Linux-Advocacy Digest #657, Volume #31 Mon, 22 Jan 01 17:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Games? Who cares about games? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Re: Games? Who cares about games? (Greg Yantz)
Re: Poor Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Nick Condon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:04:13 -0000
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:34:58 -0600, WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>mlw wrote:
>>
>> I don't know anyone that really plays games on their computers. is that out of
>> the ordinary? When people mention games as an issue, I often wonder why.
>>
>> I have a Nintendo for games, why would I waste a computer on games?
>
>
>If you have kids, then you have games on the computer. It's that
>simple. I'm not a game player but the kids and neighborhood kids
>are into it big time.
Except that flies in the face of well observed usage and
marketing trends. The kiddies are more likely to be
interested in the latest consoles as a gaming machine
rather than the PC.
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:07:03 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> Let's not get hyperbolic here. You mean totally different for a
> programmer? Sure! Just like Delphi and VB.
Yes I mean that...
> Or you mean totally different for a user? In that case, it's a gross
> exageration. For example, I am pretty sure that square beveled thing
> that says "OK" in xchat is a button not unlike that square beveled
> thing saying "OK" in ksirc.
Buttons in isolation are fine.
But consider the file open/save dialog. They are very different.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:09:22 +0000
Bob Hauck wrote:
> I'm not sure how this applies to the question of how common dialogs
> _look_ when using different toolkits. The fact that they look different
> is at most an inconvenience, while not being able to compile is broken
> functionality. The former causes a moment's hesitation the first time
> you see the new dialog, the latter can cause days or weeks of work.
Sorry, it's not the look, it's the functionality. MOTIF + Gtk style file
open/save dialogs are very different from the KDE (and StarOffice) dialogs.
> So? Either system can run the apps written for the other. All that's
> needed is some libraries, which your installer can install if need be.
> And if the standard is that all distros come with both systems (which is
> what seems to be happening) then what's the big deal? There is a degree
> of interoperability as far as drag-and-drop and session management and
> other user-level features, so the user is not going to be too put out.
Yes that's fine, but...
> What you're complaining about is really a developer concern rather than
> an end-user one. You are worried that if you use one toolkit or the
> other that you will be locked out of part of the market. I don't think
> that is the case, but I can see how it would concern you.
Yes that does concern me but...
> I think that the popularity of "skins" and things like Object Desktop
> proves that the market wants variation. People are in fact willing to
> put up with different programs having different UI's. One File dialog
> is much like another and people quickly adapt to the differences.
Variation is fine, but different standards for things like file open/save?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:18:27 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> This argument is getting so boring I could spend the whole 20 minutes it
> would take and provide you, for your use only, a replacement KFileDialog
> that is bug-compatible to Motif's.
It would be more interesting to provide a KDE style dialog for Netscape or
Gtk... can you do that?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:20:40 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> If you call crashing at 3:00 and losing all the work you've done since
> lunchtime "good productivity", then you're OBVIOUSLY not speaking the
> same dielect of English as the rest of us.
Then why are you using Windows 98 to post your reply?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:13:09 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Darren Winsper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Same here. In fact, I have Windows for the sole reason of games. If
> all my games were available for Linux, I'd dump Windows in an instant
> (As soon as I got a GeForce2 since Voodoo5 drivers for Linux are
crap).
If all you want is games, get a play station II. It costs less than a
desktop OS, the games and graphics are better, and it crashes less than
win.
What's impoortant to me are programming languages, databases, and
development libraries. I was pleasantly surprised to discover how many
programming libraries and development applications come bundled with
mandrake 7.2. More, I think than with even the SuSe 4cd sets.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:20:49 -0000
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:15:08 GMT, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 03:52:38 GMT, "Lloyd Llewellyn"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> almost coherently wrote:
[deletia]
>* Office applications - I've tried StarOffice, I've tried Applixware,
>and I've tried a couple of other smaller offerings, but none of them
>seem to match up with office applications for Windows. MS Office is
>SLOW, but StarOffice is slower, and Applixware crashed almost every
I've known Windows users to disagree on this point. Bear in
mind that StarOffice is more sluggish under Win32 than it is
being sent across a LAN via X.
Also, I've used Applix quite a bit and have never known it
to crash.
Beyond those "my experience is different than yours" objections,
you've not mentioned anything regarding actual functional details.
This is common to the point of being an annoyance.
>time I used it. I've yet to find any decent accounting package for
>Linux.
>
>* Frustrating installations - I've noticed with many graphical
>products for Linux that installation is not straight forward. I think
???
Just run the installer like you would an installshield script.
What are these "many" you are refering to?
>this is an unfortunate side effect of open source offerings. Many
>times I've downloaded something only to find in the README file "you
>also need to install package A and B and C before this will work". If
>I have time I'll go hunt down those packages, but more often than not
>I give up at that point.
Anyone tried out the rpm version of apt-get yet?
--
The term "popular" is MEANINGLESS in consumer computing. DOS3
was more "popular" than contemporary Macintoshes despite the
likelihood that someone like you would pay the extra money to
not have to deal with DOS3.
Network effects are everything in computing.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:23:58 +0000
Bob Hauck wrote:
> Fine, I'll accept that. But it is still a small thing. You easily
> figured out how to use each of the various dialog styles. My argument
> is that other users are just as smart as you in this respect and you are
> blowing this issue out of proportion. Yes, it might be nice if the
> various toolkits were more consistent. No, I don't see this as a huge
> problem.
>
> It is far more important to have toolkits will modern features than it
> is to have only one such toolkit, IMO.
OK fair enough I'll have to hope the modern desktops will all start to
converge on a commen set of features, and that things get rewritten to use
these new styles.
> No, I am not. It is a bad analogy. Even _if_ there are differences in
> user productivity between toolkit A and toolkit B, they are not very
> great. A user can easily figure out what's going on in literally seconds.
>
> This is not at all the same as cars being matched to their type of gas.
It seemed like it to me, but I won't labour the point any further.
> >Take a good look at the different styles of file open/save dialog between
> >MOTIF, Gtk and Qt. They are very different, they work in different ways.
>
> So? Does this hinder anyone's productivity? Is it really a _problem_
> or is it more of a _preference_?
Well, I find it annoying. So maybe it is a preference on my part. I'll
leave it at that.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:25:58 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> Do you suffer some sort of hysterical blindess?
No, but I'm losing track of where this thread is going! 8)
> Both of them, specially the web interface should work just fine in
> a "pure KDE" environment (so should the Gtk+ one, but you seem to
> be hellbent on not using it, that's why we bother telling you,
> for the 241st time how not to use it).
I think what I was trying to say was that if I stick to just KDE apps, then
the list of usable apps shrinks considerable. Linux Mandrake has a whole
bunch of apps written with Gtk, but not KDE.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:24:00 -0000
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:28:27 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I don't know anyone that really plays games on their computers. is
>that out of
>> the ordinary? When people mention games as an issue, I often wonder why.
>>
>> I have a Nintendo for games, why would I waste a computer on games?
>
>I play games on my computer. I always have. I've never owned a console,
>I think a PC does better graphics than a console.
When it comes to graphics, the artist has always been more
important than the specs of the rendering hardware. Also,
keep in mind that for all other forms of consumer motion
picture, that lousy NTSC resolution seems to get along just
fine.
[deletia]
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:28:01 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > If I want all my file save/open dialogs to all look the same - like
> the KDE
> > style, or MOTIF or Gtk, can I do that with the Linux desktop? No I
> can't -
> > my choice is restricted here to whatever toolktip the application is
> > created with.
>
> Yes, you can. Use the apps that match whatever style you prefer,
> and don't use the others. Or use all and live with the inconsistency.
>
> Your choice.
Well, I won't go on any further on this. I don't think I can dump Gtk apps
and just use KDE, for example, as the kind of apps written on Linux
Mandrake are mostly Gtk.
Then it's less of a choice.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:25:43 -0000
On 22 Jan 2001 08:55:27 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:41:30 -0500,
>mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I have a Nintendo for games, why would I waste a computer on games?
>>
>
>By any chance would any of your computers be sitting idle while you
>play games on your Nintendo? If so, why waste your money on the
>Nintendo??
When's the last time you saw a computer capable of playing
current games onsale for $100, or even $300?
[deletia]
The "money pit" is rather more likely the PC.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to
build their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
From: Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Jan 2001 16:32:28 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> On 22 Jan 2001 08:55:27 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:41:30 -0500,
> >mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>I have a Nintendo for games, why would I waste a computer on games?
> >By any chance would any of your computers be sitting idle while you
> >play games on your Nintendo? If so, why waste your money on the
> >Nintendo??
> When's the last time you saw a computer capable of playing
> current games onsale for $100, or even $300?
For me the question is "when was the last time you saw a computer
capable of playing the kind of games you like to play onsale for
$100, or even $300?"
Some people play games on their PC because the games they enjoy
tend to be PC games. Consoles don't do IP networking very well...
> [deletia]
> The "money pit" is rather more likely the PC.
Why are you arguing over a matter of personal preference?
-Greg
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Poor Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:50:06 GMT
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:45:18 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>translation: Kyle Jacobs acknowledges my victory over flat-head.
You're a legend in your own mind, you are Kulkis.
What victory was that BTW?
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:51:12 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 05:15:59 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >You trolled for it, you've caught it. A capsule summary of
> >your sophomoric sophistry. Babbage cabbage. Fiddling while
> >your Rome burns, Caesar Au-Gates-Us with a knife in his OS,
> >sipping his lead-laden cup of bile. Your gallium-arsenide
> >semiconductor fuctor with Pb. Sipping from a firehose with a
> >straw, it gets jammed in your craw.
>
> Yep I sure did, caught one that is...
>
> A certified card carrying Penguinista.
Shoot, where can I get one of those cards?
--
Flipping the Bozo bit at 400 MHz
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:55:22 GMT
Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Lose98 can NOT stay up 216 hours continously, especially not IN USE 24x7.
>
> Four of our NT4 boxes are running SQL server 7 and run continuously 24x7 and
> sometimes running near 90-100% for days on end. We replaced a hotswap hard
> drive during that time - THAT is how reliable we've found NT4 to be. How
> long? Nearly 8 months now - since these are not public facing servers we do
> not need to apply security patches so we have no planned reboots. We haven't
> upgraded these four boxes because they have been running non-stop for 8
> months now (and the reason for that reboot was updating SCSI BIOS and
> drivers).
>
> Our two W2K boxes that have never been rebooted since Feb 20th and, although
> I'm sure it's coincidence, not even had a hard drive pop yet. We haven't
> applied SP1 or security patches cause these are internal servers.
>
> Our three external facing W2K boxes we reboot when a security patch requires
> it so looking at their "uptime" report in netcraft would make them appear
> unreliable when in fact they stay up without fail. Period. Our solaris box
> we've retired and I can say not soon enough, we were tired of it crashing
> all the time. The only copies of linux in this shop are those tucked safely
> away in VMWare virtual machines and most definately not attached to the net.
> Thankfully when linux pukes we can just recycle the virtual machine.
You had me believing your story until you talked about Solaris crashing
all the time.
I was going to congratulate you on your sysadmin skills, but it sounds
like your trolling is the skill here.
Chris
--
Flipping the Bozo bit at 400 MHz
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: 22 Jan 2001 22:02:49 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Myers) wrote in
>Because the Fortune 500 sites are not interested in saving every last
>penny, they're interested in providing a stable, reliable, easily
>deployable and programmable (meaning dynamic content) platform.
>They haven't chose Apache, meaning it doesn't provide them a significant
>advantage in these areas. They didn't choose Apache because it is an
>inferior product to IIS and iPlanet.
Can you say Yahoo? The world's busiest website at half-a-billion hits a
day. Runs Apache on FreeBSD.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
