Linux-Advocacy Digest #469, Volume #30 Mon, 27 Nov 00 15:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:18:55 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 26 Nov 2000 14:12:08
>"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> When the user base is over 49% it is considered to be virtually
>> impossible to overcome without vast resources. This is usually
>> impossible because the organisation which has the vast resources
>> is the one which already has the 49%. This is why governments
>> have agencies or departments charged with observing and analysing
>> markets and taking action where monopolies are found to exist.
>
>Correct, now did you know that one of the very few things that Judge Johnson
>ruled in favor of MS was that even though it's a monopol, and used its
>influence to make more people use their products. It has *not* prevented
>other products from competing with it.
No, I did not know that. Mostly because it isn't true. The only charge
on which Jackson acquitted Microsoft was restraint of trade by exclusive
contracts on IE. They were convicted of monopolizing OSes, restraint of
trade (tying) in browsers, and attempted monopolization of browsers.
>The first is a perfectly legal, morally correct, and a wise bussiness
>decision. The second is considered illegal, but still a wise bussiness
>decision, moral I leave to others to ponder about, as value systems are
>different around the world.
No, monopolization is not a wise business decision. It isn't a business
decision at all; it is a decision to avoid doing business, and instead
to engage in criminal activity. You are apparently ignorant of how
competition and free markets work. This is not at all as unusual as it
would seem it should be. You are not at all alone in incorrectly
thinking of monopolization as "smart business decisions"; many business
people think the same, which is why it was made illegal. Just because
there are a lot of people who don't realize that you make more money by
increasing your *sales*, not your *market share*, and that to use market
share to make more money is, in fact, illegal, does not make this a
correct position, morally, ethically, legally, or rationally.
[...]
>> The additional money would not have been required had there
>> been any competition, since a competing organisation would
>> have provided the functionality. Basically, Microsoft had
>> to be bribed by a Government to meet the customers
>> requirement, since they were not going to do it themselves,
>> because they have nobody to compete with.
>
>No, there was a competition.
>Linux, Mac, Unix, BeOS, OS/2, and so on.
>They could've choosen antoher OS.
One of the most important points in an anti-trust trial, as I'm sure you
know if you've read Jackson's decision, is correctly identifying the
market. You have failed, utterly, to do so, purposefully. The market
that Mark is referring to which lacks any competition is Windows, not
OSes. Windows is the only OS to use Win32. You may be unaware that
this is a flaw, and a grave failing of the platform from a business
perspective. Microsoft is not unaware of that, but is unconcerned,
since they are not a business, but a monopoly. Monopolies have more in
common with gangsters than with businesses.
>The customers requirement was met by MS, since most of the people in iceland
>can understand english pretty well.
The customers apparently were not of the same belief. We're glad to
hear that Microsoft is so "in touch" with their market.
>It wasn't profitable to make a localize version.
Prove it.
>Naturally, if there would've been another OS which *did* supported the
>language, and it wasn't much worse than windows, it is likely that the
>icelandians would've used that.
I'd be careful if I were you. Once your nose grows too long, its going
to be real tough to wear pull-over shirts.
>But, that is not the point, the point is that *no other* OS presented a
>localized, viable alternative.
>They could've.
Technically, or commercially? Are you trying to say that consumers
purchase an OS based only on whether it has a localized version? If
that's the case, why did they care about whether Windows supported
Icelandic or not; most of them could use English!?
[...]
>> No, because of the barriers to entry given above. The issue
>> here is a business/economic issue not a technical one. Monopolies
>> are business entities not technologies.
>
>I understand that, but I don't understand how a MS could've prevented the
>Iceland goverment from choosing Mac, BeOS, Amiga, Linux, Unix, Os/2 as their
>primary OS and localize it.
Its called monopolization, remember? Mostly, its a matter of having
exclusive lock-in preload contracts with every major OEM.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:19:07 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:48:06
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Why does that always sound so silly? "I chose the monopoly product
>> because it is best suited to my needs," such needs always to weigh
>> heavily towards application barrier issues, lack of competitive
>> alternatives, and the high cost of avoiding the more expensive solution.
>
>Corret, that is usually how I choose a product.
>By how good it will serve me.
>By how good it compare to other products.
>By TCO.
>
>Win2k gets the best
Guffaw.
>> You chose Windows because it has a monopoly, Ayende. I can't help it if
>> you didn't realize that at the time, but you really should be honest
>> with yourself. All these "reasons" you have for using Windows were
>> manufactured by Microsoft; they prevented anything else from fulfilling
>> those needs, as opposed to fulfilling them better or cheaper than
>> anybody else.
>
>T. Max, you really ought to get outside and breath some fresh air, maybe
>take the browser off from sites with "CONSPIRACY!!!" in their title for a
>day or so.
Ayende, you really should stick it up your ass. I'm sorry if you were
unaware that monopolization leads to crappy products, and impacts all
manner of business decisions within a company. But that's really not my
problem. Nor do I have any problem with conspiracies or paranoia or
what-not. If this is the only thing you can say to try to respond to my
statements, claiming I'm a loon and attempt to ridicule me in a far
reaching and personally insulting ad hominem attack, then you might as
well save the wear and tear on your keyboard, kid.
>MS being monopoly or not is not something that I care about.
That seems apparent. My question isn't "why", so much as "how can you
be so stupid?"
>I don't choose
>products based on morals, I choose what I like to use and what will be
>useful to me.
It isn't a question of morals or ethics, Ayene. What confuses you is
that it is, indeed, a matter of "enlightened self-interest". I don't
think Microsoft's products are crappy because I hate monopolies. I hate
monopolies because their products are crappy. They will always be
crappy, and overpriced, because monopolization prevents free market
competition from preventing them from being crappy and overpriced. That
is what competition does, and why free markets are effective mechanisms
for ensuring efficiency of production.
>You've a thing agaist MS, and you turn everything with MS in in to a
>monopoly arguement.
No, I have no "thing" against MS, other than the fact that they are,
indeed, a monopoly. Can I help it if that turns every argument about
their products, and how crappy they are, into a discussion about
monopolies? No, but you can; by giving up and admitting that MS
monopolizes, that this prevents their products from being competitive,
and that this means that W2K actually sucks rocks, while still being the
"best choice" for the preponderance of consumers locked in to the
monopoly.
>You claim that you can't talk about MS without getting
>inot the monopoly issue.
>Frankly, you are quite tiresome with this approach.
>You don't like MS? You've a lot of other choices.
>Linux, Unix, BeOS, Amiga, OS/2, VMS, Mac
Indeed, and with all these alternatives, and a substantial enough amount
of experience on several that I can easily see how much Windows sucks, I
still don't use any of them, nor do the preponderance of consumers. Why
is that, do you think?
>Some of them cost less than windows, some more, some of them would serve
>your need better than others, you've a choice, deal with it.
They are all better choices for anything, but for one tiny little
problem: monopoly.
>But, here we come into another arguement, "I can't be free from MS because I
>have to use it in work."
I'll tell you what; if MS's success is based on how well their products
serve their customer's needs, then doing away with per-processor
licensing, cliff's edge pricing, and exclusivity clauses within the OEM
contracts wouldn't at all hurt their market position, would it? So how
come MS has these things? And what do you suppose would happen if they
went away?
>That is not your choice to make, in work, you use whatever your employee
>gives you, or whatever you can convince it to supply to you.
As opposed to whatever is most cost-effective, convenient, or profitable
for my employer, to be sure. Monopoly crapware; that's what employees
are provided. And you want to suggest that this is because these
companies would prefer to pay hundreds of dollars, recurrently, for a
product that is not anywhere near as reliable or robust or flexible or
widely supported, than get a better alternative FOR FREE, with unlimited
licensing *and* source code *and* the ability to modify it or pay to
have it modified whenever necessary?
>That is true for many things in work enviroment, somehow you want it to be
>different for computers?
Look, kid. I'm not some incipient moron whining about "other people"
and how "stupid" they are. This is real life; I am, in fact, intimately
involved in some cases with the decisions about the work environment you
are pretending to relate. The "other things" in a work environment
where a company locks themselves into an inferior product with a long
history of being inferior are not nearly as common as you might wish to
pretend.
>Your employee made a choice, his reasons be what they may, you can try to
>convince him to move, you can quit, and you can work with windows.
Would this be hand-waving, or arm-waving? Either way, saying "his
reason be what they may" seems to be little more than an attempt to
ignore what those reasons are, most particularly because they are, in
fact, known. His reasons are the criminal behavior of the supplier,
Microsoft.
>Simple, it would be the same if you didn't like the chair you were given, or
>the room you were working on.
And perhaps I might then attempt to find out why my company is wasting
money, rather than simply succumb to a peon's argument from ignorance.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:19:17 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said PLZI in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 17:32:39 GMT;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> I didn't say it was the only way you knew to do things; merely the only
>> way to understand them. Or should I have said to explain them, which is
>> what I meant; you see the current state of computing technology through
>> Windows colored glasses, regardless of your background and experience.
>
>As where as you see it through anti-ms-glasses, which is not the same thing
>as without any glasses at all.
But that's the point. I do see it without any "glasses", at all. You
might want to insist I must, since I'm anti-MS, but that isn't a very
cogent argument, since you are pro-MS. So we might do something like go
to an impartial observer. How about a federal judge; they're about as
impartial as you can get.
[...]
>I did not take any standing about the MS being monopoly, illegal or not - I
>simply do not care.
That is a stand.
>I leave the suing of companies and people to the US of A.
>I'm simply talking the technical merits of the platform.
So am I.
>This always seems to
>be the last line fo defense - when nobody comes up with the answers,
>everybody always defaults to "but ms is the evil empire!" - line in the end.
>Sad.
It would be, if it were true. Generally, after explaining why the
platform has no technical merits, to speak of, the kind of posturing you
are doing is used to try to avoid the response you get, which explains
that the reason it sucks is that it is monopoly crapware. You can
continue to play your children's games, or you can get some brains and
learn how to use them. Claiming I called MS an "evil empire", or that
my accurate, consistent, and practical opinion of their products is some
sort of vendetta, hardly serves to refute any of my explanations for why
Microsoft software is as bad as it is, and still considered "best" by at
least some vocal supporters, if not the majority of people.
I don't mind when people entirely ignorant of all this stuff say "I
don't care." But when you're going to start discussing how bad the
software is, its time to put away such aversions, and act like rational
human beings, rather than mindless consumer boobs.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:19:28 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said mark in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 17:41:03 +0000;
>In article <vrST5.5567$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Chad Mulligan wrote:
[...]
>>> >Not true, I published a letter to the editor of PC week some 6 years ago
>>> >with a minor complaint about Microsoft and received a call from MS asking
>>> >what they could do to fix the problem, I told them and it was done, both
>>> >retroactive and made policy in their next release.
>>>
>>> I thought that the EULA was not enforcable 6 years ago, but might
>>> be now? Related to UCITA or DMCA or something?
>>>
>>> Would be interesting to see what happened now.
>>
>>Most likely the same, MS saw this as a PR/Marketing problem and did what
>>they do best, give the customer's what they want.
>
>Chuckle. I'm still waiting for any of the things I want. Still,
>I'll assume you were joking here.
I keep thinking of George Carlin on his new special on HBO ("You're All
Diseased"), "*Service* the customer!"
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:19:41 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chad Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 26 Nov 2000 01:19:18
[...]
>> Chuckle. I'm still waiting for any of the things I want. Still,
>> I'll assume you were joking here.
>
>Not exactly, They do try to meet marketing requests. Little things like the
>Terminal Server addition to Win2K Server for remote adminstration originated
>from an e-mail sent to tech support at MS by myself.
Funny, I would have thought it originated from the fact that this has
been a standard feature of server OSes for decades.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:20:01 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chad Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 17:29:53
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Chad Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 23 Nov 2000 16:59:04
>> >"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> [...]
>> >> Wrong, Netscape sold it (for around $35, if I remember right) until
>> >> M$ decided to crush their competitor.
>> >
>> >But it was available on multiple FTP Servers for free, infact, in direct
>> >contravention of law, Netscape had exclusive use contracts with many ISP's
>> >that forbade the ISP from supporting any customer using IE. These ISP's had
>> >among their number large members such as Pacbell.net and AT&T.
>>
>> What laws precisely do you think this contravenes?
>
>The very same ones that you accuse Microsoft of violating. It is an "Unfair
>Business Practice" to limit support to customers because of the platform
>they use when this is done by an exclusive contract. It equates to price
>fixing...
You've confabulated the charge; you'll have to be more clear. As
stated, the behavior would not seem to contradict the Sherman Act, or
any other anti-trust law that I'm aware of, by itself. You see,
anti-trust law doesn't outlaw certain acts; it outlaws a *class of act*.
Netscape can ask ISPs to enter into contracts in which they promise to
not support IE; that itself is not illegal. On the other hand, they are
not allowed to monopolize or attempt to monopolize or restrain trade,
regardless of what contracts they used. So, was Netscape attempting to
control prices or exclude competition when they did this? I think not;
sounds like they were trying to survive against an illegal monopoly.
[...]
>Opera is OK but I find IE most useful.
>Netscrape hasn't had a decent version since 3.5 (that's why IE became the
>market leader BTW).
I've never been able to figure out what people are referring to when
they say things like this. I haven't been able to see a whole lot of
difference between IE or Netscape since... well, ever.
>as for middleware COM and COM+ are moving along rather
>well I really have to disagree about the technological standstill as that
>only applies to those stuck in the eunuchs world or think the bastard
>stepchild (Redheaded or redhatted?) Linux will take over the world.
LOL.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:20:30 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 21:04:17
>"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> It became market leader because it was given away by the monopoly
>> with the monopoly OS. That's what monopolies do. I think that's
>> also what the court found.
>
>No, actually, the court found that even thought IE was bundled with Windows,
>it didn't stop Netscape from competing.
You are only slightly mistaken. What he said was that Microsoft's
efforts to engage ISPs, ISVs, and others in exclusive contracts
preventing Netscape from competing did not have sufficient impact to
convict them of restraint of trade.
>It was that IE was a better browser that cause the shift.
No, it was the bundling, the restraint of trade charge which Jackson
*did* convict them of, along with monopolizing OSes and attempting to
monopolize browsers.
[...]
>With IE, I could get all the mail from all those email boxes with no
>trouble.
You mean with Outlook?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:21:09 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 26 Nov 2000 18:00:30
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 19:06:39 -0500;
>
>
>> >If I have 5 HTML documents, I can't associate each to be opened with a
>> >different editor using shortcuts.
>>
>> Actually, you can. Sort of, at least. You can make shortcuts which
>> call the app and load the doc, and use them instead of the original doc
>> icons. Rather simple, don't you think?
>>
>> Wouldn't work for links, but then you could just use a one line shell
>> script.
>
>What links are you talking about?
Symbolic links, sorry.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:22:00 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:23:41
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Yes. What do you do if the file type doesn't already exist? Or if you
>> wish to change, not the association of an extension to a file type, but
>> the file type to the application? Or if you want to re-arrange which
>> extensions belong to which pre-existing file types? (This last would
>> be, for instance, if you wanted multiple extensions to remain part of
>> one file type, and multiple extensions to change to a different file
>> type.)
>
>Define file type, please.
If only I could. File type is an abstraction, see. But I'll do the
best I can, and we'll see how it goes.
In Win3.x, Microsoft used "file associations" to provide document
launching capabilities similar to other OSes. On Unix, "magic" is used,
which is essentially looking at the first few bytes of a file and
identifying the format; but document launching was never widely used.
Magic was actually designed for slightly different things. On the Mac,
they sort of split the difference. There is a couple of codes, one
which identifies the creator app (providing similar capabilities to
magic) and one that identified the "document type", the equivalent of
the file association on Windows, used for document launching.
File associations in Windows worked on the extension of the file, using
DOS's 8.3 file format. A particular extension is associated with a
particular application, so that launching any document with that
extension loads it into the application.
In Windows 95, in an effort to try to improve this mechanism and
incorporate additional functionality, file associations were modified.
Now, instead of relating an extension directly to an application, the
extension is related to a file type, and the file type is related to an
application. Some of the ostensible flexibility in this system is that
multiple extensions can be associated with a given file type, and
multiple applications can be related to a file type.
All in all, it would seem to be a quite useful and adequate system.
However, it really only works as long as you do things a certain way,
this being limited to relatively trivial direct management. So long as
you are satisfied with 99% of the configuration, and wish merely to
change simple associations in limited ways, you would probably never
realize how badly designed it is. Even trying to forget (it ain't easy)
about that pathetically bad "Open With..." dialog, or the difficulty of
finding an arbitrary "file type" in a listed sorted by invisible
information, and what not, doing anything less brain-dead than
clicky-clicky re-assignment of an extension or two (one at a time, of
course) to a different file type is really not operationally effective.
Even after trying several programs specifically designed to handle the
relationships between extensions, file types, and applications, I can
say without question the system sucks. Not merely because of
Microsoft's little problem writing competitive software; that's just the
seed of it, really. Its every bit as much the application developer's
fault, as well, for "hard coding" how the associations *must* be set up
in order to function correctly at all. And the business about
"hijacking associations" and RealPlayer and all that crap....
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
