Linux-Advocacy Digest #394, Volume #31 Thu, 11 Jan 01 14:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?" (Pete Goodwin)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Steve Mading)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Steve Mading)
Re: The real truth about NT (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The real truth about NT (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The real truth about NT (.)
Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Steve Mading)
Re: Why Hatred? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux a non-starter at CES (Pete Goodwin)
Re: You and Microsoft... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: You and Microsoft... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Steve Mading)
Re: You and Microsoft... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Ed is the standard editor (TTK Ciar)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
(Steve Mading)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:31:03 +0000
Michael Marion wrote:
> I think they had a lot of problems with the first generation models (the
> early
> 14hour ones). I had one, then bought a 30 hour and gave the 14 to my
> parents. The 14 hour started to die a few months later. My 30 hour has
> been rock solid for almost a year now (and I even hacked it to add a 60Gig
> disk...
These are thirty hour ones bought in the UK. There do seem to be a lot of
teething troubles reported in the TiVo UK forum.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:32:22 +0000
rus wrote:
> I find the video setup disheartening. I also find that text editing
> instead of GUI controls for program setup frustrating. I am using
> Caldera distro. Is there a distro for people only having time to do
> work and not time for figuring out their OS?
Linux Mandrake is recognised as for newbies.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:21:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:>
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : XEDIT's default behavior is to facilitate generating punchcards...
:> : technology which was almost totally phased out nearly 20 years ago
:> : (exception: voting machines in Democrook-run counties).
:>
:> So where are your statistics to back up that the obsolete machinery
:> occurs only in Democrat run counties? Or are you just spouting
:> made-up bullshit?
: Was it not the Democrat party LEADERSHIP who were complaining that
: the vast majority of these ballot-tamperer-friendly machines are
: in their own districts...
Three problems:
1 - From the sound of it you are trying to refer to Florida. You
should say so. Statements without qualifiers are universal by
default. I live in a democrat-majority county, and we've used
electronic ballot scanners for at least 10 years. But I don't
live in Florida.
2 - The Republicans had no incentive whatsoever to perform a recount,
so they would never bother trying to say, "Hey, our counties had
crappy voting machinery too" regardless of whether it's true, so the
Democratic leaders could get away with spouting such a statement
whether it was true or not. (Can you tell I'm neither repub nor
democrat?)
3 - The complaint was not that the machines were tamper-friendly.
The complaint was that they cause innacuracies accidentally, not
through tampering. I'm not trying to say whether this is true or
not, just that you are strawmanning the democrats, giving them
a claim they didn't make.
[absurd sig snipped]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:23:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In <93g8to$kkm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/10/2001
: at 12:04 AM, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
:>I usually need the context, because a line like "myfunc(foo);" looks
:>pretty much the same whether it's inside an if condition I'm
:>interested in or not...
: XEDIT also lets you add to the view lines before or after a displayed
: line.
At that point I lose the benefit of having the matches in a list.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:33:48 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Dlue for the clueless: Disk drive images are NOT an acceptable
> alternative to backup tapes.
Ses you.
There are other backup media than tapes. CD-R comes to mind.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:37:14 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After NT and all Apps are installed, I end up with nearly twice as much
> disk usage then an equavalent install on Linux.
You don't say what the apps are.
> > I get 100% success with Windows 98 SE. What's your point?
>
> How much do you burn? My company burn's about 1000 CD's per month (all
> custom stuff for clients).
Much less than that.
> > Then put the data where you can find it every time.
>
> Thats just my point - the apps don't let you choose. You need to spend
> a lot of time to get everything where you want it.
Some apps do, some apps don't. Which apps are we talking about here?
> > Four hours? Blimey, what are you installing. NT takes around an hour.
> That
> > leaves three hours for applications?
>
> Office 2K, CD-RW apps, Various Web Editing tools, Lots of Graphics tools
> and the list just goes on... Most of the stuff is standard on Linux.
> After I install a Linux box, the only other CD with an app on I use is
> my StarOffice CD (which is not really necessary, since I install SO
> from the network to the new users home dir)
I still don't which apps you're talking about. What CD-RW apps? What Web
editing tools? What graphics etc.? I can't believe these are all standard
on Linux, after seeing what you get on a Linux distro.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:35:02 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:93kftr$2kj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > You "found" these facts? You claim you personally experienced this.
>>
>> Semantics manipulation. I wouldnt have thought you capable of it, erik,
>> since you whine about it so constantly.
> No, I find that the way people phrase things betrays their true experience.
In other words, you are putting words in his mouth in order to further your
own point. (sorry, just trying out your technique)
>> >> 4. CD-RW - NT gave so far 6 duds vs 0 to Linux in my org. (Maybe
>> >> mentioning that the Linux box burns about 15 times more CD's then the
>> >> NT box is overdoing it...)
>>
>> > Simply incorrect. If you're making coasters, then you've got something
>> > seriously screwed up.
>>
>> Yes, like running another application at the same time. My W2K install
>> stopped making coasters completely when I ran NOTHING BUT CD-RW while
>> it was burning. Even bringing up a putty terminal during a burn would
>> cause coasters.
> I run other apps while burning all the time. I've never had a problem.
> Under 9x, sure. Running other apps would fail, but not under NT.
I dont believe you at all. Every single last person I know who has ever
burned ANYTHING under NT and 2000 (including many militant microsoft engineers
who believe that windows is the best thing EVER) burn coasters occasionally.
Your anecdotal experience does not stand up to statistical reason.
>> Dont fall into the mistake of praising outlook express over *anything*.
>>
>> To do so marks your extreme lack of experience in the matter.
> As usual, you're completely ignoring the context.
Sorry, I was utilizing your technique about the way people phrasing things
betraying their experience. Doesnt look like it works too well, does it?
>> >> 6. Install time - As you might have guesed, I re-installed NT now a
>> >> couple of times. Average install time from scratch to a FULLY working
>> >> Work Station with all apps installed takes about 4 hours (on some older
>> >> systems up to 6 hours). I have not yet re-installed a Linux system, but
>> >> a new install, with linking up to my company $HOME directory and all
>> >> the other bells and whistles takes less then an hour.
>>
>> > Fully installing Linux took me 3 days to get all the apps configured
>> > correctly.
>>
>> What apps? It usually takes me about three hours. It sounds like your
>> problem is simply that you dont know what youre doing.
> Yet he claims it only takes "less than an hour".
It takes less than an hour to install debian, redhat, mandrake and SuSe (those
are the ones ive done most recently). It does take another hour or two
to configure all the software you want to run, obviously.
It takes at least that long on windows too. This entire point is moot.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:41:21 +0000
Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
> Very poorly written piece. From a Corporate IT/MS perspective, it talks
> as if Linux has been _technologically_ playing catch up to W* and is
> just getting there.
Sounds like my comment "Linux lags behind Windows"
> Linux was beyond that point several years ago.
In certain areas, yes, but in terms of the GUI, it's catching up to Windows.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:31:45 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In <93isqj$fea$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/10/2001
: at 11:56 PM, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
:>That's a false equivocation fallacy.
: Just because you're too stupid too understand the point doesn't mean
: that it is equivocation.
:>The word "protocol" has
:>several seperate meanings, and it should have been obvious from
:>context that I was not referring to the type of protocols you are.
: No, it's obvious from your message that you don't understand the
: various meanings of the word,
Stop. Yes I *DO* understand the various meanings of the word.
In fact that's precisely why I called you on your false equivocation
fallacy. When two totally different concepts are unfortunately
described with the same word, that doesn't imply they are the
same thing.
: and lack the native wit or curtesy to
: ask which I have in mind. Don't nother now; You can join aaron in my
: filters.
: *PLONK*
Thank you.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:46:37 -0600
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93krth$rps$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:93iqoq$fea$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : I don't fear Linux. In fact, I run my web server under Linux. I
simply
> :> : don't find Linux useful as a desktop system today, and get annoyed
when
> :> : Linux zealots insist that Linux can replace Windows today. It can't.
> : If it
> :> : could, I'd be using it.
> :>
> :> Can you comprehend the difference between "X can do Y", and "I use X to
> :> do Y"? Just because YOU don't use it that way doesn't imply it can't
> :> be used that way. Pretending that your personal needs are identical
> :> to everyone else's is a common error when extrapolating from anecdotal
> :> evidence to the general case.
>
> : I didn't say it can't be used that way. Why do you insist on pretending
I
> : said things I didn't say?
>
> You *did* say it can't be used to replace windows. You even repeat it
> in this reply.
No, I said it can't replace Windows, not that it can't be USED to replace
windows.
> :> : Linux zealots insist that Linux can replace Windows today. It can't.
>
> : I said Linux isn't useful on the desktop for me today. And I said that
> : Linux cannot replace Windows today (it can't. that's a fact). That's
*ALL*
> : I said.
>
> And that's what's false. Let me teach you some basic logic:
> If someone says, "X *cannot* do Y", all it takes is a single
> counter-example to prove it wrong.
Sure, show me a single counter-example of Linux displacing every copy of
Windows on every desktop of the world.
> That's why it's a pretty
> stupid idea to make such a sweeping generalization in an
> argument. All it takes is a single example of someone replacing
> Windows with Linux, and the statement "Linux cannot replace Windows"
> becomes false. Go read the press releases for the last few years.
> While there aren't a *large* number of these examples, there are some,
> and all it takes is one single example to make your claim false.
No, I used the words Linux and Windows as a collective, not as an
individual. If I had said what you claim, I would have said "A linux
install can't replace a windows install" or something similar.
> :> : Just like I used my Amiga over DOS, OS/2 over
> :> : Windows 3.1, and Windows 95 over OS/2, and Windows 2000 over Windows
9x
> : (I
> :> : still used Win98 primarily until Win2k came out. Although since then
I
> : have
> :> : at least one NT4 box hanging around) when each proved themselves more
> : useful
> :> : to me.
> :>
> :> : Fact is, as long as Linux must be maintained by through text files,
it's
> : not
> :> : going to be able to replace Windows.
> :>
> :> There is a difference between "able to" and "likely to". Learn it.
>
> : If it's not likely to, it's not going to be able to in all likelyhood.
>
> That's nice. This has nothing to do with your sweeping generalization
> that it "cannot".
It quite simply can't. At least, not today.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a non-starter at CES
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:44:48 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Remember...if the DOJ bails out...30 different States' Attornies General
> will file suit against Microshaft.
>
> Imagine Gates and Ballmer giving 30 more performances of
> indisputable perjury.
>
> HAH!
That means it'll just drag on even more.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:47:20 +0000
Tom Wilson wrote:
> Some servers require an audience. <g>
>
> Why is it that the old legacy servers you've completely forgotten about
> are the ones that, when discovered, are still chugging along happily -
> Only to die a day or two later? Is it fear of dying alone and forgotten
> that keeps them up?
I think it felt neglected, so it decided to die in a prissy fit once some
started using it locally. Otherwise it had been serving files quite happily
for a couple of months.
Motto: don't touch a Windows 98 SE server desktop. It's happier serving
files.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:48:17 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > We left our web server alone for two months before rebooting. That's no
> > maintenance at all.
>
> Must be Linux or BSD or commercial Unix...
Nope, it was Windows 98 SE. Like what you're running.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: 11 Jan 2001 18:47:35 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Here in comp.os.os2.misc, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: spake unto us, saying:
:>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:>: The network and the host machine isn't involved in any of those things.
:>: Only when the Transmit key or selection function keys are hit is any
:>: sort of signal sent outside the terminal itself because the base UTS is
:>: intelligent enough to interpret the field descriptors that the host
:>: painted on its screen.
:>
:>That behaviour is only acceptable if you don't care about the ability
:>to be interactive.
: You pay want to rephrase that to be "...ability to be interactive with
: an application on the host."
[snip long description of block mode terminals as opposed to character
terminals, comparing them to client/server.]
Sure, *some* interactive features exist on the terminal, but the
problem is that you can't run software of your own making on the
terminal's end of things, so the "client" is fixed and unchanging.
That's not very expressive. When you want a type of interaction
that wasn't implemented in the terminal, you can't have it. Character
terminals might require more interruption of the CPU on the mainframe,
but they allow for future expansions of the interface, and in a good
multi-user timesharing system, trying to find a way to let the CPU be
interrupted often without hurting performance is something that should
be solved anyway, block terminals or not.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:53:01 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > 1) ease of use (that's for newbies, once it's set up correctly, it will
> > not fail, and configuration is something you won't have to worry about
> > again)
>
> Actually, the Unix CDE GUI is MUCH better in this regard... KDE or Gnome
> are even better. Why? Because clueless newbies can fuck up the
> configuration of a Windows box without even trying...conversely, they have
> no such ability on a Unix or Linux box.
If only they worked properly, like Windows does.
As for not being able to screw up a Unix configuration, what does linuxconf
do? What toolkit does it use? Gtk? Is that not what Gnome is based on?
> What is THE "standardized package" format for LoseDOS?
I've no idea. What's LoseDOS? Is that like LieSux?
> Clue for the clueless: The only thing that matters is how well YOUR
> PRINTER is supported....and whether you bothered to check out it's
> performance BEFORE buying it.
Clue for you, Aaron. One thing that matters full stop - is your printer
even supported? Or even other hardware: sound cards, web cams etc.
> > 5) it needs a better browser, although this is not Linux' fault, now
> > that OS's are rather counted as solutions, not only as kernels, I can
> > clearly state that Linux misses a better browser (mozilla and konqueror
> > slowly getting there)
>
> IE is pretty lousy, too.
At least it works and looks good. Netscape works and looks good on Windows.
But on Linux? YUK!
> This is the dynamic we saw with DOS...I have no reason to believe that
> it will be different with Linux.
True, but Windows got there first.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: TTK Ciar
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Ed is the standard editor
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:12:13 GMT
ttk@typhon:~/prog> alias | grep ed
ed jove
ttk@typhon:~/prog>
This alias has been in my .cshrc on every system I've had an account
on for many, many years .. except systems which for whatever reason I
cannot install jove on, in which case I've aliased it to "emacs -nw".
-- TTK
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:59:58 +0000
Terry Porter wrote:
> >> There are no free phone calls anywhere Goodwin, do you have a point ?
> >
> >In America, all local calls are free. Here in the UK, if you phone
> >another subscriber on the same cable network at certain times, phone
> >calls are free.
> Wrong!
> They pay a monthly fee to have those 'free' local phone calls.
And do I pay a monthly fee to get free phone calls on my cable phone line?
No I don't! So, we're both wrong!
> >Oops! Missed the kernel bit. Don't matter, I could be compiling too. Just
> >not the kernel.
>
> Hence your assertion is false, don't be too hard on yourself, COLA
> forgives Wintrolls too.
I just said I could do it, it wasn't a dream. That's no assertion, that's a
fact.
> >You don't even know what I'm talking about do you.
>
> I think I've a good idea, and I've patiently worked my way thru your list
> of emotive inaccuracies.
Obviously you don't.
You said you use CLI applications on various X terminals in Linux. I said
you were a CLI user, not a GUI user. Where did I get that wrong?
> Seriously, I cant be a Linux Troll on COLA now can I ?
You can be a twoll anywhere you like - the point is you're still a twoll. 8)
> >I see no cliffs. I've not jumped off any high places lately.
>
> Sigh ..
Oh! You want me to jump of a cliff do you! Well that's nice!!!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.linux.sucks,alt.linux.slakware
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
does) )
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:52:59 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:> ANY basic is "better than Visual Basic".
: No. There have been some truly shockingly bad BASIC variants... :^(
Okay, that's true. But back to the original, there do exist basics
on Linux that are better than Visual Basic.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:03:48 +0000
Terry Porter wrote:
> >> >Just because it's free doesn't make it quality.
> >>
> >> Just because it costs doesnt make it quality.
> >
> >If you'd read what I'd said, you'll realise I've already said that.
>
> No you havent.
I'm not arguing with you. You just don't bother to read what I said.
> All i needed to prove that your 'theory' holds no water.
See above.
> >In a wonderland where things work. I think I'll stay where I am.
>
> Ahh the old Wintroll *work* again. Terse, and ambiguous.
> Sadly by my definitions, Windows does NOT work.
And by my definition, Linux lags behind Windows. Linux definately does NOT
have the edge.
> >And you're the one demonstrating your obvious bias.
>
> This is COLA Goodwin, bias is expected here.
Blind dogma appears to be accepted here.
> >Funny, I thought I was doing just that!
>
> Keep at it, perhaps you'll "get there" one day :)
I'm already there, and I'm roaring past you as you struggle onwards.
> >Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
> Only to Troll with.
That's not a good reason - why would I use it?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:11:11 +0000
Terry Porter wrote:
> >So have I. I've not seen any serious problems as yet, but... my server
> >system regularly pauses for about five minutes as it tries to mount a
> >ReiserFS disk.
>
> I have no such problem here, this PC boots in the fastest time I've ever
> seen.
And that means the problem does not exist, huh?
> > No messages are printed so I'm not sure what's happening.
>
> Perhaps you need a nice blue screen ?
It would at least tell me where to look. Merely stopping and hanging for a
few minutes tells me nothing.
> >> Yet mine works and yours dosnt ?
> >
> >Your point?
>
> Im a lucky guy ?
That's about it.
> Only the fact you have no experience with Free Software is *self* evident
> here.
You fail to read what I wrote. I'll leave it as an exercise for you.
> >Oh funny I thought you were. You mean you were truly series when you said
> >"Linux has the edge".
>
> 100% serious.
and 100% wrong.
> > Yet when I try Linux, I find a mass of problems.
>
> Wintrolls always do, its their *job* to invent problems with Linux.
I don't invent problems with Linux, they are real.
> >Funny, to me, having the edge would mean Linux is far better than
> >Windows, yet I don't find it so.
>
> I find Linux superior to Windows in every way.
Dogma!
> >Precisely my point. You use a GUI solely for running a terminal emulator.
> >In other words you're a CLI user.
>
> And a GUI user, cant you make that mental jump Goodwin ?
Your usage of the GUI is to use multiple CLI's. That's not a mental jump.
> >A CLI/GUI?
>
> Supprised ?
One application out of those you mentioned.
> >I don't use Free Agent, BTW. I use KNode.
>
> I've heard its good.
It's a GUI application, not a CLI application running in a terminal window
on X.
> But there are NOT!
I guess that depends on what you're doing. The list you mentioned didn't
seem to have anything in it that wasn't available as a commercial app.
> >And to mail with.
>
> Posting and emailing only ?
> I wonder why you bother ?
Because it doesn't crash like Windows does? Even though it doesn't offer
everything I need, it's stability is useful.
> Its not supprising tho, hes a Wintroll, theyre not supposed to be able to
> *use* Linux.
So I'm just wasting my time with KNode huh?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
