Linux-Advocacy Digest #990, Volume #30 Wed, 20 Dec 00 14:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Bracy = Chad Myers? ("Bracy")
Re: Intel Easy PC camera - cannot be supported in Linux! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? ("Bracy")
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (redc1c4)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Bob")
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? ("Bracy")
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Windows Stability (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (.)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (.)
Re: Pb with RealTek LAN Adapter (Wine Development)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bracy = Chad Myers?
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:04:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think they are the same person.
Wow, were you placed in a classroom with all those other "special"
children? . You must've been one of those voters in Florida who
were confused by butterfly ballots.
Bracy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Intel Easy PC camera - cannot be supported in Linux!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:25:58 GMT
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000 15:49:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Travis) wrote:
>And [EMAIL PROTECTED] spoke unto the masses...
>>On Tue, 19 Dec 2000 21:20:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite
>>number of monkeys) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Obviously why on my PC, such "archaic" hardware as:
>>>
>>>SoundBlaster Live!
>>
>>Tell me how you get surround sound, or digital audio via the digital
>>audio spid/f connector under Linux?
>
>OSS. Go read the changelog.
Why should I have to pay $20 for a driver for my card?
So finally, December 14th, 2000 the card gets what still amounts to
half ass'd support.
Where is the surround sound BTW?
>>Tell me about LiveWare for Linux?
>
>Tell ME why the fuck liveware bluescreens me in w2k anytime anyone other than
>admin tries to use the surround mixer? Check perms...correct.
>Uninstall/reinstall drivers...done. I would like to see some of the stuff from
>Liveware though, and I assume we will soon. Other stuff, like making everyone
>sound like a chipmunk is less than useful IMO.
Works fine for me. Must be something you are doing wrong.
>>>Creative Annihilator 2 (GeForce 2 GTS based card)
>>
>>And you get full use of all the 3d stuff and acceleration under Linux?
>
>Yes. The latest X releases are quite acceptable IMO.
Acceptable?
What you really mean is that although they "work", they are not as
good as the Windows versions and your card is not performing up to the
level of performance it was designed for.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:14:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bracy wrote:
>>
>> Is Windows really easier to use than Linux?
>
> I would say the learning curve is shorter and shallower for Windows than
> Linux.
Perhaps, and perhaps not. It's a false assumption to think that anyone
who uses Linux must necessarily use the command-line. Both Gnome
and KDE are very "windows-like" GUIs, and I don't think a Windows
user would have any trouble understanding how to use them. Almost
anything that an average user would need is available from the GUI. Not
everything that a network admin would need can be controlled from a GUI,
but it's quickly getting there.
Secondly, it wasn't that long ago when Windows users had to learn how to
edit their autoexec.bat and config.sys files, and learn how to free up
conventional memory by moving TSRs and drivers into extended memory.
Bracy
> even with Windows. I had to wonder if those users would have been able
> to learn unix variants faster. I say this because with Windows, you
> still have to learn the interface, such as how to work the menus. With
> unix, you are basically doing the equivalent of typing English commands.
> Thus, if natural speaking, which may include typing, is easier than
> pointing and clicking, then unix may be easier to use than Windows.
>
> There will be some people that will claim that Via Voice software
> accomplishes the same thing. True, but I feel it's possible to use
> voice recognition software on Linux at the shell prompt, so you could do
> something like
>
> "ell s return"
>
> as a substitute for
>
> $ ls
>
> That would aid those people who can speak, but can't type. But OTOH,
> Windows may have the advantage here, as you can probably use a brainwave
> pointing device in lieu of a mouse.
>
> Which is eaier, hunting for "shutdown" in a GUI maze, or typing
> "shutdown" at the prompt?
>
>
> -----= 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: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 10:29:56 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 19 Dec 2000 19:54:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> This kind of mentality is a major barrier to Linux going anywhere.
> >>
> >>Its actually come quite far with this kind of thinking, read: the correct
> >>kind of thinking.
>
> > Nonsense. It's come this far because there are distributors that do not
> > think like this. For example, Redhat post fixes and workarounds to known
> > problems on their website --
> > and they do this even if they didn't write the software.
>
> It is widely understood that redhat is the (by far) shittiest linux
> distribution that currently exists.
Widely understood by whom?
I use RedHat all the time and I'd definately put Corel Linux, Stable
Debian and Slackware behind it for different reasons:
Corel Linux is completely unstable
Stable Debian is so stable, it's modly with old software
Slackware has horrible package management
I like SuSE and Mandrake, but I can't see much difference between them
and RedHat 7...
> They have to, because they themselves are responsible for 99% of the broken
> ness of their distribution.
Please go into detail about this.
[snip]
> > Otherwise, why bother having a distributor, why not just roll your own ?
>
> You can with certian distributions. However, redhat is not one of them.
Excuse me? Have you ever used Redhat with kickstart?
It's the easiest roll-your-own distribution out there.
[snip]
> > Again, your attitude of superiority is completely unjustified.
>
> If you understood it, you probably would agree.
I, for one, understand Linux completely -- and I totally disagree with
your assesment.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 10:31:34 -0700
"by" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, windows is easier to learn and use. You're getting lots of windows
> support calls because:
>
> 1. there're more windows users out there
>
> 2. your average linux users are more tech savvy than your average windows
> users.
And
3. Linux doesn't rust like Windows does
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: redc1c4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "delete the \".ies\""
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:33:06 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> dvick wrote:
> >
> > "taking a turn at the government teat"???
> > Isn't that just an insulting way of saying the government pays for the
> > armed forces? Where else do you expect the military to get funding
> > but from the government? Bakes sales? Charging money for HMMWV
> > rides?
>
> Why not? That's how our schools end up raising money for frills like
> desks and blackboards.
and given the abysmal results they turn out with all the tax money they
get now, it's a good way of doing things. the whole shool system should be
supported that way, until the "educators" figure out how to teach again.
redc1c4,
public schools are for people who hate their kids
--
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We
ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed
you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that
ye were our countrymen."
Samuel Adams
------------------------------
From: "Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:25:54 -0600
I'm not a conservative, i'm liberal. But I know the value we get from our
armed forces.
Please don't assume people who don't like the military or its budget are
liberals. Thats demeaning to all the 'liberals' in uniform and all that
have died in uniform.
We can all remember quite a few militia nuts in the U.S. that would kill you
if u called them liberal, and they don't like our government or military
either.
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Fr206.16992$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > dvick wrote:
> > >
> > > "taking a turn at the government teat"???
> > > Isn't that just an insulting way of saying the government pays for the
> > > armed forces? Where else do you expect the military to get funding
> > > but from the government? Bakes sales? Charging money for HMMWV
> > > rides?
> >
> > Why not? That's how our schools end up raising money for frills like
> > desks and blackboards.
>
> But... you wouldn't have schools, or desks, or blackboards if it weren't
> for the military protecting us.
>
> I really wish I knew what it was about you liberals that you never seem
> to understand what role the military has in our freedom. You're so used
> to everything coming free from the government, you just assume that
> freedom is free and abundant.
>
> -Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:25:46 GMT
I wasn't saying that you advocate Windows.
I was just more than a little angered by your characterizing
my knowledge and experience as merely "pointing and clicking."
Windows is a quirky OS, and isn't all that easy to support -- it isn't
stable, it isn't secure, and the average Windows user has the
intelligence level of a slug.
There was a time when a DOS/Windows user had a better
understanding of computers than a Macintosh user, but those days
are gone.
Bracy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 18:02:51 GMT
On 20 Dec 2000 06:24:47 GMT, Perry Pip wrote:
>On 20 Dec 2000 05:35:59 GMT,
>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges:
>
>1) If you buy an OEM preinstall of Linux you would expect all the
>included hardware to work and be supported by the vendor, wouldn't
>you? How is that any different from with Windows?
Yes, if you get Linux preloaded it's much better. I always suggest
that newbies shopping for a new computer for Linux insist on preloads
for this reason.
>2) If you buy a boxed version of a Windows OS, and some of your
>hardware won't work with it, would you expect Microsoft to help you??
>How is that any different from Linux?
If it's on the hardware compatibility list and it doesn't work, then IMO
it is Microsoft's responsibility to offer some kind of fix (since it was
Microsoft, and not the vendor, who declared the hardware to be compatible).
BTW, two other points:
(*) Microsoft can afford to offload support to the hardware vendor, because
they can be confident that the hardware vendor *will* make sure that
the drivers work with Linux. This is the advantage that you have
when you're the market leader. Yeah, I know it's not "fair". But
that's the way it is.
(*) Microsoft actually do have a fairly large support website.
>>Microsoft are not primarily a support vendor, and their business model
>>is not "give away software and sell support". Their business model is based
>>on licensing.
>
>And you seem to think the OSS model should be "give away software and
>give away support"??
No, I don't. Most of the box sets are not "given away". Of course I don't
think that the cheapbytes CDs should come with support.
> What do I get for the "licensing" that I pay for
>with commercial software when the software doesn't work after the
>fact??
Most software companies make at least some effort to support their software.
A good example where software really doesn't work after-the-fact is games.
Usually, the software vendor will make updates available.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 18:05:04 GMT
On 20 Dec 2000 10:29:56 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>
>Widely understood by whom?
Not by anyone that matters. I read somewhere that Redhat is the most popular
distribution among kernel developers. And I believe Linus uses it. Most of
the experts don't need to find a hard-to-use distribution just to prove
that they're "cool".
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows Stability
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 18:22:41 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Windows 9x does provide memory protection between apps, it's just that
> certain portions of the OS are mapped into all address spaces, so Win9x
> can corrupt the OS itself, though not other apps.
Oops! Yes, you're right, the system space is shared and accessible to all
applications. Not very good when things go wrong!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 18:24:06 GMT
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 19 Dec 2000 19:54:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> This kind of mentality is a major barrier to Linux going anywhere.
>> >>
>> >>Its actually come quite far with this kind of thinking, read: the correct
>> >>kind of thinking.
>>
>> > Nonsense. It's come this far because there are distributors that do not
>> > think like this. For example, Redhat post fixes and workarounds to known
>> > problems on their website --
>> > and they do this even if they didn't write the software.
>>
>> It is widely understood that redhat is the (by far) shittiest linux
>> distribution that currently exists.
> Widely understood by whom?
By people who use linux all the time.
> I use RedHat all the time and I'd definately put Corel Linux, Stable
> Debian and Slackware behind it for different reasons:
> Corel Linux is completely unstable
But far more secure.
> Stable Debian is so stable, it's modly with old software
You are entirely misinformed.
> Slackware has horrible package management
So install RPM. Thats the beauty of linux you know.
> I like SuSE and Mandrake, but I can't see much difference between them
> and RedHat 7...
Then you're either blind or completely inexperienced.
> I, for one, understand Linux completely -- and I totally disagree with
> your assesment.
You do not understand linux at ALL if you cannot see the enormouse differences
between even mandrake and redhat.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 18:27:53 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Are you blind? You are answering my explanations as to why you are wrong.
How am I wrong? The registry on Windows 98 is at least two files - that
flatly contradicts what you said. So you're wrong.
> Regedit also works from a DOS command line.
That's something I'll have to see.
> I wonder how that happened, perhaps by reverting from a BACKUP which you
> claimed could not be done?
I repeat, I tried to make a backup and got an error. No explanation as to
_why_ I got an error, just an error. I then used regedit to dump to a text
file, and left it at that.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 20 Dec 2000 18:25:34 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2000 10:29:56 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>>
>>Widely understood by whom?
> Not by anyone that matters. I read somewhere
Oh, you "read somewhere". Well that certianly makes it true.
> that Redhat is the most popular
> distribution among kernel developers. And I believe Linus uses it.
Among others.
> Most of
> the experts don't need to find a hard-to-use distribution just to prove
> that they're "cool".
No, most use debian because its the most like freebsd. (not that youd know
why, or even understand why if someone explained it to you using only
two letter articles and a blackboard)
=====.
------------------------------
From: Wine Development <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Pb with RealTek LAN Adapter
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:03:57 +0000
Nicolas VIGOGNE wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I just want to submit you a little problem :
> I can't ping any host on my LAN with a RealTek 8029 adapter under Mandrake
> 7.2.
>
> Here are the symptoms : configuration is OK through netconf or DrakConf. But
> when I try to type an "ifconfig eth0 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx ...", system replies
> "Ressource temporary Unavailable".
As I understand it the 8029 is not supported under Linux. the 8129 and
8139 are.
You could also be rather more selective in the number of groups you post to.
--
Keith Matthews Spam trap - my real account at this
node is keith_m
Frequentous Consultants - Linux Services,
Oracle development & database administration
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
