Linux-Advocacy Digest #671, Volume #30 Tue, 5 Dec 00 19:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux is awful ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux is awful ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux is awful ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (B. P. Uecker)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Dennis Popov")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Steve Mading)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Steve Mading)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux is awful (I R A Darth Aggie)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad C. Mulligan")
MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical? (jtnews)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:06:09 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:00:03
> >"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:90h7km$14a6j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >Well, actually, Windows can do this too. Not as well, not as easily,
> >> >and not as conveniently, but it can do it.
> >>
> >> Wow, I never thought I would see you give even small praise to windows.
> >>
> >> Are you having a sick day or something max?
> >
> >File>Print>Print To File
> >
> >How much simplier can it get?
>
> Not that simple, certainly. Not even on Unix. Sure, the brain-dead
> idea that you "just" execute the command is simple enough. I believe we
> were discussing what is necessary for the command to actually do what
> you want. For what its worth, your 'simplier' is going to output
> whatever's on screen to whatever's the default printer, not output an
> arbitrary file to postscript. See what I mean?
File>Print> (result in a dialog about what printer to print it to)
PostScript Printer>Print To File
Not that much harder. :)
> The fact is, Nigel, I've quite a few good things to say about windows.
> The desktop isn't half bad, even before you get used to it.
> Monopolizing desktops will do that. In comparison to any other desktop
> of five years ago, or even today, there's quite a bit of good stuff in
> there. And the alternatives don't seem like they're going to ever
> realize how important convenient keyboard control of the GUI is. Then
> again, Microsoft hasn't quite followed through on that, either. I
> prefer the standard app-menu window mechanisms of windows to the
> desktop-menu of Mac or the free-style method common on X applications.
> Obviously, these are things to praise, as X has increased its keyboard
> support significantly and all apps generally adopt the standard GUI app
> layout, MDI interface. (Windows supports many more 'real world'
> interfaces that break this method than most Unix systems.)
Actually, that is technically incorrect.
It's *much* more easier to use Windows' builtin controls to do GUI, then
design your own *real world* interfaces.
BTW, there is nothing that prevents you from doing this on any OS that you
want.
QT4 is the (sad) proof of that.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:17:13 +0200
"Jerry Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ZRdX5.4296$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Jerry Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:LEyW5.2831$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Kenny Pearce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> > > Eric Meyer wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > >They should really try doing a Windows install before
> > complaining.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > I have many times. It may not be as easy as installing Office
(or
> >> > the
> >> >> > like),
> >> >> > > > but it's still a hundred times easier than linux.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Em
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > RedHat installation is really easy... at least as easy as
win95/98
> >> >> > > installation... I've never installed any other distros...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Redhat custom install can be hard, because you need to repartition
> > your
> >> > HD.
> >> >> > Server install should be avoided at all cost, RedHat somehow
figured
> > out
> >> > if
> >> >> > I choose to install a server, I have no need for information on my
> > HDs.
> >> > And
> >> >> > so it deletes them happily without even asking my opinion about
it.
> >> >> > Never installed a workstation RH, can't say anything about it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Just read the guides first.
> >>
> >> > I know that it is in the docs, the reason I've problems with it is
that
> >> > Redhat neglected to put a simple warning box through the
installation.
> >> > You may disagree, but on every other possibly distructive action, you
> > get a
> >> > warning saying this may be dangerous. Why not on one of the most
> > dangerous
> >> > thing that you can do to your computer?
> >>
> >> Reminds me of Windows, "are you sure ... " etc on every stupid thing.
> >> Now even xcopy whines when you copy over a file. But, just double
> >> click on a .reg file and it merges it into the registry! No questions
> >> asked. I remember reading of someone that did this on a .reg file from
> >> NT on W9x (or maybe vice versa) and destroyed his system.
>
> > No, if you double click a reg file, it tell you "Are you sure you want
to
> > add the information in <file name> to the registry?"
>
> No, it doesn't, it just blithely merges it into the registry.
It asks you, it doesn't merge anything to the registry by default without
asking you.
Here is what the path of the default actions ("Merge", in the registry
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\regfile\Shell\Open\Command\]) is: regedit.exe "%1"
In order for the registry to accept these without giving warning, you need
to do this: regedit.exe /y "%1"
So, no, the default is to *ask* you first.
This behaviour is consistent with every windows that I've worked with
starting with 95 and upward.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:18:23 +0200
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:FMdX5.20243$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Damn straight.
> >
> > MS claims to make "modern" operating systems...built on a foundation
> > using 1960's-style drive letters.
>
> Ah yes, that's why I can type dir \\server\share\file, yes, of course!
Or just: \directory\file and access the HD directly.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:19:13 +0200
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:sTdX5.20255$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > As usual, you are very wrong.
> > Not only it's an option, but windows will detect the safe refresh rates
> > for your resultion and recommend to you that you would only use those.
>
> Ah, but can you get it to keep that refresh rate? I had a TNT card and I
> set the refresh rate to 75Hz. Worked just fine. Except... every so often
> I'd switch it on and it was 60Hz! Somehow it would lose the setting. Then
> I'd go to the adapter page in display and the refresn rate just wasn't
> there! Took me a while to realise it had somehow "lost" my Plug'n'play
> monitor and thought I had a _default_ 1024x768 monitor!
You need to get the drivers for your monitor, which should fix it.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 23:28:41 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > No, actually, it's part of the C2 security requirements. You need a way
> to
> > > initiate a login which cannot be masked by a user mode program. On a
> > > typical unix or Linux machine, you need only run a 10 line program that
> > > clears the screen and prints login: to steal peoples passwords. That's
> not
> > > possible under NT if you don't have administrator privs.
> >
> > Bullshit.
>
> Ahh. Such a reasoned response, complete with factual arguments to back it
> up.
Any idiot can write GUI code that simulates an idle screen, then the
logon screen, then accepts a response and logs it, thus saving the
password. It doesn't even need to be installed in admin mode.
Of course, for greater realism, you can write it as a service and install
it as an administrator. You can intercept the the Ctrl-Alt-Del sequence
using the Win32 API.
I said "bullshit" because your statement was patently false as to
be incredible! Would you prefer I called you a "ninny"?
Chris
--
C:\> REFORMAT MICROSOFT
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 23:30:38 GMT
JS/PL wrote:
>
> I lived in Cicero for a while in the 80's. It was quite an interesting town.
> I was astounded by the corruption and lawlessness. There was a bar accross
> the street from Raceway Park which was frequented by police (in uniform)
> further down the street NO BLACKS ALLOWED signs on windows of businesses.
> Two major racetracks separated by an alley, poker machines in the bars and
> small restaurants which paid cash. Much more I can't remember. One night I
> actually witnessed one of the police officers, drunk and in uniform shoot a
> bottle off the top of someones head. There was also something going on with
> mob ties to the million vending machines everywhere and anywhere. Such as
> cigarette machines inside grocery stores which sold cigarettes behind the
> counter anyway. I though that was quite odd. It seemed like there was at
> least one vending machine (especially cigarettes) inside EVERY business.
That's why someone's statement about election chicanery involving Gore
is not surprising in Chicago. It wouldn't matter if the Pope was running
on the Republican platform.
Chris
--
C:\> REFORMAT MICROSOFT
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 23:32:22 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> Socialism is anarchy as practiced by flower-children.
>
> Communism is socialism under a single, authoritarian rule.
>
> Note: I said LIBERALS are socialists....Add the Democratic Party and what do
> you get????
This thread is getting absolutely moronic!
------------------------------
From: B. P. Uecker <[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: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 17:38:29 -0600
Tom Wilson wrote in <YsHV5.4091$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"B. P. Uecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Tom Wilson wrote in <bJ5U5.201$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> >IMHO, they ignore Netware because it routinely kicked NT's ass in the
>file
>> >serving department for years. NT couldn't even come close where stability
>> >and uptime were concerned. Netware was always more responsive, too.
>>
>> Stability? Netware? Ha ha ha!!!
>
>Yes. Netware...Stable.
>Particularly in comparison to NT4 Server in a file serving environment.
Netware is famous for abending at the drop of the hat. If all you do
with Netware is sit it in the corner and serve out saved documents to
PC users using IPX, it works. Go anywhere beyond that and things get
extremely dicey. As an application server it is a complete joke.
That's why companies have been abandoning it in droves...or hadn't you
noticed?
There one chance to get their act together has passed. Windows 2000
is going to close the door on that 80s relic.
------------------------------
From: "Dennis Popov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.setup
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 18:37:42 -0500
You're right, they do use it for web servers. But why would they? Isn't
linuix, according to most of you win2k advocates, nothing but a buggy,
crashy, good for nothing os? Doesn't this prove that linux is actually
superior to windows when it comes to serving web pages?
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:n0HW5.1085$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Which large companies might that be?
>
> Most large companies don't use Linux for *ANYTHING*. They might use
> Solaris, or other Unix systems, but seldom Linux. If they do, it'll be
for
> Web servers, not application or file or print servers.
>
> "Michael Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:90f4d1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > If you think Win2K is better than Linux, then why are so many large
> > companies using *gasp* Linux as their server OS?
> > Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:908nom$acvb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Michael Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:908ls1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Win2K is slow, unreliable, hard to set up and outrageously
expensive.
> > > Linux
> > > > beats the daylights out of it, especially when it comes to a good
> server
> > > OS.
> > > > All right people, here's your chance to prove me wrong.
> > >
> > > TPC scores.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: 5 Dec 2000 23:42:45 GMT
(To tholen)
Okay we agree, it seems, that intuativeness is purely relative
to what is already known. In the case of Vi, it only appears
unintuative if you are used to some other editor first. This I
agree with. What you don't seem to get is that it works the
other way around too - if you learn Vi first, then those other
editors are the unintuative ones. This is why it is useless to
accuse one product of being "less intuative" than another -
ESPECIALLY when the whole reason for the alleged non-intuativeness
is that the products differ from each other, and therefore someone
familiar with one won't find the other intuative. That type of
argument is rather anti-competitive - whichever interface is not
already more prevalent will be less "intuative" merely becuase it
is not already prevelant, and for no other reason. You are setting
up a situation where the only way for a product to be "intuative" is
for it to be a copycat of the market leader, which automatically
stacks the deck against it.
Another way to look at whether or not an interface is "intuative" is
to note how similar the different parts of the interface are to
*each other*. I call this "internal intuativeness". If the way the
interface has you do task A is drasticly different than the way it has
you do task B, then it is not internally intuative. An internally
intuative system is one in which a person who knows some of the
interface can easily guess at the rest of it. In this regard, VI
really shines, even though it isn't very similar to *other* editors.
Once you know part of the VI commands, the rest work in similar ways.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: 5 Dec 2000 23:58:34 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On 5 Dec 2000 00:15:45 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Vi is only unintuative for people who already are used to using
:>some other editor that works differently. To someone who doesn't
:>know *any* editors, and has had no contact with them, it's no more
:>or less intuative than anything else. Vi's only crime here is
:>being unique.
: Cursor movement in vi really isn't unique. HJKL for cursor movement was
: popular in CRT games.
True, but that's *because* of the popularity of vi. Remember that
those CRT games were driven by curses, which was originally derived
*from* the screen routines in the vi code. In other words, vi
predated those games, and they had vi as an indirect ancestor in
their code.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: 5 Dec 2000 23:55:19 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Bill Vermillion writes:
:>> Steve Mading writes:
:>>> Vi's only crime here is being unique.
:>> Uniqueness breeds non-intuitiveness. I haven't said whether that is
:>> good or bad.
:> vi was good. Having the ability to see all the lines on the screen
:> instead of one line, and being able to move onto a word to delete
:> it instead of .s/old-word/new-word/ was so much better.
: The "good" thus comes from being a screen editor, not from using hjkl
: for cursor movement.
I would disagree strongly. Using the typewriter keys (like hjkl) is
much, much faster than losing the home-row placement of your fingers
to go hit the arrow keys, or the 'ins/home/end.etc...' keys, or to
move the mouse. Although it is different than other editors, it's
the feature that makes it very fast. I realize that this was not
due to some major plan or anything - it was an accidental side effect
of the lack of those special keys back in the days when vi was being
first developed. But it's a GOOD side effect.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Darth Aggie)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: 5 Dec 2000 23:57:10 GMT
Reply-To: no-courtesy-copies-please
On Tue, 05 Dec 2000 19:00:03 GMT,
scatterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
<TWaX5.19204$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ Lets face facts, as far as "Home users" go Microsoft has awful support and
+ even less concern. Back in the days you could call and get a tech on the
+ line, not any more unless you want to pay extra for it. I can see their
+ point, millions of boxes and users with little or no knowledge, I'd think
+ they'd build a more stable system just because of the situation.
Why? think about it: instant cash cow and revenue stream.
James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 00:02:22 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > > You've been listening to Rush, ain't ya?
> >
> > I get most of it the same place HE does...The AP NewsWire. Anything of
his I
> > can't verify through a reliable source gets ignored.
>
> I *knew* you were listening to Rush. It's like saying, "Sure, I look at
> pornography, but I only like it when it's art."
>
ROTFL
I never thought anyone could equate the corpulent fat head with porn.
<trimmed>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 19:03:46 -0500
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: misc.invest.stocks,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical?
Isn't it hypocritical for Microsoft to complain about getting
shut out of AOL-Time Warner's broadband network when they
effectively shut out Linux on all the cheapest PC's?
====== 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: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:44:54 +0200
"Dennis Popov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90juau$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You're right, they do use it for web servers. But why would they? Isn't
> linuix, according to most of you win2k advocates, nothing but a buggy,
> crashy, good for nothing os? Doesn't this prove that linux is actually
> superior to windows when it comes to serving web pages?
No, it proves that those companies think in advance and are worried about
the time when MS would change its license so CAL is everybody who send GET
to your server :)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
