Linux-Advocacy Digest #691, Volume #29 Mon, 16 Oct 00 16:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Grant Edwards)
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Jan Schaumann)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Roberto Teixeira)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Bartek Kostrzewa)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Space Station, Windows & Unix (Bartek Kostrzewa)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Roberto Teixeira)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:32:09 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
> >It's very clear that Windows is extremely intimate with DOS, and it does
so
> >in ways that are more than the documented int 21h interface. Whatever
MS's
> >other reasons or wants, they do have a legitimate reason to test. They
> >can't guarantee safe operation on non MS-DOS. They're the ones that will
> >get the support call when Windows 3.1 fails because of a problem with
their
> >competitors DOS.
>
> Excuse me, but Windows 3.1 does not compete with DOS. That is
> important, whether you want to recognize it or not.
And telephone equipment manufacturers don't compete with the phone company
either, that doesn't stop them from putting disclaimers on the phones that
warn them not to use the equipment in unsupported phone systems.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:20:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
bobh{at}haucks{dot}org wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:02:58 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Ironically, Microsoft has been killing it's own market. They
> >created checks that now make it impossible to develop server
> >software on workstation editions.
>
> Can you clarify what you mean by this?
> What sort of "checks" are done?
I'm not sure how it knows, but several developers (including myself)
have found that when you try to install Microsoft server software
written for Windows 2000 Server ond Windows 2000 Workstation, you
get a nasty message telling you that you can't install server software
on workstation platforms.
This has had a rather chilling effect on the support of Consultants,
IT professionals who do development work at home or while in transit,
and people who were considering an low-cost prototype to test Win2K
viability on new applications.
At first I just figured I'd done something wrong in the configuration.
But when I started hearing from numerous developers who were having
the same problem, I realized that it a deliberate Microsoft Policy.
Many people did use NT Workstation for server functions. They also
used it for developing server software. It seems this is no longer
possible. I hope Microsoft reverses this policy, and fast, or Win2K
will lose all support and we'll be stuck with bouncing NT systems.
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:39:57 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Tell that to your boss when you hand in your report and it
>looks like crap, all because you used Linux and he, along with
>the rest of the world, is using Word.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but MS Word output _is_ crap. Ask
anybody with a modicum of typesetting experience to take a look
at something produced with MS Word. After they stop laughing
they'll explain to you the many, many in which MS Word is
incapable of producing professional looking output (e.g. lack
of kerning and ligatures).
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I have a TINY BOWL in
at my HEAD
visi.com
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:29:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bob Hauck
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 14 Oct 2000 18:43:44 GMT
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:02:58 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Ironically, Microsoft has been killing it's own market. They
> >>created checks that now make it impossible to develop server
> >>software on workstation editions.
> >
> >Can you clarify what you mean by this? What sort of "checks" are
done?
>
> This generated some traffic a few months (years?) ago on this
newsgroup.
> Basically, the kernel for NT Workstation and NT server was identical,
> except for a couple of registry entries and a daemon running
> somewhere deep in NT to watch over them. Microsoft also
> placed a limit of 10 socket connections in the EULA (I don't
> know if that was (is?) enforced in the actual software or not) for
> the Workstation product.
This was correct for Windows NT. Unfortunately, for Windows 2000, the
issues seem to be more dramatic. Appearantly there are differences
in DLLs and binaries that actually prevent the installation of server
software on workstations. Again, I don't have enough details to
know exactly what the issues are.
> This is all from memory, so hopefully I got it more or less right. :-)
>
> I don't know about product development being hampered, though.
> (At the time, I was still working for a Unix shop.)
>
> [.sigsnip]
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Schaumann)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:03:17 GMT
Garry Knight wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Dustin
>Puryear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Another possibility is to use HTML for true portability, but most
>> publishing houses will not support that.
>
>Most of the word processors I've come across can import and export RTF
>pretty well. It just depends on how tricky you want to get with using
>text frames and so on. And, of course, the WP needs to have a good font
>substitution algorithm. But I believe RTF to be the most portable text
>format (apart from plain text, that is...).
The most portable document format is PDF (Portable Document FOrmat - D'uh). RTF
is not half as portable.
Cheers,
-Jan
--
Jan Schaumann <http://www.netmeister.org>
Please add smileys where appropriate.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 16 Oct 2000 17:15:08 -0400
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jan> The most portable document format is PDF (Portable Document
Jan> FOrmat - D'uh). RTF is not half as portable.
Not to start a document format war, but isn't PDF a proprietary
format? What about PS? I don't know if PS is proprietary, but it sure
is *very* portable
--
Roberto Teixeira
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 16 Oct 2000 19:23:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Jan> The most portable document format is PDF (Portable Document
: Jan> FOrmat - D'uh). RTF is not half as portable.
: Not to start a document format war, but isn't PDF a proprietary
: format? What about PS? I don't know if PS is proprietary, but it sure
: is *very* portable
I believe both Postscript and PDF are Adobe proprietary, but are
well documented to the point where anyone can make a reader
(Ghostview, xpdf) or writer (ps2pdf, dvipdfm) for them,
effectively making an open standard. And since Adobe hasn't
shown much desire to make us participate in the
"File Standard Hoop-Jumping Olympics", there's little to fear
that either will be severely mucked-up anytime soon.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:22:19 -0700
"Paul 'Z' Ewande©" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sf311$3vc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > it would make logical sense if MS really did use/remove/change the
> > undocumented APIs.
>
> But they are supposed to use them to churn out better apps than the
> competitors, aren't they ?
Allegedly. Personally, I put it down to:
1. Brute force. They'll put more people on the project to get it fixed if
it's broken. And they'll keep adding more and more until it works.
Personally, I hate that development model, but there ya go.
2. No frameworks. Most application development at Microsoft is done using
straight C/C++ talking to Win32 directly. They use GlobalAlloc and
GlobalFree or VirtualAlloc and VirtualFree instead of malloc -- which gives
you better performance. About the only framework generally in widespread use
(except on some of the MS home productivity apps, where they'll use MFC
occasionally) is ATL; and that, for example, uses assembly-language thunks
for Win32 handle to object binding, which again, is a perf increase.
3. Spending 1/4 of the development cycle & budget on performance
improvements before the product is released. This definitely doesn't hurt.
Simon
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:39:06 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >Having objects that are "classes" of other objects is ridiculous. Having
> >them be magical entities that aren't addressable as objects (yet still
> >exist somehow someway) is insane.
>
> So, in short: having a class is not a necessary characteristic of an object.
> So, not belonging to classes doesn't prove classes are not objects.
What the fuck are you talking about? Do you realize that what you
just wrote is a complete non sequitur?
> So, your previous "what class are they supposed to be?" was logically
> ineffectual, since a language could have objects that belong to classes and
> objects that don't.
No, it can't bozo. EVERY object belongs to some conceptual class. Classes
might not exist as language constructs but that doesn't stop them from
existing in people's minds. And if a language chooses to have classes as
language constructs then these MUST match the conceptual classes that
people build of the system. The C++ decision to have some classes be part
of the language and others not is ludicrous.
> So much for your vaunted logic skills.
Logic is beyond you.
> And before you say I am stupid: otice how I don't claim that classes are
> objects, I just point out the inadequacy of your own attempt at doing that.
You are stupid, there's no disputing that. The only question is the
precise depth of your stupidity.
There are bound to be inconsistencies in my stated position in cases,
such as this one, where my position has evolved over time. And yet
you're too stupid to find any of these inconsistencies.
If a language has a class construct at all (and there is no reason
why it should) then people should be able to access and manipulate
this construct as easily as any other construct in the language. It's
as simple as that. If classes exist in the language then they must
be objects, just as much as if classes exist in the language then
everything must belong to some class.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:47:25 +0200
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
jazz wrote:
>
> I really need a powerful word processor with templates, styles, etc.
>
> What is available for Linux? How about for Powerpoint and Excel?
>
> Thanks ---
> Jazz
go for staroffice (respectively openoffice from now on)
www.openoffice.org
Then there's abiword (it's a little unstable still) www.abisource.com
Many others to cite still.
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:48:35 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthias Warkus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:23:25 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>It was the Sun, 15 Oct 2000 19:50:23 -0400...
>...and jazz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > claire
>>
>>
>> Are you this offensive in real life too?
>
>Claire does not exist in real life. There has been more than a dozen
>of trolls with similar stances and a similar idiom and vocabulary
>around on this group over the last months. They all had pseudonyms,
>they all posted from New York City IIRC, etc.
>
>The troll has changed its stance from blunt and total denial of any
>quality of Linux whatsoever to a slightly differentiated one, where he
>pretends to know its advantages as a server operating system. He has
>also become a bit, but not much, less offensive. Furthermore, he has
>adopted a female nickname, which is a clever move -- he's wagering on
>the hormones and/or instincts of the overwhelming male majority in
>this group.
>
>Of course the troll ("Claire") is not a woman. No woman would be that
>silly, only men are stubborn and playful enough to play a game to the
>point of total absurdity and beyond (e.g. the Cold War).
>
>In the de.* hierarchy, we tell everyone who doesn't post under their
>realname to fuck off, which is a useful policy IMO.
Gee, thanks. :-P
Mind you, at least I try. :-) I'm not quite sure what to make
of claire at times; at times s/he is almost reasonable, but at
times s/he comes on as a very argumentative individual.
Of course, I also don't change my moniker every three months,
either. I also try to admit my shortcomings -- I'm not an expert
on high-volume multi-CPU servers, for example. (And I doubt NT
can handle such, even were the CPUs ix86-based. However, I'm
not an expert on benchmarks, either. :-) )
>
>mawa
>--
>Blümchenpflücker!
>Bonsaigärtner!
>Beinrasierer!
>Beischlafbettler!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- who is the Ghost, not the Troll In The Machine :-)
(and who doesn't frequent de.* anyway)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:49:44 +0200
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Space Station, Windows & Unix
Robert Love wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Ghost" == The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Why trust critical systems to Windows? And yet I see that the
> >> USAF is switching Cheyenne mountain to Windows. Its almost
> >> criminal.
>
> Ghost> Which systems are they switching? If they're desktops or
> Ghost> low-grade "personal web servers", I'd not be too worried
> Ghost> (although Linux is probably a better -- and cheaper! --
> Ghost> alternative, complete with auditable and freely available
> Ghost> source code).
>
> Ghost> I doubt they're switching the satellite monitors (I assume
> Ghost> Cheyenne Mountain is an adjunct of NORAD or something,
> Ghost> dedicated to keeping our airspace clean of enemy missiles
> Ghost> :-) ). I'm not sure even Linux would be appropriate there.
>
> Yes, by Cheyenne Mountain I meant NORAD. Its main war room is located
> inside this facility in Colorado Springs.
>
> Let me quote from the October 9 "Space News"
>
> Pentagon Commands Embrace Windows
>
> New U.S. Air Force systems at U.S. Space Command and North American
> Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will use the Microsoft Windows
> operating system instead of Unix, an industry official said.
>
> The Air Force awarded the $1.5 Billion Integrated Space Command and
> Control (ISC2) contract to Lockheed Martin Corp.
>
> The service wants to modernize and integrate the 40 air, missile and
> space systems at U.S. Space Command and NORAD.
>
> Now I see that some east coast cities are discussing requiring the use
> of open source software so they won't be held prisoner to one
> corporation or proprietary standard. Hell, usually the military
> requires second sourcing so there is no single point supply failure.
> It seems that LockMart has bungled again...and the USAF fell for it.
>
> --
> =============================================================
> | Support Signature Minimalism |
> =============================================================
Looks like the US will be a pile of ashes soon :o) (or rather :o( )
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:50:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthias Warkus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:17:34 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>It was the Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:18:14 +0800...
>...and Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This is a time that will be long remembered. It has seen the end of UNIX's
>> hold on design software, it will soon see the end of its hold on publishing
>> software.
>
>Unix? A hold on publishing software?
>
>Hallooooo? <waves hand>
Well, there was nroff/troff in the early 80's, perhaps. I'm not
sure if that counts or not. :-)
>
>Publishing software has, if any, been an Apple domain... for DTP to be
>a real success on Unix workstations, the font handling has always been
>too primitive.
>
>The only notable exception is Framemaker, AFAIk. This may change in
>the next few years.
One hopes it changes to TeX (or Lyx or Kylix) and not to Word... :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 16 Oct 2000 17:51:33 -0400
>>>>> "Bartek" == Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bartek> go for staroffice (respectively openoffice from now on)
Bartek> www.openoffice.org
Bartek> Then there's abiword (it's a little unstable still)
Bartek> www.abisource.com
Bartek> Many others to cite still.
What about KOffice? I've been using it for about a month or two and it
seems to be nice.
--
Roberto Teixeira
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
