Linux-Advocacy Digest #696, Volume #30 Wed, 6 Dec 00 20:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Curtis)
Re: Linux is awful (Curtis)
Re: Linux is awful (Curtis)
Re: Windows review (Curtis)
Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical? (sfcybear)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux is awful ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical? (jtnews)
Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution? (Swango)
Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical? (sfcybear)
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux is awful ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux is awful (Curtis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Curtis <[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, 06 Dec 2000 19:49:49 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
| > >>It can most certainly edit text.
| > >>Why do you claim that it can't edit text?
| > >
| > >OK, it can barely edit text, but that's about it. For Christ's sake,
| > >there are less than 10 shortcut keys in the whole thing! You can't
| > >even use Ctrl+S to save. It's a good job I've got emacs for Windows.
|
| Ctrl+S - Save
| Ctrl+N - New
| Ctrl+O - Open
| Ctrl+P - Print
| Ctrl+F - Find
| F3 - Find next
| Ctrl+H - Replace
| Ctrl+G - Go To
| Ctrl+A - Select All
| F5 - Enter Time & Date
|
| Exactly 10 shortcuts key. :)
|
| > And here the MS advocates may choose to respond: "but the average
| > Joe User doesn't need shortcut keys..." or some such drivel.
|
| He does and there are in my notepad (win2000) there aren't on the 9x notepad
| .
It's really difficult to advocate notepad as an editor.
It's really just a viewer with VERY basic editor functions. Even an
average user will soon be looking elsewhere for something more capable.
Not to mention that Notepad's wrapping engine is buggy.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:49:54 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JM) posted:
| On Tue, 05 Dec 2000 22:01:48 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
| (Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
|
| >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JM) posted:
| >
| >| >As for unix system of a single root -- I have swapped components, drives,
| >| >partitions blah, blah and what not -- I don't even need to touch one single
| >| >configuration file (except maybe for /etc/fstab), because I can mount the
| >| >new partition at exactly the same place as the old partition was.
| >|
| >| Nah: I love the fun involved when Windows play musical chairs with the
| >| drives. Once when I made a new partition, I had to go back through ALL
| >| my shortcuts changing them to the new drive letter.
|
| >In Win2k, creating a new partition doesn't disturb the pre-existing
| >drive letter assignments. There'll be no need to remap shortcuts for
| >that.
|
| But I'm not using Win2k, I'm using 98.
Just clarifying. You said Windows without saying which version.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:49:58 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) posted:
| >My experience is that it isn't a problem. You linux assholes who
| >post pure lies like "Windows won't run more than a few days
| >at a time" are full of shit. You are sitting there with your head
| >stuck under the ground, trying to tell people what the world is
| >like. Those of us who aren't hiding can look and see that the
| >world is nothing like you claim.
|
| Actually most of these posts are coming from experience, the vast majority of
| Linux people have Windows experience. After all, it's quite hard to
| avoid.
>From what I see posted here, I'd say many Linux users don't have a lot
of Windows experience or haven't really used any of the more recent
flavours of Windows especially Win2k.
| Whereas most Windows users don't have Linux experience.
This is true but there are many here who have used Linux and still do.
| Just because
| you've been fortunate doesn't mean everyone is.
There are many more who are fortunate. I find the Windows stability woes
testified here to be grossly exaggerated at times.
| I don't use Windows anymore,
| have got off the treadmill because of those kind of problems. It's too much
| like russian roulette.
Windows stability has steadily improved. Win2k is presently very stable
and will easily hold its own in most user contexts.
WinME is more stable than it's predecessors but still admittedly
unacceptably stable for heavy use (multi-tasking) and where long uptimes
are a must..
| Linux has been completely crash free and incredibly stable. The odd
| application has been known to crash (though without causing any of the
| problems you get when a windows ap crashes, often requiring a reboot). You
| don't need to reboot to install applications, or even hardware.
What type of hardware?
The reboot rate for software installations have been drastically reduced
in Win2k. Most times all you really need to do is logoff and on or
nothing at all. The request to reboot can often be ignored and are
really there for the Win9x installations.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:50:01 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
| I just bought a 256MB RAM chip in about 180$US, that translate to 1.4MB per
| 1$/0.7$ per MB
In 1996, I bought a 2x32MB DIMMs for that price.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: misc.invest.stocks,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:44:13 GMT
I think it is a bit hypocritical of MS to whine about anyone else being
a monopoly. But I do not think MS has shut Linux out. Linux will
continue to grow. It will hit a point were it will reach the stores on
the cheapest PC's and the Linux PC's will be at least $50 cheaper than a
comperable W2K PC do the the MS tax.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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! =-----
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:52:13 -0500
Swango wrote:
>
> Windows 2000 rocks
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Patented Claire line.
PLONK
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:54:31 -0500
kiwiunixman wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I'm not coplaining about the lack of this information in the manual. In
> > fact, I qouted from the manual some time ago, exactly about this part.
> > I'm complaining that the *installation* doesn't warn you before it erase all
> > the contents of your HDs.
> > It has nothing to do with this appearing in the manual or not.
> > It has everything to do with taking the five second coding to ask the user
> > whatever they are aware this will erase all the contents of their HDs.
>
> What you actually saying is that user is an absolution moron/vegetable
> and has to be told what could happen every step of the way. Tough
> bloody luck if you donot have the foresight to read the manual. If I
> were to get picky, why doesn't 9x/NT ever warn when the MBR is
> overwritten by the Windows default MBR? BeOS asks, Linux asks, why not
> Windows?
Must.......not........ask.........embarrassing..questions...
>
> kiwiunixman
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:55:36 -0500
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: misc.invest.stocks,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical?
sfcybear wrote:
>
> I think it is a bit hypocritical of MS to whine about anyone else being
> a monopoly. But I do not think MS has shut Linux out. Linux will
> continue to grow. It will hit a point were it will reach the stores on
> the cheapest PC's and the Linux PC's will be at least $50 cheaper than a
> comperable W2K PC do the the MS tax.
Unfortunately, most manufacturers don't even give you the option of
buying their cheapest machines without Windows on them. It seems that
all of their Linux machines have the price jacked up because the
machines
loaded up with an unnecessary number of accessories.
====== 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: Swango <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:58:54 GMT
On Wed, 06 Dec 2000 23:28:12 GMT, tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The worst thing I have against Linux is that after working in it for
>awhile and definitely after trying to read anything, I come away almost
>cross-eyed because the fonts are just a little off, even after
>importing the windoze fonts and trying them. It's rather ironic that
>I'm trying to read the special pdf edition of Running Linux that comes
>with Mandrake, but I have to read it under Windows because of the font
>thing. It'd be nice if I could read it under Linux and try some of the
>things it covers as I come across them.
And I thought it was my NVidia video card until I did a search on
Linux and Fonts and came up with 10 gazillion hits.
Shit, there are entire web pages devoted to making fonts usable with
Linux.
Windows blows Linux out of the water for clean, crisp looking display
of fonts. Linux makes my eyes tear just looking at it and yes my
display is a good on (Sony 21 inch) and my refresh rate is correct.
>Netscape is also horrible, but I don't know if it's Netscape or the
>font thing again. I've added the lines to the startup file that gets
>Netscape to use a little large fonts; I still can't adjust the size.
Netscape and StarOffice are the worst offenders.
No wonder the die hard Linux fanatics love the command line because
you sure as hell can't look at the gui for too long without going
blind.
>Does this sound like a hardware issue? (Mandrake 7.1, P266, Leadtek
>Winfast 2300 video card w/8M ram) My card was listed in the setup
>lists, so I assume it's using the correct driver.
It's a Linux issue. Check Deja and the web. There are 10's of
thousands of post's concerning Linux and the primitive way it looks.
Swango
"It Don't Mean a Thang if it Ain't Got That Swang"
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MSN and AOL-Time Warner: Is Microsoft being hypocritical?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:48:15 GMT
Rumor has it that MS needs to sell of investments to show a profit. If
it were just on revinues from Sales, service, training, etc. MS would
show a loss. You can check the numbers in MS's anual report. Or watch
the papers, I've seen a couple of snips that hint about this as well.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Microsoft has the cash, why don't they setup a wireless broadband
service?
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> jtnews wrote:
>
> > 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! =-----
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:00:24 -0500
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : The last thread I started concerning the current OS
> : your using is very interesting reading and it's
> : still getting attention.
>
> : I thought it would be interesting reading and
> : refreshing to see your PC history's revealed here.
>
> : So from the time you first got any kind of PC forward,
> : SOUND OFF.
>
> : From mainframe land we found the
>
> : VIC 20. A commordore based machine with 256K of ram I think.
>
> : Then it was a VIC 64.
>
> The Vic 20 had less ram than the c64, and the c64 had 64 K, so
> no way did the vic20 have 64 K. I don't rememnber exactly how
wrong.
The C64 has 80K.
The OS and monitor are contained in the upper 16K, which, through
the use of a memory-mapped switch (somewhere in the range of
$0100-$01FF) switches out read-access to the ROM, thus switching
in the RAM.
ALL writes to the uppper 64K ALWAYS go to the RAM.
You can write into the ROM area, loading up whatever
program or data you wanted into the RAM, and then switch out
the ROM, and it would all be there.
Thus, the C64 can be used as it's own development system for
an alternate monitor/OS.
You use the in-ROM software to load up a program with which
you install your new OS into the shadow RAM, and the
switch in the RAM by writing to the magic memory location.
> much it had. It's hard to compare the two, though, since the
> Vic20 had its basic interpeter in ROM and this was not counted
> in the RAM total, while the c64 had pretty much the same basic
> ROM interpeter, but the ROM was only used to present a permanent
> image to copy into RAM at boot time. Once booted, the basic
Not quite. See above.
> interpeter ran entirely out of this RAM, and the ROM was never
> used. So this basic interpeter took up a part of that 64K RAM
> figure. (This feature allowed machine language programmers who
> didn't need the basic interpeter to overwrite its memory with
> their own code, which gave them more room to work with.)
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:02:28 +1300
The only real problem I find with the Linux version of Netscape 6 is the
fact that not all Java applets work, appart from that, it is pretty good,
however, Netscape 6 on Windows is grossly slow, however, not unstable. So
if ya stick with Netscape on Windows, here is the status, Netscape 4.76,
fast but unstable, Netscape 6, Slow but stable, take ya pick :)
kiwiunixman
<snip>
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:02:07 -0500
tom wrote:
>
> The worst thing I have against Linux is that after working in it for
> awhile and definitely after trying to read anything, I come away almost
> cross-eyed because the fonts are just a little off, even after
> importing the windoze fonts and trying them. It's rather ironic that
> I'm trying to read the special pdf edition of Running Linux that comes
> with Mandrake, but I have to read it under Windows because of the font
> thing. It'd be nice if I could read it under Linux and try some of the
> things it covers as I come across them.
>
> Netscape is also horrible, but I don't know if it's Netscape or the
> font thing again. I've added the lines to the startup file that gets
> Netscape to use a little large fonts; I still can't adjust the size.
>
> Does this sound like a hardware issue? (Mandrake 7.1, P266, Leadtek
Yes. I've never had such problems. ...always been sharp.
Matrox Millenium (circa 1996), and Riva TNT
Both running at 1600x1200 on a Panasonic E21.
> Winfast 2300 video card w/8M ram) My card was listed in the setup
> lists, so I assume it's using the correct driver.
>
> Tom
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:04:50 -0500
kiwiunixman wrote:
>
> 1. Grow some balls and use your proper email address.
> 2. Windows cannot, and will not work for weeks with out a reboot, maybe
> two to three days I could believe, be anything longer than that, I can't
> see happening.
> 3. Windows 2000 Pro, if I were to use it instead of Win9x (I have used
> Win2000), look at the freemem after loading Win200 (65MB used), WTF 65
> just to load Windows (unmodified)! compared to 38MB for a clean,
> unmodified boot of SuSE Linux Pro 7.0
> 4. Windows 9x sucks as multi-tasking, try using the net, wordprocess
> and listen to an MP3, slow response, and wtf! is the memory gone to? try
> that type of simple multi-tasking experiment on Linux or any commerical
> UNIX, it is like silk, smooth and responsive.
> 5. Inefficient TCP/IP stack. Microsoft has written, then re-written,
> then again have written it, and it is still shit, wtf! don't they adopt
> the BSD TCP/IP stack? it is established and very reliable and stable,
> but of course, the typical excuse by Microsoft, "if it is not written by
> Microsoft, it is obviously inferior" mentality Microsoft runs their
> business by.
Microsoft programmer's credo:
If there's no spaghetti, it's not to Microsoft standards.
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 06 Dec 2000 02:56:12 GMT, "scatterman"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Even the best W9X version (the original with all the updates) could hardly
> >> run longer then a few days.
> >
> >
> > Bull shit.
> >
> > I'm here to learn linux, but I've spent far more time running MS
> > software. I rarely reboot except when I install software, which means
> > my system tends to run weeks and sometimes months at a time,
> > running win98.
> >
> > My experience is that it isn't a problem. You linux assholes who
> > post pure lies like "Windows won't run more than a few days
> > at a time" are full of shit. You are sitting there with your head
> > stuck under the ground, trying to tell people what the world is
> > like. Those of us who aren't hiding can look and see that the
> > world is nothing like you claim.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:07:14 -0500
Jerry Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
| > I'm not claiming that Win98SE is rock solid stable, just that it's not as
| > instable as people seem to think if it's properly maintained.
|
| You're joking, right? The only "routine maintenance" my Linux system
| gets is its weekly backup. I certainly don't need to do all of
| the crap you listed to keep it perfectly stable. The fact that you
| need to do all of these things is indicative of a very poor design,
| but then again we all knew that about Windows already.
Properly maintained has to be taken in context.
There are a lot of lousy applications out there that cause nasty
conflicts with other applications on the system, add inappropriate
registry entries, or are just plain unstable themselves.
Even with Win2k here, which I don't lift a finger to maintain in any
active way, I experience nasty conflicts between applications and have
to either not use one of them or avoid using them altogether. It's just
that with Win2k, the machine invariably (always in my experience) stays
up, while with Win9x, the machine often goes down.
Avoid bad applications and you can have a surprisingly smoothly running
system (not Unix or Win2k stability but a system eons away from one that
crashes 5times a day). The more applications and crap you install, the
more likely you'll be bitten by a bad one.
If you keep having to reinstall Win9x when a problem arises, note that
you may be reinstalling the errant application or driver over and over
again, leading to the same problem each time. I've witnessed this on
many an occasion. Norton System Works being a prime example since I
noted this happening on 6 of my friends systems. It was like a frigging
epidemic when Norton System Works came on the scene. The poor soul
reinstalls and then installs the 'wonderful' Norton System Works
immediately after. Problems recur ..... why? ... Win9x is hopelessly
unstable? NOT. At least not this time.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
