Linux-Advocacy Digest #918, Volume #31 Fri, 2 Feb 01 20:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions? (Shane Phelps)
Re: The 130MByte text file ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The 130MByte text file ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux is a fad? (Karel Jansens)
Re: questions (windows & Mac)....? (Shane Phelps)
Re: Linux headache ("Robert Morelli")
Re: Goodby MS... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux is a fad? ("--====--" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Robert Morelli")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Steve Mading)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Steve Mading)
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (David Steinberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions?
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 10:15:57 +1100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten wrote:
> >
> > > But why do they need both "OPEN" and "Open" ?
> >
> > Only Linsux loosers can't tell that OPEN is better than open.
> >
> > -Ed
>
> Are you, Ed Rosten, menstruating.
>
Chill out, Aaron. He forgot to put the smiley on.
Well, *I* thought it was funny, anyway.
>[ sigsnip ]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 23:05:17 GMT
In article <95fbpa$h9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> Why on earth not? Right now, there are two X-sessions running on
> two different consoles on my home machine, and it is also clienting
> me a desktop here at work.
Okay. I got RH6.1, so maybe that has something to do with it. Log in on
tty1 and startx, get X. Ctl-alt-f2 to get a new login, log in, startx,
get an error. The explanation that I got for this was that "you can't
have more than one X session at a time". What am I doing wrong?
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 23:10:27 GMT
In article <95fbrq$clq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Heh :-) I like Mandrake.. they should just be a bit more conservative
> and consistent then it would be perfec... Unfortunattely my other box
> just got FreeBSD on so i will have to wait a bit to try SUSE.
It was my first distro too. I thought M 7.0 was an easy, user-friendly
install and setup until I did RH 6.1, and I don't think I'm going to go
back.
> Well... kwrite and the 1200 binary MB file (or was it the binary 30MB-
> cant remenber) and maybe a Mozilla (i regularly update with nightly
> builds so its my own fault).
Back up for a sec. 1200 MB? You were trying to open a 1.2 GIG binary
file? In kwrite?!?
> And dont mention "system".. its certainly just XFree86 :-)
Right... right...
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:20:29 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >IBM did it like it should have been done with OS/2 2.0 and Warp.
> [deletia]
>
> For them, the PC was an abberation.
>
I know I'm going to get fried for this one, but I can't resist: Until
this day I am convinced that OS/2 Warp is the best desktop/workstation
operating system ever conceived. Including linux.
I am also convinced that IBM was the worst possible company to promote
and market this operating system...
Regards,
Karel Jansens
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is a fad?
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:38:14 +0100
"--==<( Jeepster )>==--" wrote:
>
> I shall expand the list for you.....
>
> Sinclair Microdrives (UK tape alternatives to floppies in the 80's)
>
Never seen one. And why leave out 2" floppies, bubble memory and the
magnetised paper tape (seriously researched in the mid-eighties as the
Coming Thing <TM>).
> Sinclair C5
>
... which had at least a high camp value. Collectors are now
apparently paying good money for one of those, so the fools who bought
one might become rich after all.
> TV-AM
>
The problem with TV-AM (in whatever country it is situated) is that it
appeals to the kind of audience that is too busy rebooting their
Windows computers to have time to watch TV. A textbook case of bad
market research.
> Peter Mandleson MP
>
You'll have to elaborate on this one. He's gay, he's a liar
(allegedly) and he's Labour. So?
> all are like LINsUX, almost good, but fall at the last jump where it really
> counts.
>
Assuming for a moment that by "LINsUX" (oh, what clever use of
capitals) you mean linux, it becomes quite clear that you haven't
actually tried it. I suggest you contact a linux user group (there is
bound to be one near you - the Conspiracy is everywhere, you see), get
one of the members to lend you her/his distribution (you don't even
have to pay money for it, which I realise is quite a novel experience
for someone from the Windows world) and ask him/her friendly to assist
in the installation. This process is quite painless and will even
leave your Windows installation unharmed (which is also a novel feat,
coming from Windows which tends to destroy anything on the disk that
is not redmondian). Try linux for a while (you're bound to see the
lilo prompt fairly often if you continue to use Windows and you might
occasionally be tempted to type "linux", just to vent your
frustration. Go ahead, be angry at linux! It can take it.) and come
back then to post.
Regards,
Karel Jansens
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: questions (windows & Mac)....?
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 10:40:37 +1100
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:48:45 -0000, "Daza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Apple are leagues
> > ahead of everyone else at designing hardware and software for the average
> > man/women/alien in the street.
>
> Then why isn't the world and its brother running Macs? Style over
> substance.
>
> Peter
Because Apple priced itself out of the market in the early 1990s when MS
released Windows 3.1.
Apple always worked on short-term profit maximisation while MS took the
longer-term NPV approach. MS was happy to virtually give the OS away
to support application sales amd build market share, but Apple was after
the quick buck.
If Apple had taken a longer-term view and cultivated developers better
& dropped Mac prices (instead of playing with every neat gadget that
came along)
System 6 was far better for the user than Windows 3.x, so Apple could
have headed MS off at the pass. Scully and Jobs were too busy fighting
at the time to concentrate on cultivating the developers and pushing
the Mac as a superior alternative to Windows.
MS managed to market Windows 3 and 95 well, and a clone PC running Windows
was cheaper than the alternative, even if not as easy to use.
MS would do well to heed this lesson from it's own past.
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 14:26:17 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ketil Z Malde"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The fact is that the stock kernels that ship with the major
>> distributions are full of all kinds of hardware specific crap most
>> users will never use.
>
> If you're really that worried about disk space, why don't you go ahead
> and delete those modules? You can probably save several megabytes, you
> know!
>
>> You need to put all that crap in because 1% or your customers use this
>> uncommon hardware, and 1% use that, etc. If you just had a cd of
>> drivers, like a normal OS, you wouldn't have this issue.
>
> Yeah, there's a great idea: one driver module on each CD. This way,
> Linux users too can have drawers full of driver CDs.
Why put each driver on its own CD? You just create a single CD with
all the available drivers.
>> The bloat in Linux is even worse than that though, because it's
>> compounded by a lack of standardization in the libraries that are used
>> for development.
>
> What, would you rather link them statically? Or have no development of
> libraries? Or perhaps just do it the MS way, and ignore versions
> alltogether and just let the end user worry about compatibility -
> commonly referred to as DLL-hell?
>
> Or are you saying that Linux distributions come with binaries on the CD
> that are built against multiple versions of some library? Evidence,
> please?
There is nothing hidden in a Linux distribution so I'm not sure what you
mean by evidence. If it's not due to redundancy, how do you explain
that it takes 450 MB to load the kind of minimal functionality I
described?
>> You end up bloating your system with multiple redundant libraries for
>> everything.
>
>> Red Hat 6.2 [...] trying to eliminate whatever I could. Still, the
>> installation was something like 450 MB,
>
> Then use a different distribution?
What's that supposed to mean? Why should I expect another distribution
to do any better? You think that Red Hat has broken away from the rest
of the Linux community and somehow added hundreds of megs of
unnecessary bloat?
>> development utilities. You would get about the same functionality
>> under OS/2 for instance for a lot less disk space.
>
> I doubt it, but it depends on your definition of "same functionality".
> Just /usr/share/xemacs21 takes close to fifty megabytes, for instance.
What do you mean by `bloat' if you don't consider xemacs
bloated? Do you really think it takes 50 megs to do a text editor? I
once used a fully programmable editor that was written in assembly and
only took up 50 k. Most of those 50 megs in xemacs are packages and
functions you'll never use, taking a serious toll on performance as well. When
people complain about the bloat of Office suites, they are talking about
exactly the same thing.
xemacs has been ported to OS/2, so if you want to use it under OS/2,
you can. However, OS/2 ships with its own text editor called EPM, which
takes only a couple megs, including all the packages I need. EPM has a modern
interface and its programming is more powerful than emacs. EPM isn't
perfect, and there are some things about emacs I like better, but on
the whole I prefer EPM, so there's about 50 megs I just picked up.
By the way, there's an amusing point here related to the bloat of
xemacs. On the xemacs home site, they offer some advice on how to
free up disk space. You go through the directories of packages, putting
things you don't think you need into compressed archives. Then use the
editor. If it still seems to be working okay, you can then delete the
archive. In truth, XEmacs isn't quite that stupid; it actually has
package management features built in. The advice is there though.
> Would you care to elaborate on how much disk space was due to multiple
> versions of libraries?
>
>> Unfortunately, I can't reasonably run linux on it with a desktop
>> environment (KDE or Gnome).
>
> Then run it without a desktop environment? Use a lightweight window
> manager instead.
>
>> Of course, I could run a stripped down linux without a decent gui.
>> For
>> that matter, I've run OS/2 with a lightweight interface on a 386-25
>> with
>> 4 megs of ram. To do that kind of thing in the year 2001 though, is
>> about as enticing as a crow casserole.
>
> So you want the benefit of modern GUI software and obsolete hardware.
> You can't have it. If you pick up modern versions of Windows as well,
> you'll have the same problems.
Did you actually read what I said? Despite having been released almost 7
years ago, I think OS/2 Warp was in many ways more advanced than
Linux is today. (The current OS/2 offerings, which aren't too different
from then, still run just fine on that machine.) What you call the `modern
GUI software' of Linux is less powerful than OS/2's interface, the
Workplace Shell, which is a based on a Corba compliant distributed object
framework, can be fully controlled through OS/2's standard scripting
language, and whose usability is still beyond what you can get from
Gnome. I have never overcome the feeling using Linux, that I'm
controlling robotic arms from behind a glass wall. It's just awkward.
(On the command line, Linux is better, but on the other hand, the standard
bash scripting isn't as powerful as OS/2's scripting. Windows, of
course, has a totally brain dead command line.)
To sum up, roughly speaking, OS/2 offered more functionality 7 years
ago running faster and with smaller memory and disk requirements,
than you get today with Linux. Now, to be fair, Linux has some
nice touches that you don't get with OS/2, and there are various
advantages to running Linux nowadays. But the point remains that
Linux technology is not as efficient.
> -kzm
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Goodby MS...
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:12:54 -0600
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Kool Breeze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > I managed to learn just enough MFC/Win32 to get the app going and
> > > never learned the details, ie, 23 parameters/functions to paint a
> > > bitmap to the screen.
> >
> > This is such a wild exageration that it makes the rest of your post
suspect.
>
> This may, in fact be a simplification.
No, he claimed that each function has 23 parameters, that is 23 parameters
per function.
------------------------------
From: "--==<\( Jeepster \)>==--" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is a fad?
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 00:31:56 -0000
Oh my ribs, they are sore after both
a) laughing
b) being poked by youir razor sharp funny finger.
I have tried linux, mandrake, redhat, storm, turbo and even yellow dog on
machine i borrowed for a month.
Dont like them...sorry, maybe its personal taste, but i'd rather stay with
windows 2000 where i can
a) buy software off the shelves
b) play the latest games
c) use the latest hardware (do the words USB still strike fear into your
heart?...it should, as far as I know only mice & keyboards are
supported....oh dear)
d) not worry that the libraries will get broken if i had to install beta
test software.
e) use a good browser rather than the beta offerings or the half finished
offerings given to linux users. LOL - case in point Netscape 4.x/6 and
Konqueror..... NOW thats BAD.
f) worry about getting the latest Kernel and then buggering it all up
because the kernel needs to be patched to enable sound, PPP etc etc rah rah
rah
g) I can use standard applications at home and then go into any office and
hey, the same things...wow......
h) avoid arcane command line crap....i mean, who the hell wants to go
through an entire user manual to get the sound card to initialise and then
find it wont ?
i) who would want to sacrifice a Windows/Windows solution for a
Linux/Windows integrated solution until there is some more solid, documented
applications and cases that have already tried it and detailed the pros and
cons? Linux has a long way to go before stepping up to the corporate
plate...
Chew on that Rabid LINsUX user....
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 15:14:12 -0600
In article <95evl3$e1p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Artho-niti-bid"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Gates of Microsoft and Michael Dell of Dell Computers Inc.,both of
> them are highly successful on their own rights in their respective area
> of expertise. There are lot of parallels between these two outstanding
> men -- One began out of his college at Texas while the other from
> Harvard.
>
> Which of the two is smarter given the following criteria of
> smartness:
>
> (1) Tech Innovation
> (2) Entrepreneurial Skills and Financial Management
> (3) Assets and Liabilities Management.
> (4) Over all wealth.
Gates started out as a math major at Harvard. The book ``Hard
Drive'' quotes Gates saying that he wasn't sure he could make a
contribution to math, so he went into computers instead.
That tells you something, not so much about the man's inate
intelligence, but about his character. I myself got a PhD in math
at Harvard and I know a lot of people who took the other path, who
had not only intelligence but also character, and who went on to make
genuine intellectual contributions.
The only real comparison I see between Dell and Gates is that both
are very aggressive businessmen who've made an asset of *not*
having a vision. They have both run businesses that succeed by
relentlessly pursuing market share while competitors pursue innovation.
I personally don't admire what Gates has accomplished at Microsoft.
In my estimate, he's turned 15,000 programmers into a gang of punks
running errands for the thugs running the company, and he's retarded
progress in the most important technology of our age. I don't know
what kind of intelligence that takes -- maybe you need a fifth category.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the book, ``Thinking in
Pictures,'' by Temple Grandin. The author, an autistic woman, proposes
that Gates is a high-functioning autistic.
> Thanks for your respective observations in advance.
>
> *******Inquisitor.
>
> --
>
> "Beauty is Truth and Truth Beauty --
> That's All, Ye know on earth, and All Ye need to know."
>
> -- John Keats in "Ode on a Grecian Urn".
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 3 Feb 2001 00:57:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Ian Davey wrote:
:>
:> You've still not managed to convince me. But perhaps it's just a matter of
:> semantics, Atheism is a lack of *religious* beliefs (theism), but not a lack
:> of belief. Does that work better for you? So an Atheist believes something
:> other than religion.
: There's an old law of military command:
: Failure to come to a decision is a decision in itself.
: Do the math.
"Failure to come to a decision is a decision" is self
contradictory. It fits the patern: X == not(X).
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 3 Feb 2001 00:58:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Dan Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Could you please take this conversation private or at least to
: a more appropriate newsgroup. While I believe God advocates Linux
: (Bill Gates being the antiChrist) comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
: are not appropriate forums for this discussion.
When insults are made in public, the responses must be equally public.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: 3 Feb 2001 01:08:02 GMT
Bennetts family ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Alrighty, so we don't care about *listening* to music or watching videos,
: all we care about is watching the damn visualisations. I wonder how many
: people like having music playing in the background while they do work (or
: flame people on Usenet ;-))? I'll put one on that count.
I play my music on a separate virtual console using mpg123 because I don't
want to waste any space on my desktop.
Can't do that in Windows.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
