.0 , 98.0 , ME.0, NT4.0 and 2000.
Windows 3.1 wasn't so bad though.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:19:09 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El vie, 13 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
> >"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
> >> In Java primitive types are objects, but instances of those types are
> >> not objects. Lose one point for lack of reading comprehension.
> >
> >This, of course, is total bullshit.
> >
> >1) primitive types are not objects. What the class are they
> > supposed to be of anyways?
>
> Erm....
>
> "I don't believe classes should exist in the system at all. New objects should
> be created by copying prototypes." Richard.
>
> Consider classes to be objects that don't belong to a class.
You don't know what the hell you're talking about Roberto. For one thing,
you betray an astonishing ignorance of what "object" means.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Hotmail has been down for at least 12 hours on the East Coast
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:46:14 GMT
As an end user I could care less if they use a cup and a string, I
just need to get my mail and when I couldn't I was upset.
I use the best tool for the job, generally speaking.
claire
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 04:19:55 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Never mind I figured it out:
>>
>> Read it and weep...........
>>
>> Help
>>
>> Message to Hotmail Members
>>
>> We apologize, but your account is temporarily unavailable. This delay
>> does not affect the entire site or relate specifically to your
>> account, but the machine that holds your account information is
>> temporarily unavailable. We do not expect this delay to last much
>> longer, so please continue to check our site for your account status.
>> We will do our best to make your account available as quickly as
>> possible. We appreciate your support, and sincerely apologize for the
>> inconvenience.
>>
>> © 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Service
>> Privacy Statement
>>
>> On 12 Oct 2000 20:27:15 -0500, "Drestin Black"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Yes.. The site comes up with a generic message about it being down
>and
>> >> it not being do to my account as well as "All of Hotmail" not being
>> >> down, only the part I need, my mail. A lawyer must have written
>that
>> >> page.
>> >> It came back up last night though.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I say you are wrong.
>> >
>> >Pull the file from your cache and post it to prove it...
>
>Actually, it was also covered on CNN and CNBC. Just a short blurb.
>
>Actually, the fact that it was newsworthy is a good sign. It means
>that it hasn't been going down so often that it's not considered news.
>
>But then, it was running UNIX until recently, and then they switched
>all the front-end servers to Windows 2000 didn't they. Remember,
>you posted so proudly all over the newsgroup (and several others
>as I recall).
>
>Anyway, congratulations, you were right. Microsoft DID convert their
>front-end servers to Windows 2000, and pretty soon those nasty hotmail
>crashes won't even be worth that 5 second mention anymore.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:52:26 GMT
Sure.
Take a look at trade rag articles from a year ago say summer of 1999
and take a look now.
Linux was on the cover of Infoworld constantly.
Notice a large decrease in the number of Linux articles?
Last year Linux was the "babe of the press" and it was everywhere on
television in mainstream press and so forth.
See much of that lately?
See Linux companies having financial trouble?
Linux has peaked and is on the way down.
Maybe not quite as fast as the Titanic, but you get the picture.
claire
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:32:52 +0500, "ostracus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Now since we can agree on some things. Care to give proof of this "lead
>weight" "Faster than the Titanic" effect you mentioned?
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Out perfoms Windows
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:50:54 +0100
>Maybe you could use the "generic/text-only" driver.
As far as I can tell MS dropped the text printer driver when they ditched
win3.11 as I cannot find it in NT or win9x.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:56:49 GMT
I can finally see why. I bought my daughter an iMac as a present for
her graduation from middle school in June. It is a wonderful machine
that I should have bought a long time ago.
She wouldn't go near the Windows machines, but I can't get her away
from the Mac.
claire
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 03:34:09 GMT, "Les Mikesell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I agree with that, but the same could be said of a Commodore-64, or an
>> Atari.
>
>Or a Mac.
>
>> When setup properly Linux is no more difficult to use than any other
>> system assuming that the application base contains everything the
>> person needs.
>>
>> The problem arises when changes need or want to be made. A newer
>> scanner or printer, or software that exists only in the Windows world.
>> Maybe the person want's to try AOL (God help them) or one of the free
>> isp's.
>
>Odd, you never hear Mac people complaining about not being
>able to use all that great Windows stuff....
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Double standards around here :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:00:36 GMT
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 03:13:13 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Furthermore, it was subsequently substantiated by press releases,
>announcements, and apologies. Yes, it went down, it was down
>for a short time (about an hour?), and then it came back up.
I missed the news reports but my mail was down for about 8 hours or
so.
>This was even announced on several network news programs, including
>CNBC and CNN. Let's face it, back when Hotmail was running on Suns,
>an outage was a newsworthy event. But, it's only newsworthy the first
>two or three times. And since Microsoft has switched the proxy-servers
>(the web servers that provide the front-end for the UNIX back-ends),
>Hotmail outages have gone from being "big news" to "again?".
I don't really care what they run on as long as I can get my mail.
>The tactics were very surgical, and usually anonymous. For example,
>when a dialogue discussing the comparitive reliability between Linux
The poster talked about this group and that there was proof that
people in this group were paid.
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:05:22 GMT
I was waiting for some to mention that. The original person did his
home work reading the documentation and still could not set it up
which was my original point.
But as usual when the Linvocates run out of useful rebuttals, which in
this case didn't take long, I get called a whore.
Now you know why I posted under the name "Steve" for a year or so.
claire
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:25:04 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:00101318293500.28373@pc03...
>> Allow me to give you the idiot-proof version of how to make a masquerading
>> firewall between a LAN and the internet through a dialup link using Linux.
>
>...
>
>> Step 2: Configure a masquerading firewall.
>>
>> The command for this is as follows
>>
>> ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 -j MASQ
>>
>> Replace 10.4.0.0 with your real network and netmask. Simpler syntax:
>>
>> ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/24 -j MASQ
>
>You know, not once does it mention in the ipchains how-to this command line.
>It took many hours of frustration and fiddling the first time I set up a
>masq box. The documentation on this just plain sucks and is years out of
>date.
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
