Linux-Advocacy Digest #803, Volume #30 Mon, 11 Dec 00 00:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Uptimes ("JS/PL")
Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Linux is INFERIOR to Windows ("Adam Warner")
Re: Uptimes (Pan)
Re: Linux is awful ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows review ("Les Mikesell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[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: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:33:26 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:uz1Y5.19238$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > No, you should understand the pattern so you know how to
> > represent your intentions, assuming you are past kindergarten
> > and already know the shapes of the letters.
>
> Understanding patterns won't do any good if you don't know how
> to create new text (i and Esc) and save it (ZZ).
On the contrary, vi is extremely useful as a document viewer, and
those commands are not necessary for that function. Some
experience with the positioning commands is alwas a good
idea before entering text, and there is no need to change the
unmodified document after you view it.
> > You don't want to think 'special case, special character' for
> > every keystroke.
>
> Fortunately, I haven't. I was simply talking about the first
> things to learn.
If you don't learn the concept of the modifiers you are learning
special cases. This would be equivalent to memorizing all of
the different verb forms as separate words that you use for
separate and special situations without seeing any repeatable
relationship.
> >> It was a new case, regardless.
>
> > Not for everyone. There was a long history of command driven editors
> > before vi: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/qed.html
> > has some interesting trivia.
>
> Of course; there were a lot of editors before screen editors came
> along. The first "editor" I used was to repunch an entire card.
And some were very similar to vi, especially the ex mode.
> >>>> $ still can mean either end of line or end of file. Only the
> >>>> "end" portion is consistent.
>
> >>> It is consistent with being the end of the type of motion command
> >>> you gave.
>
> >> Do you consider d to be a "motion command"?
>
> > It is a type of command that involves a motion/range.
> > 3dw = delete 3 words.
> > d/foo<enter> = delete until the pattern "foo"
>
> As opposed to "delete the pattern 'foo'".
Yes, /foo positions you to the beginning, not the end of the
matched pattern.
> > d$ = delete to end of line
>
> As opposed to delete to the end of the file.
$ always means end of line to commands that work on
characters.
> > 4dj = delete current and 4 lines going down
>
> Assuming you remember which letter is for up and down.
Which you don't have to consider a special case.
> > 4dk = delete current and 4 lines going up
>
> Ditto.
>
> > Note how you don't have to learn this separately from:
> > w = moves the cursor a word
> > /patten = moves the cursor to pattern
> > j = moves the cursor down a line
> > k = moves the cursor up a line
> > Get the idea?
>
> I've been using vi for years now, and I still have instances of the
> cursor going up when I wanted to go down.
It isn't because it does something surprising. If you ever know
how to make the cursor go down, you know how in every case
once you understand that it is not a special case.
> > It was written by Bill Joy in 1974 and no, 'real' vi has not changed.
The
> > original paper: http://docs.freebsd.org/44doc/usd/12.vi/paper.html
> > still describes it exactly. There are some newer imitations that have
> > added new and different features (some very different), and there
> > are emacs modes that emulate it with varying degrees of faithfulness.
> > The variations are annoying if they won't remove the carriage returns
> > from MSDOS style text with the intuitive command
> > :%s/^V^M// (where ^char is control-char).
>
> What makes that command intuitive?
Carriage-returns are control-M characters - but this is the same as
your own 'enter' key so it is a special character. The control-V is
just an escape to let you enter the control-M and otherwise is ignored
so the command means:
: go to ex mode
% shorthand for 1,$ (the whole file) so only intuitive the 2nd time...
s substitute
/ delimiter
^M match the carriage return character
/ delimiter
/ replacement delimiter (replace with nothing)
It just pops off your fingers automatically like any other rY6¾ācement
command.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:34:55 GMT
"Anonymous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Swangoremovemee in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 09 Dec 2000
>
> >How come you are T.Max under some posts and Anonymous under other
> >posts?
>
> It is a server glitch.
Interesting: the posts show up here, avoiding whoever is canceling
the others.
Les Mikesell
[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
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:03:33 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> JFW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 03:33:47 -0500, Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>Static66 wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I read that they haven't built a power plant in over
>> >>> 15 years, yet in that same time the population of
>> >>> california has basically doubled...piss poor
>> >>> government planning..
>> >>
>> >>Nobody will ever allow one to be built near their
>> >>homes; neither Republican nor Democrat, neither
>> >>black nor white, neither WinTroll nor Maccie.
>>
>> >And of course, in say California, there aren't areas which _aren't_ by
>> >anyone's homes, right? Sorry, that's a provably false argument. Yeesh, there
>> >are areas where you could test gigaton thermonuclear weapons, and the only
>> >impact to humans would be secondary. I think if any state can support
>> >nuclear development, it's CA.
>>
>> >Not to mention the fact that other states, which have embraced nuclear power,
>> >like IL, etc. don't seem to the radioactive wastelands the arguments of the
>> >anti-nuclear folks insist they'd become.
>>
>> >>We can't build them in the cities or in the
>> >>suburbs. Even when they're proposed for some
>> >>out-of-the-way spot where very few people live,
>> >>the proposals meet heavy opposition.
>>
>> >They meet heavy opposition by folks who, quite frankly, will not tolerate ANY
>> >new power plant construction. I'm sorry, if new plants MUST be constructed,
>> >the first group of people I'd stop listening to is the folks who object to
>> >ANY new construction at all.
>>
>> >Power outages kill people. People die from hypothermia, they die from the
>> >lack of power to provide important medical services, they die from the
>> >intrinsic breakdowns of communication and regulation (think traffic lights)
>> >that occur during power outages.
>>
>> >"No more, at ALL" is killing people. I'm tired of supporting folks who by
>> >their actions demonstrate a depraved indifference to the death of others.
>> >There is NO logically supportable argument which justifies "No more, at all."
>>
>> Nice rant, but take a look at the how, why and effects of utility
>> deregulation. It's the important 85-90 percent of the problem; the real
>> culprit, e.g., everyone knew 10 years ago that utilities were not going to
>> build the needed plants or upgrade existing ones because there was no
>> provision in the law for them to recover the costs under de-regulation.
>You are an idiot.
>Under de-regulation, you can charge whatever price you need to
>cover your costs...as long as their is a competing company in the same area
>(which is going to be faced with the same costs themselves).
No. You are the idiot. The issue is/was "stranded costs." -- The issue is if
utilities built new plants and deregulation removed the costs of the plants
from the ratebase, then how were the investors to receive a return on their
money.
You don't seen to understand that building a major power plant is a ten year
project and under all state and federal utility regulations the costs cannot
be recovered until the plants are generating. That put cost recovery into the
future and under a changing regulatory system where Congress and the states
were not agreeing to allow the utilities to recover the future costs -- so
plants were not built.
You really need to do some homework on this, or just listen instead of acting
like you know the answers.
>>
>> Now everyone is acting surprised that the short-term -- lets make today's
>> profit the prime objective -- didn't build new plants for the long-term.
>> Utilities were once regulated in-part so there would be an incentive to build
>> into the future. The public need hasn't changed, but the politicians and money
>> grabbers don't care about that. -- Not that the right, who spear-headed
>> deregulation ever did. I consider it poetic justice for those who voted for
>> the nuts.
--
===========================================================
[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
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:00:56 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Russ Lyttle wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> > Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >
>> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >
>> > >> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> > >> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> > >> in the 1970's.
>> >
>> > Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
>> > by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
>> >
>> Not by the utilities, but by State and Federal regulators. The utilities
>> would like to build more plants : they make more money. In the absence
>> of more plants, they will just raise prices. That is a dead end for
>> them, as older plants break down and become obsolete.
>A couple years ago...at Ford Motor Company's River Rouge Complex, one of
>those 1920's era plants had a "break down".
>30 blue-collar workers killed.
>That's liberalism for you.
>They demonstrate their love for the common man by insisting that he work on
>dangerous, obsolete equipment.
This is a jackass statement. It is not the liberals who kept an old plant in
service. It was Ford management. If you went off and studied the cause of
that explosion, you would know this.
BTW, any plant of any age, can have an explosion if its not properly
maintained and safety rules are not followed.
>>
>> > >> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> > >> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> > >> would STILL have surplus capacity.
>> >
>> > >Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
>> > >for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
>> > >suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
>> > >going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
>> > >grows by that much more?
>> >
>> > >I shudder to think.
>> >
>> > >--
>> > >Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
--
===========================================================
[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
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:58:42 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> >> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> >> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> >> in the 1970's.
>>
>> Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
>> by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
>>
>So...big fucking deal.
>Three Mile Island was a text-book example of a nuclear power plant shutting
>down EXACTLY AS DESIGNED.
You're clueless here. It did not shutdown as designed, that's why there was a
partial meltdown.
>Anybody who interprets TMI as a failure in nuclear engineering
>has their head deeeeeeeeeply inside their rectum.
So according to you, all the utilities that cancelled plants didn't know what
they were doing. You need to learn more before you shoot off. Remember the
phrase "its the economy stupid." Well in this case, "It was economics
stupid."
>> >> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> >> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> >> would STILL have surplus capacity.
>>
>> >Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
>> >for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
>> >suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
>> >going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
>> >grows by that much more?
>>
===========================================================
[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
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:57:55 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >Mike Marion wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> >> > down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> >> > in the 1970's.
>> >> >
>> >> > If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> >> > plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> >> > would STILL have surplus capacity.
>> >>
>> >> Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power for
>> >> the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps) suggest
>> >> that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly going on
>> >> here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population grows by
>> >> that much more?
>> >>
>> >> I shudder to think.
>>
>> >Leftwing Liberal paranoid eco-freak's worst nightmare...
>>
>> >Public DEMANDS for nuclear power plants.
>>
>> >Of course, this is exactly the situation which the radical left
>> >was hoping for....a general degradation of life in the US...it's part of
>> >their overall strategy of trying to cause internal collapse within the United
>> >States so that a power-vacuum will occur, allowing them to sweep into power
>> >and install a Communist state.
>>
>> What a mythical world you live in. The shortage is a predictable result of
>> utility deregulation. The radical left force it. It was the right and the
>> left power brokers that get on their knees when big-business and bankers come
>> calling, and all the average people who said NIMBY to new plants.
>Your statement only REINFORCES what I said.
Not at all. You're talking about "ECO-NUTS" and the radical left. I most
certainly am not talking about anything like that as the cause.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:47:59 -0500
"Pan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > > You would if you had bought a Dell PC around 1997. Try and install
> > > Netscape Navigator Gold 3.11 from the CD on the Dell with win95 oem
> > > version. As for text editors... try and run ms works, which was
> > > installed as part of the distro on the same pc out of the box.
> >
> > You're insane. No version of windows has ever prevented you from
installing
> > a browser. Ever.
>
> I've still got the system as well as the netscape cd that cannot be
> installed on that system. Again, it was purchased from Dell in around
> 1997. The Navigator Gold 3.11 cd cannot be installed on that system as
> the installation program is hijacked. The first thing that happens when
> you launch the installation cd shows some sort of script making a call
> to $root in the location bar for a split second and then the normal
> installation program is hijacked by another program.
>
> > > contracted MS to support. You won't be able to find a significant
> > > portion of them anywhere b/c MS did not release the drivers with the
oem
> > > version of the distro. MS did not make the drivers available on their
> > > site b/c they were supposed to be released with the OS cd, which is
not
> > > the case for tens of thousands of their customers who have an oem
> > > version of the product.
> >
> > The OEM version of the OS is *IDENTICAL* to the retail version except
for
> > the install check to see if an existing OS is on the computer.
>
> ...and, of course, except for the missing drivers. Again, I have the
> cd. I'd be happy to hand off the readme.txt with the list of drivers
> that came with it. feel free to compare it to the drivers contained on
> your own cd. Having seen both versions, I know that the number on the
> oem cd that I possess is less than half of those included on the retail
> version.
>
> > That's it.
> > You can binary diff the files on the CD's. I've done it. They are the
> > same.
>
> You can say that until you are blue in the face. I own the cd. I know
> what is on it. The drivers in question are not present.
>
> > > Or, with the win98se oem version,create a dual partition system and
then
> > > install win from the cd. It automatically overwrites the entire HD
and
> > > does not allow the creation of multiple partitions.
> >
> > That's also not true.
>
> Yes, it is true. Again, I have the cd to prove it.
>
> I've done this many times. Win9x does *NOT*
> > repartition your drives, it can only install to existing partitions.
>
> Not true. You get a message that says something to the effect of "this
> installation will reformat the partitions on your hd into a single
> partition." No option exists to not reformat the partitions. Having
> gone through that installation process multiple times with this cd, I
> can assure you that you are simply wrong.
>
> > > Or, install the DLL updates required to install an Epson Stylus color
> > > 600 on a windows 95 machine. Now open wordperfect 7 and gaze in wonder
> > > at the false font allocation error message you receive. program works
> > > fine. prints fine, but the dll update flags it as an error.
> >
> > I don't know anything about this, but it *SOUNDS* like Wordperfect
installed
> > some DLL's with the same name to the system directory that were
overwritten
> > by the Epson install. Or Wordperfect was relying on some undocumented
> > functionality that changed when the DLL's were updated.
>
> Or, Microsoft simply broke their program at a time when Wordperfect
> still had significant marketshare in order to gain market share.
>
> > These kinds of conflicts happen in the Linux world as well. For
instance,
> > one program may require glibc to be built a certain way, while another
will
> > require it be built a different way. Or two shared libraries may link
to
> > different versions of other shared libraries and cause conflicts.
> >
> > > Those are just from my experience. How many hundreds of other cases
are
> > > there just like them?
> >
> > Most of them are in your mind and don't exist in the real world.
>
> You can deny it all you want. With the exception of the word perfect on
> win95 with epson stylus 600 problem, I can back up every claim I have
> made here with both the physical machine, and the installation cd's in
> question. The only reason i can't offer the physical machine in that
> case is that I overworte the entire HD on the machine and am now running
> mandrake on it ( Though I still have the drivers and copy of WP in
> question )
Sounds like your blasting Microsoft for something Dell did. Your making a
case AGAINST OEM computers not against Microsoft. You can download a
straight version of NS 3.11 from the internet and install it on that system
with no problem, except for NS taking over every internet and image file
association possible.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Blurry Fonts: Is there a solution?
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:51:06 GMT
"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Swango wrote:
>
> > I'll save you the time, it doesn't work.
>
> Oh, like you've actually tried it or anything.
>
>
> > You still don't get the smooth anti-aliased looking fonts that you do
> > under Windows.
>
> At work I had decently clear fonts, until they pulled out the video card
> and stuck some no-name brand in. Then, to my surprise, the fonts got
> really ugly. (I don't have privs there, so I haven't been able to try
> deuglification yet.) Perhaps it's a driver issue? At any rate, I can't
> recommend Matrox cards for Linux highly enough.
It has to do with the screen resolution. Anti-aliasing is just a cover-up
for lack of real resolution.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is INFERIOR to Windows
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:54:20 +1200
Congratulations on your ability to post 18 month old benchmarks about
hardware that most of us cannot afford (and your modest ability to spam a
load of irrelevant newsgroups).
An update to this link on the site would however be fascinating:
http://www.mindcraft.com/priceperf/
"Price Performance Rating Coming Soon". Maybe they're found Microsoft isn't
as lucrative a customer as it used to be (of course their customers could
discover another high-end hardware configuration where Linux doesn't scale
well and then push the required output to Linux's asymptotic limit to
achieve the desired terrible Linux price/performance).
But if this was done properly, with a variety of required performance
levels, the results could be great [e.g. at one extreme, a small scale web
server: the Linux team finds a 486 on the side of the road with 16MB of RAM
and is able to equal the real-world performance of a Pentium II Windows 2000
Server with 32MB of RAM. Oops. Silly example. The Windows team couldn't get
their operating system to install (too little RAM)].
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:58:05 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS/PL wrote:
> > You can deny it all you want. With the exception of the word perfect on
> > win95 with epson stylus 600 problem, I can back up every claim I have
> > made here with both the physical machine, and the installation cd's in
> > question. The only reason i can't offer the physical machine in that
> > case is that I overworte the entire HD on the machine and am now running
> > mandrake on it ( Though I still have the drivers and copy of WP in
> > question )
>
> Sounds like your blasting Microsoft for something Dell did. Your making a
> case AGAINST OEM computers not against Microsoft.
In the Dell example, whom to blame depends on whether or not the OEM is
preventing the Netscape CD installation b/c of a contractual obligation
to M$. In the cases of printer driver (non)support, damaging a
competitor's software, and preventing a dual-boot installation, it's
pretty tough to see where to point the blame other than Redmond.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://salvador.venice.ca.us
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:03:30 -0600
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:K6XY5.42307$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > They did provide regedit. So, the fact that you can't edit it with a
> > text editor, but you can _edit_ it, how is that a problem (apart from
> > the inability to store comments)?
>
> If you have a dozen machines, how can you tell what is different about
> each? With a directory of text files and the unix 'diff' tool it is no
> problem.
No problem in NT either. Just use regedit to export the registry to text,
then diff to your hearts content.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 05:00:54 GMT
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
> | What do you do when you have large amounts of anything?
>
> Use a CLI. :=)
>
> If I only have a few files in the intended directory then the GUI is
> just fine. Keeping oneself organised helps.
>
> | For your
> | example starting Windows Explorer, I have to scroll down through
> | a page and a half of programs before I get to it. Likewise, the
> | directories
> | and files I want are often out of sight and take extra work to bring
into
> | view.
>
> I only come up on that problem when looking through the system folders.
> At that stage I use either the CLI or the search utility to display the
> files I need to see.
The folders aren't so much of a problem as the menus because you
can at least type one letter of a name to jump somewhere that might
be close (depending...).
> | Is there an equivalent to a shortcut key to get to a particular
> | program on the program menu?
>
> Yes, creating shortcuts to commonly used programs on either the desktop,
> the start menu or the quicklaunch bar? It avoids having to wade through
> the programs menu.
Again, this doesn't scale. With more than a few things there it isn't
quick any more and you just duplicate the problem you had in the
menu.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
