Linux-Advocacy Digest #702, Volume #29 Tue, 17 Oct 00 06:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Convince me to run Linux?
Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Re: Why the Linonuts fear me
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Stuart Fox)
Re: Ms employees begging for food ("Thomas Lee [MVP]")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Stuart Fox)
Re: Suggestions for Linux
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Harry Lewis)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Convince me to run Linux?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:36:03 -0000
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:34:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"I" don't like Office, but I am in the minority here. I use Lotus
>Wordpro, but in corporate America you would be hard pressed to find
>anybody not running Office.
>
>Personal opinion..
>
>The Windows PC is the better deal, even if you dump office.
>You get a printer, Internet access and many other things you DON"T get
>with the Linux version.
Just what do hardware bundles have to do with operating systems?
That is something that's entirely up to the OEM. Besides, there
are plenty of cutrate printers sufficiently supported by Linux
and there are even vendor supported drivers for some winmodems.
[deletia]
--
No one can feel as helpless as the owner of a sick goldfish.
The reason they're called wisdom teeth is that the experience makes you wise.
Wagner's music is better than it sounds.
-- Mark Twain
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:40:31 -0000
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:27:24 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I am no win advocate or Linux advocate, however, if I were to design
>> an
>> > OS these are some of the features:
>> >
>> > 1. Linux Kernel
>> > 2. Standardised GUI, either, MacOS or Windows like interface
>>
>> WHy? do you really think that One GUI fits everyones needs??? I think
>> not. I like having a choice. If i wanted to one size fits all I would go
>> with MS or pantyhose nither of which I want
>>
>
>Because the average, non-linux user is totally stupid and expects to be
>spoon fed and all decisions about their computer made by some one else (aka
>Microsoft).
...except Microsoft and the PC concept fail that sort of
user specifically. "featurefull" and "easy" are mutually
exclusive. You can either have one or the other, even in
a GUI.
>
>>
>> > 3. Simplified Library structure similar to what Amiga had (ie,
>> > icons.library, fonts.library, printers.library)
>> > 4. ReiserFS as the file system
>> > 5. A windows interpreter, when a program makes a call it goes through
>> a
>> > filter (like wine) and matchs the windows dll call with the UNIX
>> > equivilant.
>>
>> What for? I would rather have Native linux apps
>>
>
>Again, the average CEO is totally thick as two short planks. The chances
>that even one of Microsoft comrades deciding to port an app to Linux is very
>unlikely. Although it would be nice to have Smart Suite ported, it is very
>unlikely.
In that case they are doomed.
Their apps will be reverse engineered eventually and made
irrelevant as they get ported back to win32. Anything that
really should be a commodity will become one.
[deletia]
--
Ummm, well, OK. The network's the network, the computer's the computer.
Sorry for the confusion.
-- Sun Microsystems
Immanuel doesn't pun, he Kant.
Ummm, well, OK. The network's the network, the computer's the computer.
Sorry for the confusion.
-- Sun Microsystems
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why the Linonuts fear me
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:43:28 -0000
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 19:02:18 -0500, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>Big snip<>
>
>You really are a silly person. I'd wager that 99% of the people reading
>this newsgroup have more experience with Dos/Windows than you. It really
>is kind of dumb for you to blather on about how great "Windows" is to
>them.
>
>They have also learned to use Unix/Linux and find that it
>meets their needs better than the afore mentioned operating system.
>
>You however, cannot make an intelligent assessment of what the pros and
>cons of each are because you know nothing of Unix/Linux.
>
>I wonder where you got the idea that Linux is for everyone. It isn't. If
>you cannot or will not read, Linux is most definately not for you.
That is a Lemming sensibility.
[deletia]
Most of the rest of us would settle for peaceful coexistence.
Unfortunately, that is not possible with Microsoft. It has this
winner take all mentality that really ends up being a disservice
to the common end user.
Undermining perfect replacability ultimately victimizes consumers.
--
It is Fortune, not Wisdom, that rules man's life.
If all men were brothers, would you let one marry your sister?
It's gonna be alright,
It's almost midnight,
And I've got two more bottles of wine.
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:43:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) wrote:
> In article <8qj4rv$ric$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Stutts wrote:
> >
> >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> Spoken like a true astroturfer, not a user. Because win98se is so
> >unstable,
> >> it is necessary to save files every minute or two (particularly
for those
> >
> >Actually, the better approach is to not use a home operating system
(Win98)
> >in
> >a corporate environment. NT was designed for this. While not
perfect, it
> >is
> >far more stable than Win98.
> >
>
> Very true. We've now got a web front-end for the exchange server so
that
> I don't have to use Outlook any more. Whilst I'd be happy with Imap,
You are aware you can use an IMAP client with the Exchange server
(provided your admins have not disabled IMAP support, and also
providing you can find a SMTP server that will let you send through it)?
Stu
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Thomas Lee [MVP]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:06:18 +0100
In article <39eb733a$0$75251$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>"Thomas Lee [MVP]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <39ea184b$0$14033$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Drestin Black
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>> >After reading this:
>> >
>> >http://www.nwlink.com/~rodvan/microsoft/stripper.html
>> >
>> >I have decided I really DO want to work there!
>>
>> Sadly - I sure never saw any of it...
>>
>
>neither did I but I'd go back to find the woman in the FM pumps :)
I've seen women dressed like this in every big company I ever worked for
(and some smaller ones too!). It's nothing new.
Thomas
--
Thomas Lee
Windows 2000 MVP
This message posted at news:msnews.microsfot.com - come on over
Want to learn more about Windows 2000 TCP/IP? See http://www.kapoho.com/tcpip
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 04:49:25 -0500
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I bought an Amiga in 1985. That was in the days when Microsoft
advocates,
> > stuck as they were with DOS 3.3 or some such, scoffed at the
touchy-feely
> > GUI of Amigas, Macs, and Atari STs. No real productivity could ever be
> > achieved with those mouse things, they said. And who needed
multitasking?
> > Why would anybody ever need to run more than one program at a time, for
> > god's sakes? And of course, 640k ram was enough for anybody.
>
> These groups weren't around then. Where did you see verifiable data on
this
> that you can post? Andecdotal.
Where did I see verifiable data? On my desk at home. I see no way of
posting my desk to the newsgroup for you, though. Sorry.
I understand that Microsoft likes for its worshipers to believe that they
invented everything, but yours is a pretty extreme case, Mike. Yes, these
advanced systems really did exist, and were being sold, in 1985. The Amiga
was an engineering wonder. It multi-tasked in 256k of RAM. You couldn't do
much more than open a few windows and watch independently rotating cubes
with only 256k, though, so most people upgraded to 512k. With half a meg of
memory, it really shined.
In 1985, I was sent by my employer to attend a 12-week school on real-time
process control software given by a company in Houston. This company had
nothing but Macs in their offices. I had been hearing about them for some
time, but this was the first time I'd actually seen one. Extremely
impressive, even though the ones they had were only in black and white. I
don't know when color was introduced in Macs.
As for Atari STs, I don't really know if they existed in 1985. Maybe not.
I just sort lumped them in because they, like the other two, ran on Motorola
68000 chips and were much superior to Microsoft's offerings. STs might not
have been introduced for another year or two, but they were definitely
around in the mid to late 80s.
Mike, this is all verifiable stuff. Perhaps you are only familiar with The
World According to Bill, but not even he can erase *this* much history.
Yes, advanced, GUI-based multi-tasking operating systems, were on the market
in 1985, while Microsoft's latest was DOS 3.3 (or was it 2.0?).
I'm sorry you've been misled so badly.
> > be hard to come by. My Amiga was stolen 3 years later. I still miss
it.
>
> I miss mine too. Too bad it died over 10 years ago. I got a 386 after
that and
> never looked back. Why? Windows 3.0 was better in many ways than Amiga
or Mac
> of the time.
If you say so. Don't be surprised if the only people who agree with you are
your fellow MS worshippers.
> Then Windows 95 came out and you all stuffed hat. Then you
> started bellyaching about how Windows ripped you off. Sad.
Windows 95 came out in what, 1995? You do know that it was just Windows 4.0
and DOS 7.0 bolted together, don't you? Win95 was basically a
graphics-based task switcher that sat on top of DOS. Still not up to Amiga
standards, 10 years after Amigas first appeared.
Ten years is a really long time in the computer world. When you see people
saying that Microsoft has stifled innovation to the point of holding it back
10 or 15 years, it's because those people saw them do it firsthand.
> > > > The truth is that the average user at home thinks of Windows as part
of
> > the
> > > > machine. Everybody he knows uses Windows It was on there when he
> > unpacked
> > > > it and plugged it in. He thinks it's part of it. It wasn't a
"choice"
> > he
> > > > made -- it was just there, like the carburetor on his car.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Now, perhaps. But this is a consequence of Apple's stupidity in the
> > > years 1985-1990, and MS's marketing intelligence filling the breach.
> >
> > And now we're getting into opinion. Quite a few people believe that
> > Microsoft fell into their good fortune by being at the right place at
the
> > right time. In the early days, IBM is what captured the market for
> > Microsoft, not DOS.
> >
> > What happened after that is what has been thrashed around the court
system
> > for so many years. Microsoft has parted with hundreds of millions,
maybe
> > billions of dollars in fines and out of court settlements for their
actions.
>
> Post the link troll.
No link is necessary, Mike. One public case is sufficient. They settled
out of court with Caldera for an undisclosed settlement. The amount was
never made public, but the most leaked number has been $275 million dollars.
Sorry, I can't post proof of this. I'm not a magician.
> > > > > Just face it folks.
> > > > > Windows is where it's at today because it's better at what people
want
> > to
> > > > do
> > > > > with their computers.
> > > >
> > > > Well, no, it's not. It's where it's at today because Microsoft
forces
> > it on
> > > > people.
>
> How?
Wow, you never get tired of it, do you? Don't you ever get embarassed? I
mean, you spend a lot of time calling people liars and demanding they post
proof of something that is in the public record for anyone to see. Usually,
they post that proof, only to find you in another thread somewhere doing the
same thing, having abandoned the first thread.
Doesn't it embarass you to be proven wrong over and over? I know your first
reaction here is to say, "Where have I EVER been proven wrong? Post proof,
liar!!!"
Sorry, it's getting boring.
jwb
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:47:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Said Stuart Fox in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> >Are *you* deliberately dense?
> >Integrating Internet explorer != Win32 API.
>
> Says who? Why should we believe them? Is this some pedantic point,
or
> are you claiming that IE was not combined into Win98? <grin>
The Win32 API is not the operating system. It's just one of the layers
on top of the operating system. Difficult point to grasp I know, but
you seem intelligent, I'm sure you'll get it...
>
> >[...]They spend
> >> their time destroying any hint of competition and thinking up new
> >> justifications for jacking up their prices.
> >
> >Now you're confusing the Win32API with the Windows 2000 operating
system.
>
> Like its any different in that respect than any of the earlier
versions?
>
I'll say it again, the Win32 API is not the operating system.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:07:38 -0000
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 21:35:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>Here we have the typical, asshole, linvocate response below
>
>On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:41:36 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias
>Warkus) wrote:
>
>>It was the Sat, 14 Oct 2000 16:15:48 -0400...
>>...and unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>>> 2) We need to completely eliminate the command line interface.
>>> That's right. Get rid of it.
>>
>>Why?
>
>Time wasting Linvoacte technique. The guy already explained that 5
>times.
You seem to be confusing bash with command.com. There's nothing
necessarily inefficient about a commandline interface so long as
you implement it sensibly. Furthermore, such interfaces lend
themselves well to automation.
Nothing is more of a waste than "interface babysitting".
>
>>> 3) We need to add superior functionality to the Linux GUI, like
>>> the "Halflife" game, with openGL and 3-D icons for linux functions-
>>
>>Bzzt, you lost. There is no "the Linux GUI".
>
>
>Linvocate technique of word diseecting because he really doesn't have
>anything to say.
Linux is not merely limited to a singular option like WinDOS
is. Unix in general is modular and allows for relatively
painless replacement of interfaces.
This includes the possbility of dropping in a Unix 3D interface.
[deletia]
>>> a spearate manilla folder). Hallways are directories of
>>> directories.
>>> We could produce a tool like a .wad file editor to allow users to
>>> customize the 3-D environment.
>>
>>Reminds me even more of the crappy Packard Bell Navigator (especially
>>the thing about manila folders.)
>
>
>Translation he would rather the end user suffer with config files and
...and you attempt to call yourself informed.
It is WinDOS that suffers from such problems, not Linux. Unix
is far more modular when it comes to configuration data. The
ability to insert gibberish into a configuration option will
only potentially disable the service in question.
[deletia]
--
I'm also against BODY-SURFING!!
Revolution, n.:
A form of government abroad.
Women can keep a secret just as well as men, but it takes more of them
to do it.
------------------------------
From: Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 23:06:53 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> In article <8seufm$c7d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>
> >Latex is fine. But try to give this to an experienced user of Word and it's
> >not going to happen in this life time.
>
> Wow. Word must be far worse than I had initially thoought if using it
> causes so much brain damage that it renders the user incapable of learning
> simple tasks with even a lifetime to do so.
>
> Learning to use LaTeX is certainly no more difficult than learning to use
> Word. Provided with a set of LaTeX templates, I've seen people with no
> typesetting or programming experience whatsoever producing within a day
> documents that looked like they were professionally typeset. You can spend
> the rest of your life plus most of the next one futzing with Word and will
> never end up with anything that wouldn't make a discerning reader gag.
>
> --
> Grant Edwards grante Yow! My mind is making
> at ashtrays in Dayton...
> visi.com
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
If all you have is a typesetting program, everything looks like a
typesetting problem.
Problem is, everything isn't a typesetting problem. Typesetting is the
business of printers. Word processing is what users do.
Harry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:09:32 -0000
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:56:27 GMT, Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Max - just grow up. It's not just Microsoft that abides by the rules I laid
>out -- it's all software development that isn't 'free' in the Stallman sense
>of the word.
>
>Though I'm sure you can offset development costs. Let's see... if it costs
>Corel $15,000 to implement a converter for Word Perfect that takes
>AppleWorks files and converts them into WP native format, and only 3 people
>will buy it, they won't do it.
>
>Or they'll charge all 3 of the people who want it $5,000 a piece.
>
>Grow up, Max. This IS how the world works.
Alternately, a student or two will get together (or not) and
just implement it themselves. THIS is also how the world works.
--
momentum, n.:
What you give a person when they are going away.
Tomorrow, this will be part of the unchangeable past but fortunately,
it can still be changed today.
QOTD:
"Of course it's the murder weapon. Who would frame someone with
a fake?"
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
