Linux-Advocacy Digest #343, Volume #31 Tue, 9 Jan 01 00:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: kernel problems (Gary Hallock)
Re: kernel problems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Hatred? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: kernel problems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? ("Nate Good")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (John Brock)
Re: Why Hatred? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Why Hatred? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: VB job offer, and ensuing dilemma ("Tom Wilson")
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: kernel problems (Gary Hallock)
Re: Could only... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KDE Hell ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Advocacy? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: KDE Hell ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux a non-starter at CES ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Duh! ->was: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Why Hatred? ("Tom Wilson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 23:10:18 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
> With Windows, you don't need to recompile, you download the DRIVER run the
> INSTALLER and you've got yourself the latest, greatest from whoever made
> "it".
>
> With Linux, compilation has been kept around, apparently to make things
> "more complicated" to ward away those evil "humans".
>
> Gee, seems to be working.
>
You do not have to compile the kernel with Linux. You can, if you want, but
you do not have to. With Windows, you are stuck with what MS supplies. With
Linux, you can choose to recompile the kernel if you want to trim it down to
remove functions you don't need or to optimize for a particular processor.
You can't do that with Windows. You can with Linux, but you certainly don't
have to.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:12:40 GMT
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 17:42:10 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Even if building a kernel for linux results in total failure, it is still
>way better than the kernel-build you can do yourself (take whatever
>win-version you wish)
Don't have to build anything with Win2k, it works right out of the
box, unlike Linsux..
I prefer spending my time running applications, not building an
operating system which has NO applications of any use to run.
What a joke Linsux is...
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:13:56 GMT
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:sWk66.22593$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> > MODULE HELLOWORLD;
> > FROM InOut IMPORT WriteLn,WriteString,WriteInt;
> > VAR
> > SomeInt:INTEGER;
> > BEGIN
> > SomeInt:=5;
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Hello World");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Each scalar type such as this int,");
> > WriteInt(SomeInt,1);
> > WriteString(", has its' own damned output function!");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Is this strong typing not anal-retentive???");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Also take note that each of these damned functions ");
> > WriteString("needed to be specifically imported by name...");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("There are hundreds of functions among scores");
> > WriteString(" of different libraries...");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("You spend more time looking them up than you");
> > WriteString(" do programming...");
> > WriteLn;
> > END HELLOWORLD.
> >
> > Does this answer your question?
> >
> > PS: Modula programmers, be kind. I'm sure there are some errors there...
I
> > haven't even looked at a Modula II compiler in nearly 15 years.
>
> Sacrilege! It's a single quote, not a double quote!
<LOL> I noticed that later!
I've been programming C & C++ for too long!
The last time I fired up my PASCAL compiler, I had this trouble.
>
> WriteString('oh my goodness!');
>
> At least Modula-II has zero terminated strings, unlike Pascal.
>
> Object Pascal has strings that are length counted, up to 2GBytes.
Now that's great!
I always hated the 255 char limit.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:18:23 GMT
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 03:07:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>By the way, it was MY error, not linux's fault, as is every problem i've even
>had. MY FAULT, NOT LINUX. Is that clear enough for you, wintroll? I usually
>don't bother with assholes like you. But, don't come to MY forum and tell ME
Sorry to see they have gotten to you. The Penguinista's that is. They
always blame the user instead of the OS. It's NOT YOUR fault because
the very questions you asked are asked thousands of times over and
over and over again by Linux users. Just like the "Why do my fonts
look like shit?" question. See the "Font De-uglification How-To"to
band aid that one.
By the way, don't go to sleep... (Body snatcher Movie in case you
don't get it).
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Nate Good" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 10:19:42 +0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Nick Condon"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
>> Nick Condon wrote:
>> >
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >
>> > > Nick Condon wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Perry Pip wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > And to think they pride themselves in being objective. I can
>> > > > > only wonder if Ayn Rand was really such a bigot or whether this
>> > > > > is a bunch of people misusing her name.
>> > > >
>> > > > No, she was a bigot. I knew an Objectivist who insisted I would
>> > > > see the light if I read Ayn Rand's stuff, so I tried reading
>> > > > "Atlas Unshrugged". When I said she was a selfish bigot he told
>> > > > me I didn't "get" it.
>> > >
>> > > Since when does equality of opportunity and equality before the law
>> > > equal bigotry?
>> >
>> > It doesn't. But since those two things have been claimed by every
>> > *ism since the Enlightenment, it's hardly a distinguishing
>> > characteristic of Objectivism.
>> >
>> > Rand was an extreme individualist who claimed altruism was immoral
>> > (i.e. she was selfish).
>>
>> Wrong....
>
> She said it herself. Repeatedly. She wrote whole papers on the subject,
> like "The Virtue of being Selfish".
>
> [snipped irrelevencies]
You're right. Rand had to shame in pointing out the personal benefits of
selfishness. But the "irrlevencies" that you conveniently snipped clarified
your erroneous suggestion that Rand thought "altruism was immoral".
You missed the point--altruism is not immoral, altruism in the context of how
the antagonists where displaying it is immoral. And that's what the
"Wrong...." meant (to me, anyway), at least if you read it PAST the elepsis.
I think "Atlas Shrugged" portrays the U.S. now so well that it's creepy
considering when it was written and who it was written by.
I've seen too many people who don't show up for work, do a sloppy job
because they won't lift a finger nor take pride in accomplishing a task
well. These people will press and press until they are finally canned.
Then they get to sit at home watching Jerry Springer while they collect
unemployment or welfare. And where does this money come from? From
people who show up to work every day and do their jobs well enough to
keep them. What an ideal society...
Rand may have been extreme, but I think she makes several good points.
Is it right for a society to force those successful to share?
Oh, but wait. I'll work my ass of so someone can sit on their can all
day eating stale generic potato chips and chugging bear at nine in the
morning. Afterall, I wouldn't want to be labled a "bigot" just because I
believe when I work for something that I deserve the full reward for my
labor...
>
>> >
>> > "Selfish" and "Bigot", look 'em up in the dictionary.
>>
>> Neither of which applies to Ayn Rand.
>
> Riiight.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:20:25 GMT
Better let the guys at Corel know that because their latest abortion
Wordperfect Office (or 200 or something like that) for Linux runs
under Whino...
And it runs like shit...
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 23:16:32 +0100, "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Clue for the fucking clueless. Word Perfect was ported to SCO Unix over
>> a DECADE ago. To port the SCO version to Linux is trivial.
>>
>Maybe they find those sources for you so you can compile them. (and finding
>some bugs while looking at .c, .h and makefiles).
>l.o.l.
>
>
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 8 Jan 2001 23:22:18 -0500
In article <c1.2b5.2Ytgnm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In <93ck84$g3n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock) writes:
>>In article <3a591ac4$19$fuzhry$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In <93anlp$dik$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/07/2001
>>> at 04:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock) said:
>>>>Eh??? I sometimes use Kedit under OS/2, and it appears to me to be a
>>>>rather good Xedit clone. Are we thinking about the same product? Or
>>>>has Xedit advanced significantly since I last used it (maybe 8 years
>>>>ago), leaving Kedit in the dust?
>>>No, KEDIT was missing key XEDIT functionality from day one. I never
>>>could convince Mansfiled to add the missing pieces, so I will probably
>>>wind up with THE one of these days.
>>What functionality is that? I don't use Kedit that heavily, so I
>>just may not have noticed.
>http://www.rexswain.com/kedit.html#kedxed
>
>(some nice stuff about APL2, too)
>From the web page:
XEDIT features not supported by KEDIT:
* SET commands: MASK SERIAL SPAN SPILL
* Prefix macros
If the lack of prefix macros and a couple of SET options is the
main difference between Xedit and Kedit then I think that would
pretty much prove my point. That's not much of a difference!
--
John Brock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:24:10 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:93d5us$4vd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson:
>
> > MODULE HELLOWORLD;
> > FROM InOut IMPORT WriteLn,WriteString,WriteInt;
>
> Note that with some compilers you had to write
> FROM InOut IMPORT WRITELN,WRITESTRING,WRITEINT;
>
> It was perhaps the only language where HELLOWORLD
> was not portable...
I recall reading that somewhere. The above syntax works with Logitech's
compiler,
>
> > VAR
> > SomeInt:INTEGER;
> > BEGIN
> > SomeInt:=5;
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Hello World");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Each scalar type such as this int,");
> > WriteInt(SomeInt,1);
> > WriteString(", has its' own damned output function!");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Is this strong typing not anal-retentive???");
> > WriteLn;
>
> Put("No problem with strong typing: "); Put(SomeInt);
> Put_Line(" if the language provides overloading, like Ada...");
Can't recall if Logitech's implementation provided function overloading. It
sure would have made working with it easier. Modula was a language I was
destined to ignore since I found C and PASCAL superior. The first language I
was proficient with, aside from BASIC, was ASSEMBLER. You can imagine the
Modula II's impression on me.<g>
It's an excellent tool for teaching modular programming techniques and data
structures though.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:34:52 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Tom Wilson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > > news:bXN56.16755$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Tom Wilson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > No...RPG-II and COBOL.
> > > > > > C and C++ are my primary languages
> > > > > > PASCAL, ASSEMBLER and PERL round out the top five.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oops! Misread the context. I can understand why you hate RPG-II
and
> > COBOL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Delphi is Object Pascal. Ever tried Ada, Modula II or Oberon?
> > > >
> > > > Ada, yes and no. I was part of a pilot program at my University to
teach
> > it.
> > > > It still wasn't completely standardized at the time. It looked to
have
> > > > potential but it was awfully weighty. I'm sure the final
implementation
> > is
> > > > smaller and more cohesive.
> > > >
> > > > Modula II is Pascal for anal-retentives <g>. A great language for
> > teaching
> > > > modular programming and data strutures. A bit too pedantic to do any
> > real
> > > > work with.
> > >
> > > I thought Pascal was anal-retentive for practical use.
> > >
> > > YOu mean Modula is even WORSE?
> >
> > MODULE HELLOWORLD;
> > FROM InOut IMPORT WriteLn,WriteString,WriteInt;
> > VAR
> > SomeInt:INTEGER;
> > BEGIN
> > SomeInt:=5;
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Hello World");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Each scalar type such as this int,");
> > WriteInt(SomeInt,1);
> > WriteString(", has its' own damned output function!");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Is this strong typing not anal-retentive???");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("Also take note that each of these damned functions ");
> > WriteString("needed to be specifically imported by name...");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("There are hundreds of functions among scores");
> > WriteString(" of different libraries...");
> > WriteLn;
> > WriteString("You spend more time looking them up than you");
> > WriteString(" do programming...");
> > WriteLn;
> > END HELLOWORLD.
> >
> > Does this answer your question?
>
>
> Wow...I didn't think it was even possible to make the handcuffs
> any tighter than pascal's...
Borland's PASCAL implementations were a great deal more powerful and less
restrictive then ANSI PASCAL. You could, honestly, do almost anything with
it that you could with C. Especially where low-level programming was
concerned. I actually managed to write a device driver for an old tape
backup with it. Excellent in-line assembler support. Also, with BP7, you had
the option to write DPMI programs. You were still limited to a static 64K
data segment but, using pointers, you could use up to 16MB of RAM. If you
were clever enough, you learned to swap portions of the data segment out to
a RAM cache. Tricky, but workable.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VB job offer, and ensuing dilemma
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:38:11 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93dp7s$m1s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> For anybody who was paying attention, I turned down the job offer.
Wise move.
If they won't pay you what you're worth, they're not worth working for.
Never sell yourself short.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:38:54 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:kst66.13389$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Windows has a unified configuration system called the REGISTERY.
> >
> > Linux has /etc.
> >
> > Guess which one is light years ahead of the other.
>
> The one that allows you to run a test instance of a program at the same
> time as the production copy but using a command line switch to
> point it to an alternate file. The one that allows recovery of
> an unbootable system by using an alternate boot (floppy, etc.)
> and copying in correct versions of some files.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kyle has proven himself to be a flame that generates no
light, only heat.
--
Flipping the Bozo bit at 400 MHz
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 23:38:31 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel problems
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Don't have to build anything with Win2k, it works right out of the
> box, unlike Linsux..
>
> I prefer spending my time running applications, not building an
> operating system which has NO applications of any use to run.
>
> What a joke Linsux is...
>
Clearly a lie. You obviously prefer to spend most of your time bashing
Linux. How many hours a day to you spend on that? When do you find time to
do anything useful?
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Could only...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Jan 2001 14:50:11 +1100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) writes:
>JM wrote:
>> ("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>Look at Australia...they banned guns, and the murder rate TRIPLED.
>>
>>That's such a fallacy it's untrue.
>Nope. It's statistics.
Yeah, but it's made up statistics. The Australian bureau of statistics
has a web site which has the actual numbers, and the rate is absolutely
flat, with a sharp drop in firearms related murders in the 1999 figures,
which might yet turn out to be either a fluke or the start of a trend.
>>>This indicates that private ownership of guns PREVENTS more murders
>>>than it causes.
>>
>>Yes, your attacker having a gun PREVENTS him murdering you.
>The idea is you shoot him before he shoots you.
Don't get me wrong --- but unless I would be willing to shoot people
as soon as I "feel threatened", the chances are my attacker has her gun
out before I even relaize that I should shoot her. Which means my chances
of getting in the first shot are pretty damn slim.
And in that case, I'd feel much safer knowing that the attacker *doesn't*
expect me to be armed, and thus *doesn't* fear that any moment I will
try to shoot her, and thus *doesn't* see a need to shoot first. My wallet
is gone either way, but digging bullets out of my guts is painful, expensive
and takes a lot of time.
Bernie
--
One man's wage increase is another man's price increase
Harold Wilson
British Prime Minister 1964-70 and 1974-76
In a speech at Blackburn, 8 January 1970
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Jan 2001 14:57:32 +1100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>The church of scientology is evil and retarded, as are ALL of its members.
>EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM. ALL OF THEM, WITH NO EXCEPTIONS AT ALL.
Now now, that's a pretty strong statement. There are certainly members
who are not retareded (think of those at the top of the Scientology
food chain, the ones who pocket all that money), and there are members
who are not evil (think of the other end).
Maybe if you use "or" instead of "and", and replace "retarded" with
"not necessarily overly bright", you have a point.
Bernie
--
Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate
John F. Kennedy
US President 1961-63
Inaugural address, 20 January 1961
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Jan 2001 15:00:44 +1100
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Thank you for explaining the analogy.
>But I guess the same applies to cars, there are such things as terrible
>cars.
>I think Linux is a terrible car, err, OS.
Then I guess you will be one person who doesn't drive, err, use what will
turn out to be the most popular car, err, OS in history.
Bernie "just stretching" Meyer
--
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything
E.J. Phelps
American diplomat
London, 24 January 1889
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.fan.bill-gates
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Jan 2001 15:08:22 +1100
Jure Sah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> -- the machine is upstairs, and doesn't usually have a monitor attached.
>H-Hey! You have a computer with 128 Mb of RAM and you don't use it?!
Huh? I didn't say I don't *use* it. I said it doesn't have a monitor
attached. It *does* have a network cable attached, though.
>I know now: You people have too much comfort and all you have to do left
>if complain about things!
Well, if I set up a machine to do a certain job on the network, I want
to forget about it afterwards. Having to babysit it through a "safe"
reboot after each power outage is really annoying, not the least because
I need to grab a monitor to do it.
Bernie
--
I have been underestimated for decades. I have done very well that way
Helmut Kohl
German Chancellor since 1982
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Jan 2001 15:13:16 +1100
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Say, why don't you just install Linux on this poor peice of machinery?
>There doesn't seem to be too much hope for it.
Because the makers of the Encyclopedia Britannica have yet to realise the
market potential of a CD-ROM version for Linux. Plain and simple.
Seeing as I like the EB CD-ROM very much, setting up a "poor peice of
machinery" that can handle it quite well seems a reasonable thing to do.
If it just managed to reboot properly...
BTW, how many "poor peices of machinery" do you know that come with Wide
SCSI on the motherboard, have case intrusion detection and are original
IBM hardware?
Bernie
--
Never offend people with style when you can offend them with
substance.
Sam Brown
Washington Post, 26 January 1977
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:44:07 GMT
On 8 Jan 2001 21:08:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>>
>>1. It is the default Window manager for some distributions.
>
>KDE is not a window manager
And this is EXACTLY why Linsux is failing so miserably on the
desktop's of home users, because all the while you Penguinista's are
playing your little semantic games, the fact remains that the
gui,xserver,wm or whatever you choose to call the components today,
suck.
When I put exec kwm at the end of .xinitrc file I get kde. Looks like
a Windowmanager to me...It puts Windows that look different than if I
put exec wmaker there instead.
Hint:Stop making yourself look ridiculous by splitting bits and
concentrate on the subject as a whole.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:44:07 GMT
"Andres Soolo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93dofj$q73$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Form@C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Certainly within the home and small business sector "user applications"
are
> > installed and run on the desktop machines, although their data may be
> Why certainly?
>
> > stored on a server. Some packages, particularly in the CAD field, cannot
> > easily be run on a server in any case (the program segments may be
stored
> > on it though so that they are run *from* the server rather than *on* it)
> > because they often require direct hardware access to operate. Games,
> Ugh ...
> Why would CAD software need direct hardware access?
If the OS it runs on doesn't have a good Hardware Abstraction Layer, API
calls will be so slow as to be useless. Particularly if you're doing any 3D
rendering. Direct access is generally the best way to go if you want
anything beyond mediocre performance.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:45:09 GMT
On 9 Jan 2001 02:34:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>All the KDE applications, bar "kwm and friends" in kdebase, will work
>equally well in any window manager.
And most of them suck equally well under whatever WM you choose.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux a non-starter at CES
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:47:30 GMT
On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 22:19:02 GMT, Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>An interesting article by Kevin Reichard appeared in Linux Planet today,
>about how Linux appeared to be a no-show at CES this year:
Mainly because CES is all about SELLING and MAKING MONEY and using the
word Linux and the phrase "making money" in the same sentence doesn't
make sense.
Once again Linux is being ignored because it is too fragmented,
inconsistent and unappealing to the high rollers.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Duh! ->was: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:50:38 GMT
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 01:09:28 GMT, "Kyle Jacobs"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No, according to the post, it states
>
>"Duh! -> was: Linux is crude an inconsistent."
And it is. Why do I have to click once sometimes and twice other
times? Why does my mouse behave one way with one application and
another way with a different application?
Why do some web pages look ok but others look like crap? They all look
ok under Windows.
Why do fonts appear in some applications but not in others?
And on and on and on and on....
>I do believe we're talking about Linux being crude and inconsistent, with
>someone posting "duh" to the title, indicating agreement.
Exactly.
>Nope, we're still on track.
Yep
>"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> MH wrote:
>> >
>> > Linux is crude and inconsistent.
>> >
>> > OK, now that you've stated the obvious...
>> > What's your point?
>>
>> Oh, I thought they were talking about you, jerk.
>>
>> --
>> Flipping the Bozo bit at 400 MHz
>
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:51:03 GMT
"Bones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> Don't be quite so cynical even if it comes naturally from prior
> >> experience with MS products. Win2k really does have some of
> >> the long-missing command line functionality filled in but for some
> >> reason nobody knows anything about it.
>
> Even if you're UNIX hardcore, you could just run Bash under NT, as well as
a
> host of UNIX-like CLI utilties that work with it.
There is a big difference, though. Win2k has CLI commands for system
administration functions that aren't available for NT.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:53:12 GMT
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> > Modula II is Pascal for anal-retentives <g>. A great language for
teaching
> > modular programming and data strutures. A bit too pedantic to do any
real
> > work with.
>
> Hmmm... and what about Modula-3? Is this worth learning, or not? I
> could install the M-3 development package on my machine, but I think I
> have enough work cut out for me trying to learn and/or perfect my
> knowledge of C, C++, Java, and Perl. It sounds like the above-mentioned
> languages are a lot more common than Modula-3. But, I've seen people
> mention that Modula-3 was a "great systems programming language". Gee,
> and I here I thought C and C++ did this pretty well. 8-)
I think I replied once already but my ISP dropped a T1 line and the router
failed to kick over to a second. I don't see some of my posts...
This is the first time I've even heard Modula-3 mentioned so I don't know
whether its' worth learning. C, C++, and PERL are far more versatile and are
in widespread use, so, I'd stick to learning them. You'll encounter them far
more. If you're still not firmly grounded on modular programming techniques
and in data structures, such as linked lists and binary trees, PASCAL or
MODULA-II would be worthwhile. Those structures can be done under any
language but they seem to translate better to PASCALish languages.
Especially if you're still in the beginner or intermediate stages.
If Modula-3 is anything like II, I'd prefer to do my systems programming via
machine code <g>.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
