Linux-Advocacy Digest #948, Volume #29 Mon, 30 Oct 00 19:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux in approximately 5 years: (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: MS Hacked? (Gary Hallock)
Re: To all you WinTrolls (Terry Porter)
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (David Dorward)
Why Linux is great (mlw)
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (Terry Porter)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:39:48 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in approximately 5 years:
MH wrote:
> > > I have now got Lotus Smart Suite ME running under Linux using WINE, it
> is
> > > really cool. I now have a replacement for StarOffice.
>
> I thought SO was tits up? Everyone here (guru's included) say so.
> What's up with that? Are you saying SSME is a better product?
> Say it ain't so Joe!!
Better? Well, that's a matter of opinion. But where I work, Lotus is what
people use. So it would be nice to have Smart Suite work on Linux.
>
> BTW, I'm going to put Linux on a new 20gig drive and use Wine so I can run
> all my windows applications under Linux instead of windows where they run
> three times as fast and are no more stable than when running under windows.
> DUH...
Duh. I've been runing Lotus Notes under wine on Linux for months now. It
runs faster and is definitely more reliable than on Windows. And since all
of my real work is done on AIX and Linux, I don't want to have to boot up
Windows just to send a note or draw a diagram.
>
>
> > Great! I haven't tried it for a while, but I always had trouble in the
> past
> > getting it to work. What version of Wine?
> >
>
> That hasn't changed in the present.
I really don't know what you mean. Wine is constantly getter better
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:41:23 -0600
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Weevil in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
> >Maybe, but I don't feel confused. :)
> >
> >When Win95 was launched, most people had never even heard of the
internet,
> >and the WWW was in its infancy.
>
> Thus, the point. The hype which surrounded the release of Win95 would
> be as convincing today of the supremacy of the solution as the original
> PlayStation, for all practical purposes. Win95 is only perceived to
> have been in any way a motivating facto in putting Win95 on everyone's
> desktop because the WWW happened, immediately after that. You see how
> you can be mistaken, and yet not confused?
Certainly. But that turns out not to be the case. No statistical analysis
is necessary. You only need to understand that advertising works, and MS
put on an advertising blitz for Win95 like the computer industry had never
seen (except for those cool Macintosh Super Bowl commercials).
This is the way the world works. It is why Super Bowl commercials cost
magnitudes more than commercials for an afternoon game show. If the world
didn't work that way, advertisers wouldn't be lining up to pay hundreds of
thousands for 30 seconds during a football game.
You are welcome to argue the point all you like, of course, but you'll just
be wrong over and over. :)
> >I got a personal connection to the net in
> >1994, but it was through a shell account using a plain text comm program.
>
> I first connected to the Internet through MILNET, but that was a whole
> different thing, back before DNS was a user interface type of system,
> and most of the thing was still mini-computers. Then I figured out the
> difference between X.25 and Internet (no "the", back then) playing with
> CompuServe dial-up in 1992.
CompuServe was unrelated to the Internet. It was simply another dialup
network that did eventually connect itself to the net. I had a CompuServe
account in the mid 80s, but it was prohibitively expensive. They charged by
the hour, and I was already an online junkie by then. I ended up canceling
my account and sticking with Opus, Fidonet, and others.
> >I used command-line versions of ftp and telnet, and I even tried out
> >a rather odd WWW client which downloaded the components of a web page and
> >rendered them on your PC in a pretty strange manner (can't remember the
name
> >of the program), but as I was on a 2400 baud modem at the time, I pretty
> >much ignored the WWW since it was hideously slow for me (and I didn't
have a
> >decent browser).
>
> Perhaps the "strange matter" was a "Magellan" like permutation of
> gopher.
No, it wasn't gopher. It was WWW. I used gopher, archie, veronica, ftp,
telnet, WAIS, and WWW. Actually, I tried more than one of those odd
browsers, and I now remember the name of one of them -- Slipknot. The only
reason I didn't use a real browser (Netscape or Mosaic) was that I didn't
have a PPP or SLIP account. I had a dialup shell account, and I used Telix
(a DOS comm program) to access it.
> >In 96 I moved to Florida, got a faster modem (14.4k) and a PPP account,
and
> >decided to download Netscape to give the web another look. In those
days,
> >web advertising was barely getting started, and most page creators were
> >mindful of bandwidth issues for the growing number of modem-based users,
so
> >they kept graphics to a minimum and made the web a joyful experience.
>
> It still is, if you spend time at it and know what to avoid. But, yes,
> its mostly crap.
Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is bullshit.
> >Windows 95, at that time, was far, far better known than this thing
called
> >the Internet.
>
> And yet, it was because of the Internet, not Win95, that people were
> buying computers. Isn't that odd?
It was both, of course. MS's massive advertising campaign, and the
Internet's word-of-mouth popularity.
>
> >And yes, Microsoft's massive media flood did have the desired
> >effect of recruiting new computer owners (Microsoft customers). It was
only
> >later that the Internet explosion ended up doing the same thing on an
even
> >bigger scale.
>
> It was only later that you noticed the massive recruitment wasn't really
> because of Win95, to begin with. All PC users were, at that time,
> Microsoft customers, as they still are, because of, well, you know. The
> "massive desired effect" is simply a matter of them still taking credit
> for the large scale on which they, you know. That it was only the early
> portion of the Internet explosion to which you attribute market behavior
> is a matter of your inherent need to second-guess what is going on, when
> you are prevent from double-checking what is happening by unethical
> behavior.
Not at all. Market reaction to Microsoft's media blitz only lasted slightly
longer than the blitz lasted. They only did it for a few months, after all.
Their advertising resulted in a spike in the number of new computer buyers.
I don't have to see numbers to know this. The same thing would happen no
matter who spent the millions for the advertising. It's pretty much a law
of nature. :)
jwb
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:45:23 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS Hacked?
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Huh? Goto's do not make code any more or less likely to work. They do make
> the code more difficult to maintain over time. The programmer writing the
> code knows exactly what the goto is doing at the time, but a year later that
> same programmer might not have a clue, or might miss the program flow
> because of a goto.
Overuse of goto's does indeed lead to unreliable code. It makes the code much
more difficult to review and be sure that you understand all of the edge
conditions.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: To all you WinTrolls
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 30 Oct 2000 23:45:51 GMT
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:34:06 GMT, Jake Taense <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>It was the Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:28:37 GMT...
>>....and Jake Taense <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Guess what? I know several people who tried linux - an honest, real attempt -
>>
>>> gave up, and went happily back to Windows. Some of them made the claim that
>>> you mentioned above - "Linux sucks".
>>
>>If you can't name them and point me at negative statements they made
>>about Linux, I'll take it you're inventing those people.
>>
>>mawa
>
>Jerry Jackson, Terry Adamoski, Liz Fruer. All residents of Edmonton, Alberta,
>Canada.
That only leaves 4 to justify your claim of "several" ?
> But what good is that? I could easily be inventing them. I can't point
>to their statements. Shall I have them come onto cola and state their
>opinions?
Sure why not ?
> That can be done. What would happen is they would be labelled as
>Microsoft zealots, even if they expressed not one single pro-Microsoft
>sentiment, and their claims would be dismissed out of hand.
Bull shit.
>
>Your response is typical. "Nobody could EVER find something negative about
>linux. He must be lying."
Nope thats a tried and true Wintroll claim.
>
>Lots of people have genuine, valid complaints about linux. I use it at home
>(RH6.2 currently) a good deal of the time, but I have a number of unresolved
>complaints.
Then get with the program and resolve them, its FREE you know, we all work
together to resolve our problems with Linux.
How long since you rang the Microsoft "help" line btw ?
>
>If you start questioning claims that lack direct evidence, perhaps you should
>start with the huge and varied claims that the linux publications like to make
>concerning the installed user base. Talk about unsubstantiated drivel.
Commercial publications want to sell publications they want your $$$$$$
>
>But, like all linux advocates (and advocates in general) if it supports your
>opinion, you accept it without question, and if it doesn't, you attack the
>source of the info as your starting point.
What a nice generalisation, thanks for that.
>
>(By the way, that last bit was not directly related to this post - more to the
>tone of your posts in general (thanks to a deja search).)
Hey please feel to stay in Wintroll land ?
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: David Dorward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:53:36 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> dir is directory what is list? List of files? Lists? What? Why 'ls', why
> not 'list' - why so short?
Probably becuase it takes fewer keystrokes to type.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Why Linux is great
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:59:27 -0500
Where else can you find a system, which can be downloaded for free, or
any price for that matter, that has:
Object Relation SQL database.
C/C++ compiler
Programming editors
Office Packages
Debuggers
Network file servers
Printer Servers
Entire Internet service package
remote administration tools
e-mail servers/clients
Choice of desktops
Various programming languages besides C/C++
Calendar programs
CDR tools
The list continues, 100s of utilities and tools, most (if not all) of
what anyone would want to do with a computer.
There is no reason to buy Windows or NT!
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 31 Oct 2000 00:02:11 GMT
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:18:48 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Brown) wrote in
><8tjfd6$v2n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>"Type" is what you do at the keyboard - why do you think that "type" is
>>somehow more intuitive than "cat"? "ls" is short for "list", "dir" is
>>short for "directory" - neither one is more or less cryptic than the
>>other.
>
>type file?
>
>Seems pretty obvious to me.
>
>cat file or concatenate file...
>
>hmmmm... sorry a bit strange
No just a bit different from the DOS things you know.
>
>dir is directory what is list? List of files? Lists? What?
Type "man ls" and find out .... Wintroll
tp@gronk ~ >man ls
Formatting page, please wait...
DESCRIPTION
The program ls lists first its non-directory file arguments, and
then for each directory argument all listable files contained within
that directory. If no non-option arguments are present, a default
argument `.' (the current directory) is assumed. The -d option
causes directories to be treated as non-directory arguments. A file
is listable when either its name does not start with `.', or the -a
option is given.
Each of the lists of files (that of non-directory files, and for
each directory the list of files inside) is sorted separately
according to the collating sequence in the current locale. When the
-l option is given, each list is preceded by a summary line giving
the total size of all files in the list, measured in semi-kilobytes
(512 B).
The output is to stdout, one entry per line, unless multicolumn out-
put is requested by the -C option. However, for output to a termi-
nal, it is undefined whether the output will be single-column or
multi-column. The options -1 and -C can be used to force single-col-
umn and multi-column output, respectively.
...................
> Why 'ls', why
>not 'list' - why so short?
I beleieve its because programmers are lazy, I know I am. We hate to type when
its not neccessary.
>
>--
>Pete Goodwin
>---
>Why don't I use Linux?
Because Goodwin is a Wintroll, no one could be this persistently ignorant.
>Waiting for Borland to release Delphi.
Its called Kylix
>
>
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:41:39 -0500
Static66 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:59:53 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >John Fereira wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <rGPK5.116711$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce Schuck"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Matt Kennel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> > > :Look at Oracle. You pay for the software by the mhz of the chip you
> >> >run
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > > :on .... as if that was any of their f**king business.
> >> >> > > :
> >> >> > > :Upgrade the processor and pay more money!
> >> >> > > :
> >> >> > > :Talk about extortion.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Why? I see no relation.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I guess you are blind.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > The problem with Microsoft's business practices is that they were
> >> >> > intentionally
> >> >> > > designed to thwart agreements between the Microsoft client and some
> >> >other
> >> >> > > third software maker by means other than offering a superior product.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > They were designed to strongly encourage companies that sold hardware to
> >> >> > sell only Microsoft software in the same way GM, Ford, and Chrysler
> >> >strongly
> >> >> > encouraged franchisees to only sell cars made by the company that sold
> >> >them
> >> >> ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> >> > the franchise.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Note the PAST TENSE, as this is *ILLEGAL*.
> >> >>
> >> >> A sizeable portion of auto-dealers, IN AND AROUND DETROIT--RIGHT UNDER
> >> >> THE AUTO-EXEC's NOSES sell cars and trucks from multiple manufacturers...
> >> >
> >> >A sizeable portion? Are you trying to tell me dealers sell both Ford and GM
> >> >and Chrysler cars?
> >> >
> >> >Never seen it.
> >> >
> >> >Or are you talking Ford/VW and GM/Volvo.
> >> >
> >> >That I've seen. And I've seen Auto Malls where multiple separate dealers
> >> >sell cars.
> >>
> >> Are you sure they're separate? Out in the south SF bay area there is a
> >> company called the "Lucas Dealership Group". It's one company that owns
> >> mulitple dealerships that include almost all of the major domestic and
> >> foreign models. I've seen the same thing in several other places. Each
> >> dealership might be limited to one or two manufacturers but they're all owned
> >> by the same company.
> >
> >And the reason that they can compete is because the automakers are NOT
> >allowed to discontinue volume discounts just because the dealership
> >sells competitors products.
> >
> >The computer industry should be the same.
> >
> >>
> >> John Fereira
> >> Ithaca, NY
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I gotta disagree with you on this one. I think the LESS government
> MANDATES the better off we all are.
You're not advocating "Less Government"...you're advocating NO GOVERNMENT.
Our government is founded upon the principle of acting as an agent to
guarantee rights. One of those rights is to freely conduct trade.
Microsoft's entire corporate strategy, for over 2 decades, has been
to seek to obstruct, or otherwise interfere with the free trade among
OEM's and third parties.
It is therefore, PROPER for the government to get involved.
Remember, Microsoft has come under DOJ fire during not only the Klinton
administration but ALSO during the George Bush, Sr. administration AND
the Ronald Reagan administration. Thus, through the entire rainbow of
political climates, Microsoft has been deemed to be committing acts which
are in blatant violation of the LEGAL rights of their competitors.
Your right to swing your arms ends whereever someone else's body begins.
The only business arrangement which you may legally prevent someone from
carrying competitor's products is in franchise agreements. As Dell, Compaq,
etc. are NOT Microsoft franchisees, Microsoft has NO legal standing for
basing their pricing upon the volume of products sold which come from
other suppliers (RedHat, SuSE, Sun, etc.).
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
