Linux-Advocacy Digest #521, Volume #30 Wed, 29 Nov 00 08:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux? ("Frank Van Damme")
Re: Statistic about this bigot group ("Frank Van Damme")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Is design really that overrated? ("Frank Van Damme")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: linux on a 486 (Terry Porter)
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Andy Newman)
Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux? (Disco Stu)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Marc Richter)
Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux? (Disco Stu)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Stuart Fox)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("PLZI")
Re: The Sixth Sense (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Ian Davey)
Re: Whistler review. (Peter Ammon)
Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux? ("Ken McFelea")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Frank Van Damme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:29:05 +0000
In article <ns3V5.10453$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Smartygus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi guys,
>
> I was just wondering if i could get some opinions on which linux distro
> is the most powerful. ie. a combination of good useability with powerful
> features.
>
> thanks,
>
> Michael Smart
Not Redhat. You'll get frustrated.
Debian and so are maybe too professional, it's not recommended for
newbies but it seems to be a very powerful distro once you can work with
it.
Don't take any of the "you don't need to repartition your hard drive"
distros. You run Linux or you don't.
Personally, I recommend Mandrake. It's 2 cd's jam-packed with useable
programs, nearly everything you need, also for servers. Besides, it is
fast, because it has pentium optimisation, but for a 386 or a 486 you'll
have to download a special version.
Success!
--
Never underestimate the power of Linux-Mandrake
7.2 on an AMD K7 800 / 128.
------------------------------
From: "Frank Van Damme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Statistic about this bigot group
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:32:59 +0000
In article <By4V5.73427$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "BcB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>System Uptime:
>4 Days, 0 Hours, 21 Minutes, and 40 Seconds
How did you do that? I have some source code from someone, but it doesn"t
filter out the "load average" and so on.
--
Never underestimate the power of Linux-Mandrake
7.2 on an AMD K7 800 / 128.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:37:23 GMT
"Matthew Soltysiak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Only if he's a software developer or consultant looking to be
employable.
> > Otherwise, what's the problem with his preference?
> >
> > --
> > Tom Wilson
> > Registered Linux User #194021
> > Also...
> > NT 4.0 User
> > Win 95/98 User
> >
> > They're operating systems...Not religions
> > GET A LIFE!
>
> Yes. I't amazing how many poeople take their os's seriously, ppl like
Aaron and
> Kiwiunixman. One person says they like windows, then i post a one-liner,
and
> they all yell like bitches. Goddamn crazy.
I'm like them in that I'm not very fond of Microsoft operating systems.
Unlike, say, Aaron, I'm not an admin and am forced to support and update
software written for MS OS's. Taking my preference for *nix to extremes
means leaving customers out in the cold and I refuse to do that. I'm also
under an obligation to finish a Windows project I started earlier this year.
Once, that's done, I plan to focus, primarily, on Linux and embedded
applications. If I see any money making opportunities that require
Windows...I'm not stupid - I'll take them. I just won't actively advertise
for them anymore.
I only get yell like a bitch when politics are discussed <g>
--
Tom Wilson
Go home Al....
Game over, man!
------------------------------
From: "Frank Van Damme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is design really that overrated?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:42:35 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mark"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can those two sentences follow one another. The last one absolutely
> contradicts the penultimate.
>
> I am also really not interested in the colour scheme of winxxx. It does
> not affect my computing experience in any positive way at all.
>
> And, it'll probably clash with the office environment anyway, and if
> not, with my clothes :)
>
> Mark
Not necessary. Wat if you set your borders fading from pink to orange,
wear an orange T-shirt, and flashy pink pants. Then, set your background
to the one from the win98 sixties theme. So you don't clash with your
computer! With your office of course...
--
Never underestimate the power of Linux-Mandrake
7.2 on an AMD K7 800 / 128.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:54:22 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9006h8$5rl9v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:91IU5.152$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> > I'm not above admitting that they've made some drastic improvements. A
lot
> > of Windows' problems had to do with supporting the MS-DOS legacy and I'm
> > sure it wasn't easy for them. I'm glad to see they've finally buried it.
> > Their developer support is MUCH better too. Aside from its' occasional
> > brain-farts, I rather like NT for casual desktop use. It sure as hell
> beats
> > 95/98 as a development platform.
> >
> > For heavy-duty, mission-critical stuff, though - MS just hasn't cut the
> > mustard yet.
> >
> > When someone shows me an MS OS that doesn't inexplicably die after a
week
> of
> > heavy server activity - Or an MS workstation that doesn't BSOD several
> times
> > a week - Or an MS OS that doesn't need restarted everytime an
application
> or
> > component (other than a service release) is added or removed, I'll
> consider
> > it a serious OS. Until then I and the other "idiots" won't be overly
> > impressed.
>
> You want a heavy server that would run for a week? NT 4(!) can do it.
> (Although, that is not my defination of server)
> You want a workstation that doesn' crash several times a week? NT 4(!) can
> do it.
I'm sorry Ayende, I still do some development on NT4. And it does crash
several times a week. I sometimes DARE Linux to crash and do everything
concievable to make it do so. I can do it...but it ain't easy. NT 4 is much
more stable than previous MS OS's and when I have to do my Windows related
development, it is indispensible. It still isn't even remotely close to
Linux, though.
As a server platform, my last computer related job, outside of my own
business, was working for an ISP in West Virginia (Home State). The main
server was a rock solid Prolient multi-processor server running NT4.0 with a
SCSI array. It had to be rebooted weekly in order for anyone to sleep at
night. Beyond a week's uptime, the chances for lockups and sluggish
performance skyrocketed. Since it was a smallish outfit, and the reboot done
during non-peak hours, it wasn't such a major deal. Still, that does little
for my confidence when considering an NT solution for a heavy volume
network. I've noticed recently they're running a total of seven Win2000
servers. I have half a notion to call sometime and see if that changed
anything.
>
> The above only hold for properly configured one, of course.
The above examples were/are configured properly. Improper configuration was
considered at first with the Web Server. Someone leagues beyond me in the
networking area looked at it and couldn't think of a thing to change.
> Win2K Server and Pro respectebly are the things you want to get in order
to
> get more than what you ask for.
> You don't *have* to reboot for every application install/removal (aside
from
> hotfixes or service packs), the setup program ask you this because of the
> bad precendent of the 9x line.
That's a major improvement.
--
Tom Wilson
Go home Al....
Game over, man!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: linux on a 486
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Nov 2000 10:53:57 GMT
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:47:02 -0800, Micah Higgs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>is it possibul to put linux on a 486/66mhz with only a floppy drive?
Sure, I have it on my 386/sx25 mhz router right now.
It boots from the floppy drive, and thats all it needs.
On the other hand you may mean, 'can I install, Linux with only a floppy drive'
?
The answer is yes to that as well.You can d/l a minimal floppy dist of Debian
(www.debian.org) on 8 floppies (2.0.36 kernel), that will run on a 120 meg hdd,
thats what Ive got on my spare which is an old 486/50.
You can do just about anything with Linux
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:58:50 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9006ha$5rl9v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:5tIU5.157$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8vulpn$5pbkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "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.
> >
> > That's true.
> > The misconception comes from the fact that NT's CLI (cmd) is
syntactically
> > identical to DOS. (A major weakness, IMHO)
>
> Why?
> And if you don't like NT default CLI, get another?
> There are plenty.
I did get another one. My point is, that MS kind of has a history of lousy
CLI shells of any kind. It took them until, what, DOS 5.0 for doskey? It
would be nice to see them put a little more effort into those kind of
details from the outset.
--
Tom Wilson
Go home Al....
Game over, man!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:01:57 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9008a6$5qg6u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:rLGU5.140$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8vv5ba$5nime$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:LeCU5.34$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
> > > > >
> > > > > [..]
> > > > > » 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*.
> > > > >
> > > > > You really should use it before saying such drivel about it.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, sorry, I know. I don't doubt that 2k is more stable than NT4,
> and
> > > > Whistler will be even better, but still, there's too many bodge
fixes,
> > and
> > > > the whole thing desparately needs a rewrite from scratch.
> > >
> > > Well, they got it half right :)
> > >
> > > 2K is much more than simply a more stable version of NT4.
> >
> > Out of curiosity, have you had any video-related GPFs yet? If not, what
> > hardware are you using? (If you posted this previously, sorry. I
sometimes
> > don't have time to closely follow threads)
>
> None, I don't have blue screens in Win2k that are not related to the
screen
> saver.
> The only problem I've with win2k is that the display hanging if I run it
for
> several days without cold reboot.
> The computer is on & active, it's just that you can't do anything locally
> aside from a restart.
> Go to another computer, log user off, and the system is fine.
> I tracked down the problem to a bad viedo card (voodoo 3 3000), this is a
> verified hardware problem.
Thanks for the info there (That's what I'm using )
> It happens on other systems as well.
> The new video card is supposed to arrive today. Along with extra RAM. ( I
> may need to test web pages on Netscape 6. )
>
> Whistler, during CPU & Memory intensive taks, emulate the display hanging
> from Win2K.
> It goes away after a short while, between 10 seconds to 3 minutes.
--
Tom Wilson
Go home Al....
Game over, man!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:14:28 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:900dr0$5pbqk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Corneil du Plessis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:900d6e$kaq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
>
> > Only Microsoft expects their customers to upgrade everything when they
> make
> > a change.
>
> I still have a win95 running word 6 on a 486 & 12MB
> It's being used daily.
I certainly admire your patience! Anything below a P133 running Win95 makes
me apolectic! <g>
--
Tom Wilson
Go home Al....
Game over, man!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:22:48 GMT
Simon Cooke wrote:
>And? Maybe that's the first version he bought. Certainly, that's the first
>one I ever got -- before that, I used Works (for Windows) -- and before
>that, Works for DOS.
I used Word 2 on MS-DOS for a few (painful) years. Nice blue
screen (not that kind). Windows 2 was a wonderful thing for
running a clock and a terminal at the same time. Let me run
with a black on white graphics mode too. At the same time
you could buy Frame Maker for SunOS (Sun 3's).
>Before that? Wordstar :)
That too. CP/M was fun.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Disco Stu)
Subject: Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:34:25 GMT
try mandrake, i have heard very critiscisms about it.
disco stu.XXX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Richter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 16:13:37 -0500
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 01:45:00 GMT, Chad Mulligan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Mulligan wrote:
>>
>> > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> > > But it really is very simple to install wine. If you can't do it,
>then
>> > you
>> > > have no brain:
>> > >
>> > > rpm -Uvh wine*.rpm
>> >
>> > This assumes you use a distribution that supports RPM, not all do.
>> >
>>
>> The other major choice is deb. Just get the deb package and install. It
>is
>> easy.
>
>Also an assumption. Ever looked at Slackware????
>
Oh, yeah, Slackware is a real bitch :-)
download source tarball. Then issue the following commands:
tar xzvf win<tab><return>
cd win<tab><return>
./configure
make
su
make install
Wine is now installed. Custom the .winerc as needed. (very simple)
Compare this to installing any flavor of Windows, as far as steps
or configuration. <grin>
Any questions?
>>
>> >
>> > >
>> > > man wine.conf
>> > >
>> > > follow the instructions to adjust wine.conf for your local
>environment.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Taking about a week and several volumes of typing.
>> >
>>
Less typing then registering any Windows payware.
>> I take it you have never installed wine. wine comes with a base wine.conf
>> file that typically only requires a one line change to specify where your
>> Windows C drive is located, if even that.
>>
>
>Correct, why emulate something that works well enough on it's own.
>
Because I can run all those goofy .exe email attachments safely
via Wine on my Slackpad (Thinkpad w/ Slackware 7.1)?
Because I can run Vantive (customer support software) via Wine
on my Slackpad?
And still run all the Linux stuff that I use?
Which frees up my NT box for Quake 2. (did I say that out loud?)
Just 'cause, I guess.
>> Gary
>>
>
>
--
Marc A. Richter I&R Deployed Support
The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
my employer, Merck & Co., Inc. All responsibility for the statements
made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
sender.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Disco Stu)
Subject: Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:21:13 GMT
oops!!! i mean very FEW critiscisms
disco stu.XXX
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:18:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8vvrt2$as3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> I keep having to come back to the FACT that Windows of any form
> is UNSTABLE. They are making some BOLD marketing statements
> about Whistler being STABLE, but I bet it's not. They have
> never achieved stability and they are admiting it by taughting
> this marketing fling concerning stability. Why if they
> were stable to begin with....
>
> And operating system is only worth it's weight in shit if
> you can keep it up and OPERATING for a period of time
> exceeding say a week without it crashing or blue screening
> under normal business conditions. Windows hasn't made
> anything yet which can make it a solid week yet under
> business conditions without having to be re-booted.
> It's either re-boot or crash. In my work, we turn
> them around every 3 days now instead of every day
> with W2k. That's an improvement over NT by a little.
>
What exactly are you doing with your boxes where you have to reboot
them every three days? Working in an all NT desktop/90% NT Server
development environment myself, I just don't see this at all. We
reboot them when we upgrade them, and that's it. They don't reboot
themselves, they don't bluescreen. Why does it seem to be Unix
advocates who can't keep an NT box running longer than a day?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:34:07 GMT
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Of3V5.26020$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Now, very slowly, please explain to me, what is MS supposed to do with NT
> > group information? Provide a NT Group support for all *nix platforms?
>
> When did documenting your protocol without NDA restrictions become
> 'support'? The other platforms will take care of themselves, given
> the opportunity.
NT Groups are not a part of the protocol. They are part of a service, which
USES the protocol. The service is NOT required to actually use the protocol.
> > Yes, NT's user groups are proprietary. They do not exist on unices. Let
me
> > see. I'll put a Win32 binary file as an attachment to an email message.
> Now
> > you receive that file on a very standard SMTP transport. Say you're using
> > linux. Are you now telling me, that the SMTP standard is somehow
violated,
> > cause the attachment can not be run in your system?
>
> Yes, Microsoft made millions on upgrade licenses simply because they
> arranged to have Office97 included or as a cheap extra with new PC's
> and immediately everyone else in the office could no longer read the
> boss's email until they got the upgrade themselves. Getting client
> software on every desktop that will not interoperate completely with
> any other vendor's server, and charging client license fees for that
> server even if you only authenticate against it is another stab at the
> same thing.
You are talking about some obscure issue of sending and receiving documents
as attachments. And this somehow violates the SMTP protocol standard? Like,
how? Please understand, these are two separate issues.
- PLZI
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:44:04 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > >
> > > Perchance you need some learnin' on system configuration. BTW Linux 2.3
> > > with KDE really stunk on that system. And Linux wouldn't run the SQL
> > > application.
> > >
> >
> > Perchance you need some learnin' on system configuration.
> > Like I said, if you read carefully enough, this is a fresh,
> > default install from the Windozzzzzzzzzzzzz 2000 Pro CD.
> > No extra crap running, just the default stuff.
> >
> > Maybe you need to take a mulligan.
>
> Nope, maybe you need to learn how to configure systems. The funny thing
> about the old piece of junk is the HD is flakey too but software performance
> is fine.
I regretfully conclude that you're thick as shit. Sorry.
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:44:14 GMT
In article <8vvrt2$as3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I accept Windows 95/98/ME is unstable but its desktop and hardware
>support is currently better than Linux Mandrake + KDE 2.0.
But that is only an issue where the hardware you have is unsupported. If your
hardware is supported then Linux is definately superior. The Linux desktop is
also much nicer, with multiple desktops being a huge advantage. I honestly
don't see what is supposed to be so wonderful about the Windows desktop.
There's no easy way to get and access a list of the apps you've got open (the
taskbar can easily get far too cluttered), the way the start menu is arranged
is dreadful (and made worse by installing programs), Alt-Tab + Ctrl-Tab used
to work well in Win3.1 but is now broken and inconsistant. The list goes on.
It's probably very much a personal thing. I've moved to Linux from a
DOS/Win3.1/WinNT/95 heritage and found it vastly superior, without any
disadvantages. There's nothing I did before that I can't do now, and many
things I can that I couldn't. Games might have been a big issue a few years
back, but I find I don't have much time for games these days.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 07:44:47 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS/PL wrote:
>
>
> And give me an example of a .dll file or .exe I can't open for reading. I
> just dropped msimn.exe (outlook express) into notepad for viewing while it
> is running, I then proceeded to RENAME it while it is running without so
> much as a warning prompt without any problems. Windows simply kept msimn.exe
> and added the newly named duplicate msimn1.exe to the folder.
Wait, are you saying that you can't rename an open file under Windows
without making a copy?
I've got a file open in AppleWorks right now, and I rename it as I would
any file, in the Finder. Not only do I not get "so much as a warning
prompt," the name change is immediately reflected in the title bar of
the window where I edit the file.
-Peter
------------------------------
From: "Ken McFelea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 07:01:20 +0600
In article <ns3V5.10453$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Smartygus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi guys,
>
> I was just wondering if i could get some opinions on which linux distro
> is the most powerful. ie. a combination of good useability with powerful
> features.
>
> thanks,
>
> Michael Smart
Loaded question. Everyone has their opinion about their own "personal"
favorite distro and will defend that opinion vigorously. If it works for
you, it will automatically become the best/most powerful distro. All the
distro's have their unique +/- features.
If you are looking for a distro that will allow you to make a somewhat
easy transition from Windows, try Linux Mandrake 7.2. My personal
favorite would have to be Caldera OpenLinux eDesktop 2.4. In my opinion
it is the best combination of clean, powerful and stable.
Ken McFelea
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
