Linux-Advocacy Digest #529, Volume #30 Wed, 29 Nov 00 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: KDE2 (Mig)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (mark)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: Whistler review. (Rob Barris)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:58:21 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8vvcd7$5e9qk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> >> They said W2k was stable and it proved to NOT
> >> be stable. They claim Whistler is stable but
> >> they have done this before with W2k and NT
> >> before it.
> >
> >Who proved it and how?
> >
> >
>
> 7,000 packages Ayende - how many with Whistler?
Who proved Win2k to not be stable.
Answer the question.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:00:04 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8vupqd$5an6e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:3a22e1cf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> 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.
> >
> >As a note, Whistler should give you the option to turn off the GUI.
> >Which is something that can be very useful for a server machine.
> >I'm not sure if the workstation has it, or if it has, how to do this.
> >
> >
>
> Er, what use is that with something with no cli?
It has cli.
> I know that's the hook you're looking for - go for it, Ayende!
> What colour is the 'new' cli?
Any color you like, of course.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:02:26 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9008a6$5qg6u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"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.
>
> Ah, several days. And how many times have you said that it's stable?
>
>
> This is ludicrous. Microsoft have managed to persuade these people
> that 'display hanging' is not a problem on a graphical controlled
> OS.
>
> Amazing the power of monopoly marketing.
Interesting that you snipped the rest of my post, which explained that it
was a hardware issue with the display adapter, and which could be fixed by
going to another ocmputer and logging off.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:05:54 +0200
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <zmBU5.22$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bennetts family wrote:
> >
> >"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.
> >>
>
> >>
> >> 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.
>
> Restarting is a windows thing, Ayende, not a Linux thing. Linux
> users do not need to keep restarting. The OS doesn't keep
> stopping.
Interesting, the last time I installed linux, it had to reboot after the
install.
And if I didn't changed the BIOS settings or pulled the CD out, it would go
right back to the installation screen.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE2
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:10:38 +0100
Matthias Warkus wrote:
> It was the Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:55:58 +0100...
> ...and Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > I think this piece of software (KDE2) will help a lot
> > > > > > to bring several desktop Windows users to GNU/Linux.
> > > > > > Welcome to new distributions with 2.4 and KDE2 by
> > > > > > default (I consider GNOME inferior nowadays)
> > > > >
> > > > > Why?
> > > >
> > > > - Crashes a lot
> > >
> > > What in GNOME crashes a lot? I haven't seen any non-alpha GNOME stuff
> > > crash in months.
> >
> > The panel; the applets; the filemanager. amazingly not the Gnome apps i
> > use but the enviroment itself .
>
> Which version are you using? Can you give me some more information
> about your system configuration?
At the moment - and ill stick to this one on my main box- its Mandrake 7.2.
Actually i havent had one crahs since i installed it, but i dont use Gnome
itself but some apps like dia and gftp. I have had the problem since Gnome
1.0 came out (i allways install Gnome) - and i have used RH 6.0, 6.1, 6.2
and Mandrake 6.x and 7.1 (dont really remenber the 6.x versions).
> > > > - programmed in C (Jeeezzz in this day and age )
> > >
> > > What's wrong about C?
> >
> > Whats wrong about assembler i might ask. Lots of things have happened
> > with computer science since C was created. The most important IMHO is OO
> > and C is just not up to the task.... its too close to the machine so it
> > makes it diffcult to think abstract with it.
>
> Oh really. Have you done any GTK+ development?
Playing around with it a bit. Like Glade and the idea to be able to load
the UI with ligblade at runtime. I am planning of writing a generic
ISDN-terminaladpater configuration utility with it, also because of the
portability of GTK+. I dont think i can do the same with QT 2.x - or i
havent looked closer at QT for that specific intent i have.
The nice idea i see with Glade with it is that the UI is separeted from
functionality by default.
> > > > - Inferiour toolkit
> > >
> > > How so?
> >
> > It was created as an exercise by one of the Gimps programmers as
> > interface tool for the Gimp....
>
> It was created as a Motif replacement. What you mean by "an exercise"
> and "an interface tool" is not very clear to me.
My mistake.. i was probably thinking about Glade. I do remenber one
interview, i think at slashdot.org with one of the first programmers of The
Gimp.. that was what he wrote (i my memory does not have too many holes :-)
> > I think that the reason why Gnome uses it was that
> > Miguel couldnt find anything else.
>
> Exactly. It was the best free toolkit available.
Qt was never a problem, at least not too me.
> > > > - KDE clone
> > >
> > > Bullshit.
> >
> > Most emulates KDE.... Panel , desktop menu (yeah.. KDE2 was first with
> > it in early develpment), control center..
>
> Yeah sure. If that's what you call cloning or emulation, you shouldn't
> work with any third-generation window manager at all. Why don't you go
> back to plain Bowman or such? But surely there've been window managers
> doing panels, desktop menus and such before Bowman. Good luck on your
> quest for the original inventor of the desktop menu ;)
Sorry, dont know Bowman :-) But lets face both the KDE/Gnome interfaces are
not very creative.. they both just look like something else.. and the
interfaces they borrow from also look like something else.
Lets drop that borring Desktop metaphor (:-| will not happen ).... it
maybe convinient for newbies on Windows and MAC but is uninteresting for
unix users and experienced Windows and MAC users as well.
> > But why even wonder since it was Gnome was intende as an alternative to
> > KDE
>
> As an alternative, not as a clone.
You know what i ment
[cut]
> > Whats that i am hearing about Visual Basic and Gnumeric?
>
> Well, there's going to be a sandboxed VB interpreter to aid importing
> of legacy Excel documents. How's that "copying MS"?
I think that adding MS technology to Gnumeric is copying it. I believe its
a completely wast of time (some KDE developers have the same silly VB
cloning idea) since its rare that you really need the functionallity.
Why the heck dont they use something thats stable and good like Python and
PHP (if thats possible). Why should Linux/Unix users care about Windows...
lets forget it and do our own thing.
> BTW: How is copying MS bad?
Dont ask again.. i earn my living doing Windows support. MS is bad bad bad
bad :-)
I think that basiccly everything they do sucks.. Name me one
technology/application that does not suck (forget Outlook - i like that one
a lot)
> If you've got the impression that it's different elsewhere, you need a
> reality check. Over here in Germany (a/k/a KDEland), it's KDE who are
> doing the fast talking and who are being overhyped. The reason why I,
> as a German, don't support KDE and came to working for the GNOME
> project is that I wanted to keep KDE from monopolising the Linux
> desktop.
Nahhh........ KDE developers dont realy do that much talking.. they code..
thats the reason the KDE league was created.. they need some more hype
since the product is so good (and yes KDE2 has also shortcommings)
But great to hear that you also think that KDE is so good that there is a
danger of a monopoly on the desktop (lets not forge that "linux desktops"
are also used on other unices)
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
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 20:04:56 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer wrote:
>mark wrote:
>
>> In article <gPlU5.54$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bennetts family wrote:
>> >
>> >"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:8vsa9p$5e8t6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> I've finally gotten whistler (pro, 2296, beta 1), and I'm *liking* it.
>> >> For those of you who doesn't know what this is, whistler is an the new OS
>> >> (the one that will inherit both win2k & win ME) from Microsoft, destined
>> >to
>> >> finally eliminated the 9x line.
>> >
>> >About bloody time.
>>
>> I guess this means the Dos7 command processor?
>>
>> I wonder how long before somebody ports a decent shell
>> to this?
>>
>
>I've been using csh for the last four years on windows. Works great.
>
ah - so losing the MS command processor is really no loss at all, then.
>
>
>>
>> It's amusing that Mac OS/X has just appeared with tcsh as
>> standard at the same time as Dos8 loses its command processor.
>>
>> Microsoft tried so hard to catch up apple on this, they
>> actually met them going the other way...
>>
>> Mark
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:06:20 +0000
In article <8vuhn3$a6s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 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.
>Looser, HAH
No time - she's busy trying to find a way to make money to pay
microsoft before we go under - we'll never buy another microsoft
product again - can't afford it....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
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 20:10:16 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen Cornell wrote:
>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Wow....look at this car
>> >
>> > It's great
>> > It's fantastic.
>> >
>> > They painted it at the factory!!!!
>> > etc.
>
>
>"Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Hey Aaron, want YOUR hint?
>
>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.
>
>> 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'.
To be honest, I'd be careful about even putting the words proprietary
and standards into the same sentence.
This is a battle I've been fighting for years on equipment/hardware
(not computing) as well as in the OS space.
The business world is as susceptible to fashions & trends as the
teenager's clothing world. I was truly disgusted when I realised
this, but kind of unsurprised as well.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
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 20:13:24 +0000
In article <8vulpq$5pbkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"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?
How can anyone possibly review anything on a PC in 24 hours?
If you want to write for a computing magazine, fine. If you want
to post into (a) knowledgable newsgroup(s), you're not really hitting the
spot at all.
Use this stuff for a few months. When it's been up for 6 months without
a reboot, doing something useful, let us know.
Before then, well, it just reads like, err, a magazine article where
Microsoft have promised lots and lots of full pagers....
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
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 20:17:41 +0000
In article <900j60$60tvc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 14:26:03 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >
>> >"Stephen Cornell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > I've the OS installed for about 24 hours now.
>> >> > How am I to test something other than look & feel in this time span?
<massive chopty>
>
>A standard is something that is published openly.
>De facto standard is something that almost everybody use.
No. There is standard, and there is proprietary.
When there is a monopoly, proprietary is what almost
everybody uses.
Please get the language right.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
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 20:18:50 +0000
In article <900su9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon Palko wrote:
>
>"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:26:51 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>Oh, cut it out already. You two just seem to be hung up on the semantic
>difference between whether something is "standard" (MS Office) or "a
>standard" (IEEE 802.11).
No, MSOffice is proprietary. A standard is a standard. The
only time when proprietary is confused with standard is
when there's a monopoly.
>
>One is an adjective. One is a noun. Pick one and use it.
>
>--
>-Simon Palko
>
>"More fun than a barrel of monkeys... with dynamite strapped to their
>backs!"
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:21:46 +0000
In article <900dr0$5pbqk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"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.
>
>
What use is word 6 now?
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:24:56 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
>Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Giuliano Colla wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm forced to use for a portion of my time Windows, but this doesn't
>> > necessarily make of me an incompetent amateur.
>>
>> I've been peeved by Microsoft's Gilligan-like iconclasm for a long time.
>> I got my first real computing experience on a PDP-8, then worked with
>> a time-sharing terminal (Digital OS again) from Atchison, KS, to
>> Kansas City, I think. Then a small IBM mainframe. Then a DEC-10.
>> Found a resonance in a PDP-11 running UNIX. Nothing else has
>> felt so good since, until Linux.
>
>But yet you too are "forced" to use Windows?
>
Work forces many things I don't like. Windows is certainly
one of the desparately unpleasant parts of my working day.
mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:26:32 +0000
In article <ZcKU5.10668$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:7oHU5.25235$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:idiU5.10334$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > > Who the hell cares? The "average users" opinion on what is or is not
>a
>> > > core process is rather entirely meaningless, in terms of what is a
>core
>> > > process.
>> >
>> > And thus, we define the whole reason that Linux will likely never
>displace
>> > Windows or even MacOS in the desktop marketplace.
>>
>> You mean it is really just the glossy press release that matters instead
>> of the real performance or reliability?
>
>No, it means that Linux users like this don't give a rip about what
>consumers want.
>
>
>
Unlike monopolies like Microsoft who are beating down the door
of the consumer, competing against, err, err, err, well, someone,
anyway, to sell their product, against, err, who?
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:27:53 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
>Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> > "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > > > Rant off, I'm having a bad day with linux & its users.
>> > >
>> > > Windows and their users are typically worse.
>> >
>> > I'm holding Linux users to higher standards.
>>
>> Don't mix up OS merits with user merits.
>>
>> I'm forced to use for a portion of my time Windows, but this doesn't
>> necessarily make of me an incompetent amateur.
>
>I love how virtually all Linux lovers say they are forced to use Windows
>at least sometimes. Usually end up that they just plain can't do
>something the need to in Linux and have to go back to Windows to do it.
>
>
>
I have to use Windows to work. I *never* go to windows to do something
I need to in Linux. I just have a bad time during the day, dealing
with the unpleasant windows experience (another reboot, sir?)
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:29:46 +0000
In article <900eb5$5npgb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Mike Byrns wrote:
>> >
>> > Giuliano Colla wrote:
>> >
>> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Rant off, I'm having a bad day with linux & its users.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Windows and their users are typically worse.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm holding Linux users to higher standards.
>> > >
>> > > Don't mix up OS merits with user merits.
>> > >
>> > > I'm forced to use for a portion of my time Windows, but this doesn't
>> > > necessarily make of me an incompetent amateur.
>> >
>> > I love how virtually all Linux lovers say they are forced to use Windows
>> > at least sometimes. Usually end up that they just plain can't do
>> > something the need to in Linux and have to go back to Windows to do it.
>>
>> There's nothing I can do with Windows which cannot be done
>> much better under Linux, as far as my professional and
>> personal needs are concerned. On the contrary there's a lot
>> of things which can be done only under Linux, and which
>> can't be conceivably done under Windows.
>
>GUI?
>Linux & Unix has the worst GUI I've ever had the displeasure to experiance.
>It drove me to the CLI.
>There isn't one one windows manager that can compare with Windows' GUI or
>Apple GUI.
Ah, but you are the person who thought that 24 hours aggregate
installed time was enough to post an OS review. That means
to me that you don't really use these things at all.
for those of us that use them, the windows environment is
unspeakably unpleasant.
Linux, however, has the major advantage that it works, it keeps
working and it doesn't stop (seen terminator?).
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:32:23 +0000
In article <900bs5$61qq2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:ZHIU5.25257$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > >
>> > > I'm forced to use for a portion of my time Windows, but this doesn't
>> > > necessarily make of me an incompetent amateur.
>> >
>> > I love how virtually all Linux lovers say they are forced to use Windows
>> > at least sometimes. Usually end up that they just plain can't do
>> > something the need to in Linux and have to go back to Windows to do it.
>>
>> Yes, the thing they almost universally have trouble doing under Linux
>> is interoperating with the proprietary file formats that Microsoft has
>> used to lock you in. It's your data, but you have to pay for a software
>> license to access it on another machine.
>
>Well, ther is a nice idea which Office support called *exporting*.
>Actually, they call it Save As, but that is what they mean.
>Save in a file format that you can read, and you are done.
>That the proprietry file formats are superior to the open ones is another
>matter (if they are not, why do you use the proprietry file formats when you
>don't have to?)
>
>
Ah, the words of the naive. What does that diagogue which says:
"some formatting and other information may be lost, as you
sure you want to save in this format" mean?
this is not file conversion, Ayende, as you'd like to suggest.
It is an information filter specifically designed by a monopoly
to ensure that no product can hope to compete with the monopolists
offering, because it cannot even exchange data losslessly.
Lossy conversion is not conversion at all!
Mark
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 20:33:42 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>mark wrote:
>>
>> >No, it was me, running as root, deleting the FS.
>> >It was some time ago.
>> >And, like any person on this planet, I didn't suddenly gained holly
>> >knowledge of the working of linux just by installing it for the first time.
>>
>> So you're quoting yourself deleting a filesystem whilst
>> running as root, stating that you didn't know what
>> you were doing, and saying that shows some kind of
>> weakness in Linux (this was the /etc directory, audience).
>>
>> Wow.
>>
>> I think the weakness may be on the other side of the
>> keyboard.
>>
>> Mark
>
>Well, it didn't look like "C:\", did it? So it should have been
>safe!
>
><leer>
Chortle chortle snigger, laugh, arghhhhhh :)
Mark
------------------------------
From: Rob Barris <[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 20:47:00 GMT
In article <903l4c$57ru$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1500 apps on one machine?
> Assuming average install time of 5 minutes, that means about 5 days of
> just
> sitting there 24 a day, just installing software.
> If we assume 8 hour work days, it results in over two weeks.
> No one install 1500 apps on a machine.
> No one *need* 1500 apps on a machine.
I have 1,177 on my PowerBook.
Funny thing though, I didn't spend 5 minutes on installing many of them.
I just copied them en masse from my old hard drive.
Nice huh.
Rob
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
