Linux-Advocacy Digest #680, Volume #31 Tue, 23 Jan 01 16:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: 23 Jan 2001 20:01:09 GMT
Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: You MIGHT be able to implement a Linux soulition here. But you can't,
: because the users WILL complain. Hell, so will you when network wide policy
: can't be set remotely.
Careful, your ignornace is showing. The set of things that cannot
be done remotely in Unix is totally confined to those tasks that
require physical manipulation of the machine (sticking a CD in
the drive, or plugging in a new disk drive, that sort of thing.)
Anything and everything that is done *by software* can be done
remotely. And I mean EVERYTHING.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 20:08:36 GMT
Martin Eden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Charlie Ebert wrote:
:> Debian is BSD based
: Where on earth did you come up with that?
: BSD is a family of Operating Systems which does not include Debian. I am
: sure all the people who have worked so hard to develop Debian from
: scratch will enjoy hearing that their product is a knockoff of something
: else.
: It's not "based on" BSD any more than Solaris is "based on" BSD.
:> Debian prefers to call Linux - GNU Linux.
: That's because the operating system is filled with GNU sources.
But calling it "GNU Linux" is also a lie, because Linux is not
a GNU project. It's just very heavily based on a GNU foundation.
Linux is not a GNU project in the same sense that gcc, emacs, HURD,
and so on are. It *includes* GNU tools, but is not itself a part
of the GNU umbrella. You're kidding yourself if you actually
believe that the only way to give credit where credit is due is
to do so in the title of the product.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:13:09 -0000
On 23 Jan 2001 05:03:38 GMT, Lewis Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Kyle Jacobs was heard ranting about
><HC7b6.6557$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in alt.linux.sux on 22 Jan
>2001
>
>>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[deletia]
>Blah blah. Have you talked to the end user recently? They learn what they
>need. I install computers often enough and they don't understand what a
>mouse or the 'desktop' are. If I was to have set them up with unix,
>they're learn it. Hell half the ppl just use it to Check email and load up
>WinTeg (temrminal emulator) to connect to the HP (oh yeah running HP/UX)
I had to give my mother-in-law a "click here to scan" desktop
Icon so she could use her WinDOS scanner... <chuckle>
>
>>>> I can just see NOTHING getting done. No words processed, no print
>>>> jobs printed because no one can
>>> > figure out how ass backward UNIX GUI's are.
Pulleeze.
As far as the basic "getting to the application" part of the
interface goes, THEY'RE THE SAME. Infact, that was one bit
that Microsoft copied from Unix in Win95.
>>>
>>> Aster*x has been out there for years.
>>> Word Perfect has been out there for a DECADE.
>>
>>> Star Office.
>>
>>1. I have corrected this line.
>>2. Word Perfect for UNIX? Did I miss something?
>
>Apparently , cause it is out there.
HELL, long before Corel got "Linux Fever" you could
get copies of WordPerfect for Unix at my college
bookstore...
[deletia]
Unix versions of 6.x and 7.x were both available, including
Linux versions.
--
In general, Microsoft is in a position of EXTREME conflict of
interest being both primary supplier and primary competitor.
Their actions must be considered in that light. How some people
refuse to acknowledge this is confounding.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:14:41 -0000
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:07:48 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>
>> You MIGHT be able to implement a Linux soulition here. But you can't,
>> because the users WILL complain.
>
>Why on earth would they complain?
It deviates.
You must know how end users are? They don't learn to compute
in abstract terms. They memorize steps as if they were using
Wordstar.
Change a thing and their world breaks.
This includes going from Win98 -> Win2k even.
>
>That's BS, I haven't seen it happen -
[deletia]
--
Freedom != Anarchy.
Some must be "opressed" in order for their
actions not to oppress the rest of us.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
