Linux-Advocacy Digest #473, Volume #30 Mon, 27 Nov 00 18:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: C++ is very alive! (Edward Rosten)
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Bennetts family")
Re: Whistler review. (Spicerun)
Re: Off Topic: Funny Light Bulb Joke: ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Is design really that overrated? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: humor ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Whistler review. ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Whistler review. ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Whistler review. ("Bennetts family")
Re: Whistler review. (sfcybear)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("PLZI")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:16:05 +0000
mark wrote:
> It always amuses me that the windows people seem to have stability
> problems with linux, but the linux people don't, now why might
> that be?
Really?
It always amuses me that non-windows people seem to have stability problems
with Windows, but Windows people don'y, now why might that be?
> It's just not happened to me. I rebooted my Win98SE machine
> twice today, (only twice because I'm managing to avoid using
> Outlook now).
I didn't reboot my Windows 98 SE _once_ today. It didn't crash. You know,
it does happen.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C++ is very alive!
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:39:02 +0000
> > What is a radix?
> radix search? hmm, I forgot what that was, supposedly some alternate
> way to sorting... (not a comparison base sorting, which is how it
> archieves faster than O(nlog n) efficiency right?)
sometimes radix is used to refer to the exponent in a floating point
number.
> > What other types of sorting algorithms are there, and what are the >
> pros/cons?
>
> mergesort worst case O(n log n), the constant for the average
> case is bigger than quick sort though
>
> quick sort worst case O(n^2), but usually works much better.
>
> good old inefficiency bubble sort, very slow, very easy to code
>
> insertion sort, forgot how fast it goes, REALLY efficiency when n is
> small... in fact, "real" quick sort algorithms switches to insertion
> when n is small.
Heap sort- O(nlogn), faster than merge sort, absolute buger.
Bucket sort. O(n), must have a fixed set of possible values. If you are
sorting (say) 32bit floats, you can use a bucket like sort to sort in 2
passes. Uses a lot of memory, and since it is only worthwhile for large
arrays (because of speed and complexity) it's fairly useless.
Shell sort. O(nlog 2n), best worst case.. Good all-rounder.
> note: in general, all comparison based sorting algorithms cannot
> achieve bettern than 0(n log n).
>
> > What would you a histogram for?
> dunno...
Useful for stats?
> > How do you simulate subtraction with addition?
> dunno...
Depends.
a=10+(1+4294967294)
gives 9 for 32bit integer arithmetic.
In general you can't. The only 2 necessary instructions are subtract and
branch if negative. Those alone are the bare minimum for a turing
complete language. Note the lack of addition.
> > Which can be written more efficiently, divide by 3 or divide by 4?
> dunno...
divide by 4. Shift 2 bits towards the LSB.
> > On a pentium which is more efficient integer arithmetic or or floating
> > precision? How about PIII? Why?
> integer... dunno why.
integer. Floating point nuimbers need to be normalised afterwards.
Integer arithmetic needs therefore fewer logic gates.
> > What is the advantage of keeping objects in memory closer to one
> > another? When/how is this a problem in a multitasking multiprocessor
> > environment?
> dunno...
To minimize cache misses.
> > What are the trade-offs between fixed memory block allocation vs
> > variable block?
> dunno... do you mean fixed size? I suppose if you have var size, you
> save some space, but might fragment your memory...
>
> > How about first fit, last fit, or best bit allocation strategies?
You missed out worst fit. First fit generally tends to be the best all
rounder (because of the lack of searching needed compared to best fit).
Not always the case though.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:37:28 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <RptU5.25410$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers
wrote:
> >
> >"Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom Elam wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 02:30:51 +0200, Tom Elam wrote this reply to
"Ayende
> >> > Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >
> >> > >For now, I think that there is a good chance that Whistler will be
as good
> >> > >from win2k as win2k was from NT.
> >> >
> >> > That would make it a pretty impressive piece of software.
> >> >
> >>
> >> yep, only 2 crashes per day instead of 5, and only 5 employees angry
for
> >> their work being lost instead of 10 employees.
> >
> >You idiots are all the same. You used Windows back in the Win3.0 days,
> >realized it was shit, and then never used another Windows again, but
> >held every version to that standard.
> >
> >NT is far superior, Win2K even more, and Whistler just that much more.
> >
> >-Chad
> >
> >
>
> Unfortunately, we've had to use Windows from 3.0, 3.1, wfw3.11,
> Win95osr2, Win98se. Or at least I have. And they've all
> been *very* unstable.
In other words, you reach judgement on the NT lines without even trying it.
9x is a whole other (ugly and horrifying) beast.
> The constant marketing effort by Microsoft
> to persuade the populous at large that using windows is a
> pleasant experience just doesn't cut it. I'd rather have had
> that money spent on making it stable, 'cos it's not.
You *believe* PR?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:39:03 +0200
"Spicerun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > When did you last used MS OS?
>
> Today at Work......Win2K. Performs like garbage compared to the Sun
system
> in the next cubicle. Performs like garbage compared to my Linux laptop.
How is it set up?
On what hardware?
What is it doing?
I'm not seeking answers to this question, btw.
I'm showing that there is a lot more to how well the OS perform than the OS
itself.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:42:21 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <3a228f5a$0$14371$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Rutherford
wrote:
> >how would you know?
>
> I think he knows what's run better for him, which is what he said.
>
> It's nothing like :
>
> >
> >That's like saying you run Linux cause it kicks DOS 6.22's ass.
>
> at all.
>
> wa waaaaa.
>
>
> Besides, we really don't care whether Ayende likes the colour
> scheme of DOS7.3 or DOS8 or whatever this will be.
There isn't, nor ever was, DOS in NT line.
You are thinking 9x line.
A very common mistake with linadvocates, it seems.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:49:21 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Soltysiak wrote:
> >Aaron, get a life. The guy likes Whislter, so be it. Leave him alone.
In fact, i like
> >it too. My eng. buddies and I love it. Beats the hell outta Linux for
usability.
>
> Then Ayende can post about the lovely colour scheme somewhere else.
>
> Maybe you and Ayende can swap skins?
I wish, but my graphical ability is still on the verge when it take me half
an hour to draw a straight line.
> Perhaps develop several.
When I can, which I doubt that I'll ever be able to, I would.
> You could call them 'the professional range' or something.
No, I'm sure that I can come up with a better name, but thank you very much
for the suggestion.
> I bet changing skins is really easy and user friendly and
> intuitive, right?
Display properties>Themes
It is.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:54:21 +0200
"Stephen Cornell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I certainly don't wish to speak for Aaron Kulkis, but I would have
> though that it was pretty obvious that his point was that the review
> of Whistler only touched on the look and feel of the desktop, whereas
> the underlying OS was very unfinished.
I've the OS installed for about 24 hours now.
Most of those 24 hours were spent away from the computer.
How am I to test something other than look & feel in this time span?
Beside, as I'm using the desktop version, it's the most imporant part of the
OS.
The underlying OS is very unfinished, of course, that is why it's a *beta*.
Beside, from what I can tell, the system's inside behave very much like
Win2K.
I'll try to post some more about the underlying OS in a little while.
Anything in particular that you would like to know?
> > You want the truth...you can't handle the truth. Linux is a university
> > drop-out hobby. It's been taken over by hippies who don't know the 60s
free
> > love and free drugs are over. It's promoted by anyone who wants to ride
the
> > Anti-MS wave thats popular with the underground. it'll be there until
the
> > next thing comes along and replaces it as the Ultimate-Anti-MS-OS(tm).
>
> Don't judge all Linux advocates by the more extreme members of this
> group. Many of us like it because it's an affordable, capable
> alternative to Unix, which happens to run rather well on cheap
> commodity hardware. It has all the kind of software that I need
> (mostly for free), and, being a Unix-like OS, it's easy to adapt it
> for my own purposes. I'm only anti-Microsoft inasmuch as I resent the
> way that that corporation is doing its best to make my prefered way of
> working unviable, by flooding the market with proprietry `standards'.
Do you mind telling me what those propriety standards are?
------------------------------
From: "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:18:04 +1100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Great post :)
>
> claire
Claire (/steve/...)! You're back. I just knew you couldn't hold off! Still
using Mandrake 7.2?
--Chris
------------------------------
From: Spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:33:35 +0000
Leonardo wrote:
> "Spicerun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> >
> > > how would you know?
> >
> > I've been there!
> >
> > > That's like saying you run Linux cause it kicks DOS 6.22's ass.
> >
> > I run Linux because it kicks MSDOS3.x, MSDOS4.x, MSDOS5.x, MSDOS6.x,
> > MSDOS7.x, Win9x, WinME, WinNT, and Win2K's ass (all of which I've tried at
> > one time or another....and having to use Win2k here at work -- which you
> > would have known if you had read one of my replies elsewhere in this
> thread.
> > But then again, asking a Winvocate Troll to Read before Posting is futile.
> >
> >
>
> Then why don't you tell your boss that You Will Never Use Windows Again.
As a matter of fact, I did. That's why I'm now setting up computers that we're
going to use to completely replace Windows.
> Looser, HAH
Obviously, speaking for yourself. I've been winning on Linux here.
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Off Topic: Funny Light Bulb Joke:
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:26:51 +1300
I didn't post the original joke! I saw it on nz.comp and thought I was a bit
of a hoot.
kiwiunixman
A transfinite number of monkeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:05:49 GMT, kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> : 1 to post that the bulb used was CRAP and challenging the INTELLIGENT of
> : the other posters
>
> How about 1 to suggest you use a dictionary to find the proper word?
> *INTELLECT*
>
> :-)
>
> --
> Jason Costomiris <>< | Technologist, geek, human.
> jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is design really that overrated?
Date: 27 Nov 2000 22:27:40 GMT
the_blur <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip!>
You've made a lot of great points about Linux, but I think there are
a few things worth mentioning.
<snip!>
: Why is the Linux penguin used so much when it's so goddamned goofy-looking?
: This thing I see at boot (the scrolling list of things that load when you
: start Mandrake) assaults my sense of style. Why do you all have to put up
: with such a silly-looking mascot?
Larry Ewing's Linux penguin won't win any ascetics awards, that's for
certain. Penguins themselves are too entrenched to be replaced now,
but I do think we can do some better ones. The linuxdoc.org
penguin looks rather nice, IMO.
<snip!>
: The default theme for XMMS is dark and it's difficult to discern different
: elements like play/stop/rewind (the eMAC skin is what I would make the
: default) There are so many classy, useable skins, why use such a crappy one
: by default?
XMMS clones the WinAmp UI a little too well. Skins are a slight
improvement, but the whole look and feel of the app is obnoxious.
But, like WinAmp, it works very well at playing oggs and mp3s,
and so we put up with it. I really wish it would play nicer
with standard X clients, though.
: Cut and Paste support across apps is terrible,
Left button to highlight. Middle button to paste. It really does
work almost everywhere, but hardly gets publicized.
: Now I know why I design my pages for IE5...If I were to design for
: linux users, I'd have to either not use CSS font handling at all
: (because fonts become illegible) or design the pages completely in
: flash (but you can't design legible pages in flash because of
: the anti-aliasing). So I would have to design pages that look oh about 5
: years behind the times.
Please, please, please don't design pages for IE5. Design them for
HTML4.x. If you've written a page in standard HTML and Linux can't
display it right, then that's our problem. But if you've written
it for IE5, it makes it a lot harder for us to do the Right Thing.
<instability problems snipped>
I use a lot of battle-hardened apps like Emacs, xterm and LaTeX
and have had no stability problems (not surprisingly). But,
I concede a lot of the newer apps won't be as stable. Depending
on your needs, you might or might not be able to find something
that's been tested enough to be rock solid.
<appearance problems snipped>
I think a better looking Linux would be a pretty good idea.
But, for reasons unknown, coders just aren't great at making
things look pretty and ascetically pleasing (I'm certainly
not); most apps are long on functionality but short on looks.
A little more time devoted to design surely wouldn't hurt,
if only we could find more people with those sorts of talents.
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: humor
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:28:37 GMT
lol!
kiwiunixman
Patrick McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vtkpc$d92$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> just thought it was funny...
>
> http://bbspot.com/News/2000/11/linux_bash.html
>
>
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:34:20 GMT
I have used Windows 3.1/3.11/95/98/98se/NT/2000, NT was the biggest joke of
them all, installed a driver and NT failed to load, resulting in a blue
screen memory dump, not very fault tollerant or reliable!
kiwiunixman
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:RptU5.25410$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Tom Elam wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 02:30:51 +0200, Tom Elam wrote this reply to
"Ayende
> > > Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > > >For now, I think that there is a good chance that Whistler will be as
good
> > > >from win2k as win2k was from NT.
> > >
> > > That would make it a pretty impressive piece of software.
> > >
> >
> > yep, only 2 crashes per day instead of 5, and only 5 employees angry for
> > their work being lost instead of 10 employees.
>
> You idiots are all the same. You used Windows back in the Win3.0 days,
> realized it was shit, and then never used another Windows again, but
> held every version to that standard.
>
> NT is far superior, Win2K even more, and Whistler just that much more.
>
> -Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:36:03 GMT
Well you fuck off you GUI dependent mumma's boy. So, not only you can use a
GUI but a mouse ooooooooooo you must very bright, you fucking nittwitt.
kiwiunixman
Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a2291ba$0$14376$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> So, kiwiunixman, did you classify yourself as a "unixman" because you
don't
> know how to use a mouse and are afraid of getting sticky fingers in GUI?
Go
> away you pathetic worm troll
>
> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > So, Matthew Soltysiak, you classify yourself as a Comp Sci/Soft Eng, did
> you
> > obtain this title because you could click on the start button and copy a
> > couple of files.....oooo big man! Wake up and smell the shyte, Windows
is
> a
> > poorly designed operating system that will never reach the scalability
> > hights of what is achievable by UNIX, an example of this is the big push
> by
> > Intel to SUN Microsystems to ensure that the 64bit version of Solaris
for
> > Intel is ready by the time Itanium is released, now, if Intel had
> confidence
> > in Microsoft, they would not of given a shyte if Solaris was not ready,
> but
> > because Intel wants to move into the enterprise area they needed a well
> > respected Operating System (which Windows is not one of them) to win
> > customers over (esp. UNIX admins previously stuck with expensive,
> propriety
> > hardware who wished to move to Intel based UNIX solutions).
> >
> > kiwiunixman
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:40:14 +1100
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vthhl$5kru8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:gPlU5.54$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Fair enough.
>
> Thanks for the understanding, some people seem to be unable to understand
> that you can't test the system for anything more than look & feel in a
short
> time.
No, I just agree that you don't test beta's for stability. Release
Candidates and tests, by all means, but not alphas and early betas. Don't
make stupid assumptions.
> > So's mine, running 98SE and Mandrake 7.0, funnily enough.
>
> Any idea why?
Because I understand nerdboxen well enough to know that, unless I do
something stupid like leaving a bootable CD in the drive between restarts, I
doesn't do anything except pause for about 1/2 a second during the boot.
> During the install? Of course it tells me what it's doing.
> I especially liked the way the MS ads during setup repeated themselves.
ROTFL! It tells you how great Windows is, and then the install crashes.
> During install, I don't *think* you can install 3rd party drivers, but I'm
> not sure.
> But why would I've to endure 304 reboots anyway?
> Install all drivers, reboot, it works.
No, install one driver, forced into a reboot, install the other 5 drivers
with associated reboots. Install apps (even f***ing Acrobat Reader needs a
reboot), upgrade Internet Exploiter...
> > Try linux, it tells you every damn thing, which makes debugging easy,
and
> > gives you real feedback on what parts of the startup are taking most
time,
> > and what daemons are loading.
>
> So can windows.
Sorry, it can't.
> > ROTFL!!! Ahh yes, at this stage, it is safe to say whistler != secure.
> Just
> > what we need for servers.
>
> Just a nitpick, but the version I'm runnning is a workstation, not server.
In this day and age where PCs are spending more and more time on the
Internet, and more cases where people share the same computer, security is a
necessity at all levels.
> > Just what we all need when we are trying to get *work* done.
>
> Yeah, I know. But you can turn it off.
It should come off unless you turn it on. Like the paperclip (die! die!
die!). People need to get stuff done without being distracted by a series of
animations.
> > Animations...ouch...slow...I just want to logon, dagnammit, not watch a
> damn
> > Flash animation.
>
> Then turn the animation off.
No, it should come off.
> > Not showing anything ala Unix etc is a security measure, noone looking
> over
> > your shoulder or somehow getting onto a VT can suss the length of it.
And
> > anyway, if you make a mistake, whatever sort of blobs are there, you
need
> to
> > retype it from scratch anyway.
>
> I know, but it prevent people from getting any sort of feedback about
> whatever their typing is being sent to the computer.
> Which is the whole reason you've password fields in the first place.
You don't have the faintest idea about even basic security. What about
keypad doorlocks? They don't give feedback like that. You don't need it.
> > Doesn't Win+L work any more?
>
> Yep, it does. Just checked.
> I never thought of trying it
That's the crux. You don't think.
> > Look for IE6 to be in it. With a better print preview as it's highlight.
>
> Yeah, there isn't much that they can change, can they?
> At least on the outside, which was what I was commenting about.
> They could revert to IE 5 on Mac standards, and put in some more standards
> support.
No, the only things M$ can do with Exploiter is make it standards compliant,
and fix the pig ugly default toolbar settings. And that print preview...
> > Good to see focus on the things that *matter* </tic>.
>
> For the user, it is what matter. And what I'm using right now is not a
> server, it's a workstation.
I thought getting things done was what computers are for. I am obviously
wrong...
> > > For now, I think that there is a good chance that Whistler will be as
> good
> > > from win2k as win2k was from NT.
> >
> > Not what you'd call hard.
>
> You think that it isn't hard?
> Then you've never used NT & 2000
Spent time on NT, and it isn't as bad as 98, but certainly not crash hot,
either. I haven't used 2k, because it is just NT5, with a new paint job. And
that *matters*.
--Chris
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:29:41 GMT
Why is an MS review in a Linux group???? Don't you know were this goes?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "PLZI" <[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 22:40:04 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said PLZI in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 17:32:39 GMT;
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 do not know anything about US legal system - so I might say I'm the most
impartial person in the world. Federal judge? Now what is that? Never seen
one, never heard about one, and you come and tell me they are impartial.
Right. Watch me not get impressed.
And for the record - I truly am pro-MS. I'm also pro-Unix, pro-BeOS, pro-VMS,
pro-MVS and pro-DOS. I like computers. I like software. I like computing in
general.
I did not say in my posts, that Unix is bad. By the same token, I do not say
MS software is bad. They all have their weaknesses, but all in all, operating
systems all have their merits. I tend to stick to the merits side - what I
can do with given system. And what system fits my needs best.
This is where you and I differ. You use your time talking about how bad
things are. You also automagically say that everything MS does, is bad -
without really giving any alternatives. This makes you anti-MS, not
impartial. I might say, that this makes you anti-computing. When you were a
small boy, was one of your hobbies to smash the other kids Lego(tm)
structures to pieces?
> [...]
> >I did not take any standing about the MS being monopoly, illegal or not -
I
> >simply do not care.
>
> That is a stand.
Of course it is, but not about the MS being a monopoly or not. As it says. It
is a answer to question: "tea or coffee?" - "neither, thanks." Now which one
I do like more, tea or coffee?
> >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.
You still did not answer in any way to my list about the Things Needed To Be
Done. No, you are not talking about the technical merits, sorry.
> >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.
And the "no technical merits" -explanation was in there....where? Things are
not bad, just because one says they are bad.
> You can
> continue to play your children's games, or you can get some brains and
> learn how to use them.
Somehow I like these witty "fuck you, you're an idiot because I say
so" -remarks. Please feel free to continue. And tell me about children's
games while you're at it.
> 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.
Your explanations are "they are bad, 'cause the company is a monopoly, and
because they are bad." Spanish inquisition would have been proud to have you
as a member.
> I don't mind when people entirely ignorant of all this stuff say "I
> don't care."
I don't care about anything which is besides the point. I care about getting
the job done. Time to contribute, would you still like to go over my list and
give some examples about how these things can be done in other platforms, and
Better (tm)?
> 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.
...or sound like a broken record. Come on, you have brains, you claim you do.
Go over the list, give us examples of technologies which enable us to do
things better, easier and whatnot. I dare you.
- PLZI
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
