Linux-Advocacy Digest #764, Volume #29 Fri, 20 Oct 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Magnetism (Gregory L. Hansen)
RE: Clearing things ("Idoia Sainz")
RE: Clearing things ("Idoia Sainz")
RE: Linux or Solaris ("Idoia Sainz")
RE: Why Linux is great. (Roberto Alsina)
RE: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? ("Idoia Sainz")
Re: Real Linux Advocacy (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Dustin Puryear)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Matt Garman)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Matt Garman)
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! (JoeX1029)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Matt Garman)
Re: Clearing things (sfcybear)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? ("Matt O'Toole")
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? ("Matt O'Toole")
Re: Why Linux is great. (Keith Peterson)
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Matt Garman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:02:46 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> And if you knew anything about DOS you would know that DOS 4.0 was the
> worst version released by far.
>
> claire
Let me quote myself:
<Les Mikesell wrote about DOS 4.0>
<I wrote:>
"Ah... the Lemon version of DOS. :)"
Which does indeed imply that it was the worst version.
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Subject: Re: Magnetism
Date: 20 Oct 2000 19:13:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bruce Scott TOK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <8s7b51$na2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Gregory L. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>What are the odds of finding a GNU project for the design of magnets and
>>magnetic shielding?
>
>Sounds like something you ought to do yourself... especially if it is
>for research.
To say it's a non-trivial problem is putting a happy spin on it.
>Same comment for CFD: do you trust a black box?
--
"Jugo de naranja, loco con pulpa!"
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Clearing things
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:13:30 GMT
> I'm calling your bluff, troll - name one thing that debian has done for
> the express purpose of locking users into a proprietary protocal.
Not exactly, but did not like its behaviour with KDE, neither do I like
the GPL fanatism ... think would change to BSD license.
> Sure, many companies try to get you to keep using their stuff, but no one
> has done it to the extent that MS has. (though some might wish they
> could).
You said, no one could, but all (I say all) of them has the wish. Of
course
that is not reason to forgive Microsoft.
> Personally, kmail works just fine (bit slow, but no big deal). Don't know
> what features LookOut has that I would need. 'Course, I don't have to
> worry about virii.
Well, last time I tested it had not multiaccounting and it freezed more
than
desirable.
> You aren't worried about never having a choice again? Doesn't bother you
> that IE is only "the best" now because MS used their monopoly to crush
> Netscape? (Do you honestly think that IE 3.0 was better than Netscape at
> the time?)
Companies' wars does not matter me, be it one or another, they'll behave
always the same. And if IE had not been better, it would have not succeeded.
I tested IE since 2.0 and for that times I liked it more than Netscape.
> I find IE's internet options needlessly complex. Give me the simple, easy
> to use Netscape layout any day.
Netscape is not stable and is not worth to run in a stable OS like Linux.
It
can not do right Java or Javascript with no freezing, it is slow (Motif).
Mozilla
has not come yet ... and I guess it'll last. And by the way, one of the good
things in Netscape 4.x has been removed from 6.0 PR3 : LDAP support.
> So you admit that the cost of developing IE (and LookOut?) is included in
> the cost of Windows, so IE is not really free, is it?
It is free. I can download it for free giving no name, no money and no
data.
> SuSE is free - beer and speech. Windows isn't. Either way, IE costs more,
> windows costs more.
Here an official SuSE one is almost as expensive as Windows ME. Yeah, I
know it is only mailing costs, and I know it comes with 5 or 6 CD's full of
things that are obsolete when they finally arrive.
> Please tell me, is WinME multi-user? Really multi-user? Didn't think so.
No, it isn't, and no home user does need it, with different profiles is
enough.
> MS decided you have to pay extra for that. Same with even elementary
> stability - linux you get it, WinMe you don't.
I decided, not MS. And I decided to use a lot of OS's and to try not
to fall into loving one blindly.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Clearing things
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:15:49 GMT
> My latest copy of Mozilla also does URL autocomplete. I don't really
> care for it, and it's a feature I could easily do without.
Less typing ... better.
>And I can't
> even imagine a use for full screen view, except maybe surfing p0rn sites.
Poor imagination.
> But I suppose if I were stuck with a single-tasking, single-user
> operating system, I wouldn't care about covering up all the other
> windows where I'm actually accomplishing work.
NT/2000 have threads included at kernel level ... not like
the pthread() one. Since Windows 95, all Win32 applications
behave preemptively. The task bar is very useful if you want to
use the full monitor for each application and want to exchange
among a lot of them ... be it whichever OS.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Linux or Solaris
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:19:03 GMT
> we are currently developing a business a plan for a rather
> large e-commerce site.
> I am trying to figure out which is the best direction to
> go concerning server and database technology. One possibility,
> of course would be to walk the SUN/Oracle path. But you can buy
> 20 Linux boxes for the price of one sun server. So Linux might
> be the way to go. On the other hand, I heard the Oracle for
> Linuy is supposed to suck. So if we go with Linux which database
> would you recommend and how well do they compared to Oracle.
> I appreciate you comments,
We have Oracle on several Sun servers and it goes fine, even
when setting it up is a little of a mess (suppose Linux version
would be similar, nor better netiher worse). I would recommend
Solaris because of the Sun support (the more you pay the more
they give) and because of the very important thing when important
data are around : hardware rock solid.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why Linux is great.
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:29:20 -0300
El vie, 20 oct 2000, Idoia Sainz escribió:
>> Just a quick comment. I do all of the above just fine in X Windows using
>> KDE 2.0.
>
> Still beta4 while under IE since 4.01.
KDE 2.0? Beta 4 was 2 moths ago. There have been 3 more sice.
>> can use the built in X copy/paste. The built in one is used by
>> highlighting text in anything and pasting it elsewhere with the middle
>> mouse button (or right & left on a two button mouse).
>
> I know it, but does not work for every application.
On what application doesn't work?
>> Drag n' drop between
>> KDE apps works nicely, also, but I've rarely ever used this even in
>windows
>> so I can't comment on the extent of the functionality.
>
> Okay, as you say ... among KDE ones ... a matter of consistency.
On KDE2, you can drag to GNOME apps, to GTK+ apps, and you can drag from Motif
apps.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:20:03 GMT
> I am writing a paper for a college class on the topic of "The Pros and
> Cons of a MS Windows Dominated World" from a "raw" perspective (i.e.
> Usenet and email listserve). I am interested in whether the market
> created the best (fast, efficient) hardware/software products in light
> of MS Windows dominance.
There are different fields like home, office and servers.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:41:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:13:55 +0100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>James E. Freedle II wrote:
>>
>> I have been wondering, why use Linux? Of the several Linux distributions
>> that I have tried, none of them equaled Windows on my computer. At most the
>> functionality was close to DOS 5.0 and Windows for Workgroups 3.11. And do
>> not say stability, because Windows is perfectly stable even when I tax it
>> the most.
>
>A new troll!
>
>Allow me to welcome you to cola.
He's right though. None of the Linux distributions are equal to Windows.
Whether that is a good or bad thing may depend on what the user
considers good -- or bad. :-)
After all, Windows leads the pack in functionality -- at least, according
to Microsoft sales literature and/or Winvocates -- but it also leads
in crashes, unreliability problems, huge monolithic binary registries,
weird behavior such as "no tooltips today" or "my icons are going to
be randomly changed every so often", stupid GUI decisions (try double-
clicking on a .REG, .EXE, or .VBS file on your desktop, especially if
it's totally unknown! Also, a hanging application can't be iconified),
bloat, strange library interdependencies, and, above all, a slightly
oddball definition of "operating system" that includes a browser, yet
doesn't include Microsoft Office, the Windows calculator (which
finally got '3.11 - 3.10' right), Pinball, Solitaire, Notepad, or Write [*]
(one might call that "Word Lite", for various reasons).
Or does it? Now I'm all confused.... :-)
I could see an HTML widget (IE = HTML Widget + executable launcher, in
a very gross sense) being part of a support library and construed as
part of an OS distribution, though -- perhaps it's an issue of
clarifying the differences between:
- the operating system kernel (including kernel loader, perhaps?)
- OS loadable modules or drivers
- OS support libraries
- OS utility toolset/executables (e.g., mv, ls, df, ifconfig, mke2fs, init)
- additional libraries not required by the kernel
- additional tools
- applications
[.sigsnip]
[*] I'm not sure if Write got renamed to WritePad, or replaced by WritePad.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:53:06 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8sq26i$htd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <lMZH5.112376$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Microsoft is not a monopoly not matter how stupid some judges are.
> [snip]
> > But, since over 90% of desktop computers are running a form of Windows
> [...]
>
> Make up your mind.
Are you having trouble with the concept that 90 <> 100?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:51:43 GMT
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:44:36 -0500, Michael O'Connell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I believe ALL networking technologies "allow for differing types of transmissions".
>Phone, video, and internet currently go across many other types of networking -
>dialup lines, DSL, ISDN, frame-relay, T1, etc...
Oh sheesh, what have I started. Anyway, you will notice that I
said that the original quote was that ATM allows for differing
types of transmissions. That's incorrect. Rather, ATM will
encapsulate and transport different types of transmissions. But
ATM itself only supports ATM. For example, ATM can be used
as a bridge between two frame relay networks.
Probably just a matter of phrasing, but one is correct and
one isn't.
Regards, Dustin
>Dustin Puryear wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 23:17:16 -0600, David Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Do you want an RFC, it is a very complicated technology and I am not about
>> >to start explaining it in a NG where it has at best a vague relevance in an
>> >already off topic discussion.
>>
>> Well, ATM really isn't used for "differing types of transmissions." It uses
>> the same type of "tranmission" everytime. Now, what is transported is
>> another matter. As far as educational institutions using ATM goes.. well,
>> they are just part of a pretty big crowd using ATM, including your local
>> DSL provider.
>>
>> Best regards, Dustin
>>
>> >
>> >"Dustin Puryear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:36:46 -0600, David Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >I stand corrected then "many people" as opposed to some.
>> >> >
>> >> >Btw, the other ATM stands for Asynchronous Transfer Mode and is a
>> >networking
>> >> >technology that allows for differing types of transmissions. There are
>> >some
>> >> >educational institutions that use it for phone, video, and Internet, all
>> >on
>> >> >one line.
>> >>
>> >> Not the best definition of ATM that I've ever heard..
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Dustin Puryear <$email = "dpuryear"."@usa.net";>
>> >> Integrate Linux Solutions into Your Windows Network
>> >> - http://www.prima-tech.com/integrate-linux
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Dustin Puryear <$email = "dpuryear"."@usa.net";>
>> Integrate Linux Solutions into Your Windows Network
>> - http://www.prima-tech.com/integrate-linux
>
--
Dustin Puryear <$email = "dpuryear"."@usa.net";>
Integrate Linux Solutions into Your Windows Network
- http://www.prima-tech.com/integrate-linux
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Garman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:54:52 GMT
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:35:59 -0600, Praedor Tempus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> typesetting. Your scientific WORK is what matters most and it is a
> waste of time and effort to learn something that isn't needed just to
> ...
> Gene, Journal of Molecular Evolution, RNA...NONE of them accept latex
> (tex) format documents. They DO accept word and wordperfect. Some of
> them accept Wordstar. A few of them accept plain text, which latex
> _can_ handle in these circumstances.
> ...
> Freehand or Illustrator. The EDITOR(s) at the journal gets to deal with
> all that typesetting crap. That is what they are paid to do.
If the scientist's job is scientific *work* and the editor's job is
*typesetting*, why does the scientist need to bother with anything but a
text editor (and something separate for graphs or illustrations, of
course)?
If the scientist submits something that's going to be re-typeset by the
editor anyway, it's foolish to use Word or LaTeX. It seems that in this
case, the journals should *only* accept in plain text format. What are
the chances that a scientist is going to submit his article in *exactly*
the format required by the journal? So, clearly the editor is going to
spend some time formatting the article to meet the needs of the journal.
I don't think the editor is going to lose any more time if the article was
submitted in plain text.
In fact, if the journal editor has a Word template for articles appearing
in his journal, then it seems as though he'd *prefer* plain text.
So Word is *still* a waste, because the money the scientist spent on Word
could have gone towards hardware or other scientific tools.
MG
--
Matt Garman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I may make you feel, but I can't make you think."
-- Jethro Tull, "Thick as a Brick"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Garman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:13:32 GMT
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:25:05 GMT, Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> U need to read a whole book to understand how to use Latex. I am in the
> business of writing books using computers. I don't want to have to learn
> programming to do that.
I think it's reasonable to assume you could start using LaTeX after
*skimming* the Leslie Lamport's book for only a couple hours. I also
think it's reasonable that you could become sufficiently profficient with
LaTeX in about two weeks. And I don't mean 80 hours, I mean one or two
hours of LaTeX review per day. Learn the features as you need them.
What kind of books are you writing? If you're writing something simple
such as a novel, you could learn sufficient LaTeX in 10 minutes. If
you're writing something sophisticated such as a text book, you'll
certainly have to learn more about the LaTeX typesetting language. But to
write a textbook in Word would also require some learning. And if you
have a huge complicated project in Word (such as a textbook), lost
productivity due to software bugs and system crashes is virtually
*inevitable*.
So take the time to learn LaTeX that you'd normally waste on system
crashes (and some time you'd spend learning advanced Word functionality).
And learning LaTeX might set your work back a few days---at first. Once
you've got it down, though, you'll be *saving* time.
I cannot see the cost of learning LaTeX not paying for itself in a
reasonable amount of time.
MG
--
Matt Garman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I may make you feel, but I can't make you think."
-- Jethro Tull, "Thick as a Brick"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Date: 20 Oct 2000 20:16:56 GMT
>Whereas the Linux price, wasn't. So how much is the price for WinME
>with no prior license?
I think ME is $189. Pretty steep if you ask me....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Garman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:18:56 GMT
On 19 Oct 2000 20:35:27 GMT, Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : U need to read a whole book to understand how to use Latex. I am in
> : the business of writing books using computers. I don't want to have
> : to learn programming to do that.
> http://ctan.tug.org/tex-archive/info/lshort/english/lshort.pdf
>
> It really isn't all that hard and certainly doesn't require
> any programming expertise (unless you want to).
Another upside to LaTeX: since you're working in a *text editor*, if you
use a reasonably sophisticated text editor such as emacs or vim, you get
syntax highlighting that looks pretty (within the editor). Color makes
typing fun, in my personal opinion :)
MG
--
Matt Garman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I may make you feel, but I can't make you think."
-- Jethro Tull, "Thick as a Brick"
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Clearing things
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:22:29 GMT
In article <hMMH5.954$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Multiaccount POP/IMAP/SMTP mail GUI client with filters.
>
> Eudora, Outlook Express, Outlook, Pegasus <--- free
>
> kmail ? xfmail ? pine ? netscape ? mutt ? sendmail ?
> fetchmail ? procmail ? qmail ? Combine like you want
> to get the same that at Windows programs.
Combining any of those with procmail gives a great deal more than MS. Not oly
that but all you have listed is clients for windows so running ANY of the
Linux clients with sendmail gives you MUCH more than with windows. It gives
you an email client AND a Mail server!
>
> Off-line per user suscriptions multiaccount NEWS GUI client .
>
> Outlook Express <--- free
>
POS
> leafnode ? inn ? tin ? slrn ? netscape ? knews ? Combine like
> you want to achieve a final version as capable as Windows
> contrepart.
DO you Know what you are talking about???? DO you know what INN is????? IT"S
A SERVER! Combine ANY of the news servers with INN and bang! more capable
than that outlook express POS.
>
> Java, Java script, 128bits encryption GUI browser with off-line
> per-user capabilities (ActiveX and all that crap if possible).
>
> Internet Explorer <--- free
>
> netscape ? opera ? lynx ? mozilla ? arena ? Can't combine
> anything to reach Internet Explorer power.
Who uou didn't include appache here!
>
> All that should leave clear that GNU/Linux is not a good desktop
> for the average user just because it lacks what Windows gives
> for free more powerful and easier to use.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:03:03 -0700
"Christopher Browne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In our last episode (Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:28:19 +0400),
> the artist formerly known as Jan Schaumann said:
> >"Garry Knight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> >>>Garry Knight wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Most of the word processors I've come across can import and export RTF
> >>>>pretty well.
> >>>
> >>>The most portable document format is PDF (Portable Document FOrmat -
> >>>D'uh). RTF is not half as portable.
> >>
> >> Great. Let's see you "port" a PDF document into Word 97.
> >
> >See <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> further below.
> >
> >Opening one document-type with an application that is not intended to
> >handle that type can not produce the correct output.
> >
> >*You* try opening a word-document with xv.
>
> The point, which should be underlined by virtue of the Subject: line
> above that asks
> "Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?"
> is whether there is something sufficiently analagous to MS Word.
>
> One of the properties of MS Word is that it is used to read, view,
> _AND MODIFY_ documents prepared using the formats that it accepts.
There are plenty of "analagous" programs. That you're not aware of
Wordperfect and Staroffice for Linux is amazing. Either will open and edit
Word files, though perhaps not the very latest version of Word. OTOH,
neither will older versions of Word.
BTW, I've found RTF files to be no more reliable than Word files, or any
other word processor file format. For this reason, I have all the major
word processing programs installed on my machine. Sometimes I'll get a .wp
or .lwp or .rtf or even .ps file that can't be opened by one program, but
for some inexplicable reason can be opened by another. So, true cross
platform, or even multi program compatibility is a myth. Except for ASCII.
So stick with that unless it's absolutely necessary.
Actually, as long as you don't get too wacky with fonts or tables, you
shouldn't have much trouble with any of the above.
I've found that of all the major programs, that Staroffice for either
Windows or Linux is the best at opening "foreign" file formats. Lotus
Wordpro is pretty good, too. Wordperfect is probably the most finicky.
YMMV, depending on which .dlls are broken in your Windows system. ;-)
Matt O.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:20:24 -0700
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Haoyu Meng wrote:
> >
> > U need to read a whole book to understand how to use Latex. I am in the
business
> > of writing books using computers. I don't want to have to learn
programming to
> > do that.
>
>
> Use LyX. No book required.
I encourage anyone to try LyX, just for kicks. For someone coming from a
standard word processor, they'll giggle with glee because it's so easy. It
really is neat. I wish all word processors worked this way.
Matt O.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith Peterson)
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great.
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:33:31 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Some people like it.
> ^^^^^^
>
>You misppelled "IDIOTS"
>
After reading your other posts herein, the one IDIOT we can be certain of is
you.
For a UNIX engineer you sure come off like a 12 year old geek wanna-be.
Grow up.
Another one for the killfile... along with Jedi...
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:34:25 -0400
I have not spent that much, and a lot of what comes with linux is
duplication. Eventually I will learn Linux, but it will take time, but I
have to get my lab reports done, and my drawings finished. Now I may have
software that will do with what I have on Windows 2000, but I do not know
what I have installed under linux. I do not know half of the 1,500+
applications that came with my linux distribution. BTW what comes with Linux
that Windows does not have on the CD?
"Haoyu Meng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> You have a valid point. For people on a budget, Linux could seem
attractive.
> Shelling out $200 for Win2k and another $500 for office might be
prohibitively
> expensive for some if not many. I was never conscious of this issue
because the
> university I went to had a lisence agreement with Microsoft, so I got my
copy of
> Windows2000, Office2000, and DevStudio7 for only $5 a piece.
>
> KDE 2.0 is definitely a significant step in the right direction for
populating
> Linux onto business desktop. On balance, I would much prefer Linux/KDE2
over
> Win98/95. But the overall rating combining stability, usability, and
software
> support, Win2k edges out over Linux -- that's my personal opinion.
>
> sfcybear wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Windows 2000 is rock solid. I have used it for almost half a year.
Only
> > > had to reboot twice, both times due to conflict from newly installed
> > > hardware devices.
> > >
> > > Windows 2000 is stable, powerful, and easy to use. So does anyone see
it
> > > as seriously challenging the relevance of pushing Linux to the
desktop?
> > >
> > > Personally, I had been a Linux fan since Kernel version 1 with
Slackware
> > > floppies downloaded over 28.8k modem. While in college I used Linux as
> > > my main workstation OS, with Win95/98 relegated to secondary role. But
> > > Win2k changed all of it. Right now, all the workstation frontends I
use
> > > at home at work is win2k boxes with the headless Linux servers tucked
> > > away on a network link to do only number crunching and code comping.
> > >
> > > Any similar stories?
> > >
> > > Haoyu Meng
> > >
> > > Telpic Internet Solutions
> >
> > Let's see, pay $$$$ for the OS, PAy $$$$ for an MS office.......
> >
> > Or download a free OS that has every thing most people would need and is
rock
> > solid. I'm using the new KDE that is due out on the 28th. It comes with
an
> > Office suite that does MORE than I need. I can take a trip to Tahoe for
the
> > money I saved! So I get a free trip to Tahoe every time a new version of
NT
> > comes out!
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Garman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:36:45 GMT
Lyx, TeX, LaTeX, pdflatex, dvips, pstopdf, mpage, bibtex, xfig...
Let's not forget that all of these software typesetting tools are *free*.
The money a corporation or organization saves on software licensing costs
(of Windows, Word, etc) *easily* justifies the cost of training employees
how to use these free tools.
This is conjecture, but I don't see how *any* organization could fail to
show long term savings by switching to free software and investing in
employee training.
Training is a one time or very sporadic event. Software licensing is
continuous.
MG
--
Matt Garman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I may make you feel, but I can't make you think."
-- Jethro Tull, "Thick as a Brick"
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
