Linux-Advocacy Digest #550, Volume #32 Wed, 28 Feb 01 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie (Ian Davey)
Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American (Ian Davey)
Re: [OT] .sig (Richard Bos)
Re: Breaking up is so very hard to do... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: My long signature - Oops! (Woof)
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Richard Heathfield)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: [OT] .sig (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: What the hell is MS thinking? (Johannes Bauer)
Re: why open source software is better (Craven Moorehead)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("David Brown")
A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship (Robert MacGregor)
Re: How much do you *NEED*? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("David Brown")
Re: why open source software is better (Ian Davey)
Re: Breaking into the Unix field: FreeBSD vs Linux (RH7) (Tor Slettnes)
Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship ("Flacco")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:03:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Scott Gardner) wrote:
>>You probably need to su to root first.
>>
>Any difference between that and just logging on as root in the first
>place, which is what I did? Remember, semi-newbie here...
It's just a way of giving you access to root from a user login account having
to login as root.
So you'd do something like this to install from source code:
tar zxvf program.tar.gz
cd program
/configure
make
su root (just plain "su" would work)
make install
So the initial compilation etc. is done as a user, the installation stage is
done as root.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:11:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>moooo wrote:
>>
><large amount of steam engine stuff snipped>
>> >
>> > How did we get on this topic, anyway?
>> > -- Marten Kemp
>> >
>> Why you in a sad 80s new romantic band by any chance Marten?
>
>Huh? If this was a question about me being in a band, no. Otherwise,
>pleas rephrase the question a bit more coherently.
He's referring to the fact you share a name with the singer of 80's
band Spandau Ballet, who is currently a soap opera actor.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Bos)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: [OT] .sig
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:13:54 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Vandervies) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Richard Heathfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Dave Vandervies wrote:
> >>
> >> (After all, I've been mistaken for an American...)
> >
> >You mean you're not one?
>
> No, I'm Canadian, and the only thing I have in common with a lot of
> Americans is that I'm forced to share a continent with them.
And what's that continent called? You may not be a Merkin, but you
certainly are an American in the original sense of the word.
Richard
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Breaking up is so very hard to do...
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:50:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
"Microsoft could win, legal experts say"
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4969392.html
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Woof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My long signature - Oops!
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:23:45 GMT
Seems like many of you are taking this seriously for some reason.
It was just one of my many examples of my twisted humour
I was just teasing Aaron over his long sig in this one thats all
Anyone with half a brain can see its a fake i didnt try very hard to
fake it at all
Woof da dog
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:18:00 +0000
From: Richard Heathfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Something Seemingly Simple.
Michael Rubenstein wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:53:01 +0000, Richard Heathfield
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In the C programming language, if you use the printf function, you are
> >/required/ to include <stdio.h>. If you use printf, and do not include
> >this header, you are no longer writing in C.
>
> Actually, you are not required to include <stdio.h> to use
> printf; you may also just code a prototype for the function
> yourself.
Yes, my apologies. I had forgotten that possibility. Of course, it must
match the stdio.h prototype byte-for-byte.
>
> Including <stdio.h> is, of course, preferred.
Indeed.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:59:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <971fah$d8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >> Correct. For some reason, best known to the GIMP developers, it ships
> >> with many different printer drivers.
> >So there are one set of drivers for CUPS and one set for The Gimp... any
> >more applications that ship with drivers for printers? Does any of this
> >sound _wrong_ to anyone?
> My big complaint against you is that you start whining without doing any
> RTFM. Guess what, you start up your browser to the Gimp Manual (HTML
> version), you pick the Index, scroll down to "P" and select "Print".
> Here's a little snippet of what you see then:
I'm not "whining" about doing any RTFM. I'm complaining about the fact
that I configured my Lunux Mandrake system to use one Epson printer
driver, then The Gimp ignored that and dumped postscript to the printer.
I'm also rather surprised that any modern OS would still have multiple
drivers for a printer - this is something the OS should be doing, not
each application. Now I'm hearing The Gimp doesn't do this - yet it
overrides the system selected printer instead! DOH!
--
Pete
All your no fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] .sig
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:52:46 +0100
Michael Vester wrote:
> It is appropriate for an advocacy group. If offended, feel
> free not to come into this group. Bandwidth whining is
> nonsense. A single porno jpg eats more bandwidth than a week
> of Aaron posting. Aaron is much more interesting than
> Microsoft endorsed product speak from Chad Myers. My only
> complaint is that the sig should be more current.
>
> Looks like the "losedos" advocates are really losing. Can't
> attack Linux on a technical level (Linux is superior in every
> way), then attack the more obvious Linux advocates. An act of
> desperation.
>
> Come on you "losedos" advocates. Try explaining what .NET is.
> Tell us how wonderful the future will be with a Microsoft only
> world. Explain how a subscription based OS will benefit
> humanity.
>
I am NOT a Wintendo user, I use linux since years.
And I fell offended by that asshole A R Kulkis, so I have killfiled him,
as have many others using linux.
I do not believe his claim he is using linux and has a forged header.
I think he is using Win98 because he is way too dumb to use linux.
He can claim whatever he wants, it is my right not to believe any of it.
He is in my killfile and will stay there until he has learned to quote,
has trimmed his sig and stops playing with his guns on usenet.
Peter
--
The sticker on the side of the box said "Supported Platforms: Win 95,
Win NT 4.0 or better", so clearly Linux was a supported platform.
------------------------------
From: Johannes Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What the hell is MS thinking?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:35:22 +0100
Contrary to you, dear Erik, I do not need to reboot my server every 30
days and therefore do not have the possibility to plug in new hardware
all the time.
It is not necessary anyways. The system requirements are extremely
low-end.
And, BTW, Linux has PNP support (take a look at pnpdump), except it is
very configurable and doesn't change the settings as it likes - and as
Windows does.
------------------------------
From: Craven Moorehead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: why open source software is better
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:37:31 +1100
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:58:03 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil
hunt) wrote:
>The only thing i use Windows for is playing games. I will only use
>it for programming when someone pays me to do so at my normal
>consulting rates.
You expect someone to write your OS for free though. Or at the very
least give you all his source code. Good one, Do you live in a trailer
park ?
People should be rewarded for their work and intellectual property
should be protected. Why should I give people my fancy highy optimised
code ? What's in it for me, a warm feeling in my loins ? You can get
the same effect by pissing in your pants.
Craven
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:33:05 +0100
Giuliano Colla wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>When a text editor decides
>to correct the name of your customer because it thinks you misspelled
>it, and replaces it with a word you'd better not use in a polite letter,
>you understand that the added "features" are really idiotic. If you're
>writing in a hurry, you may not notice it. If the customer gets the
>letter, this significantly increases the Total Cost of Ownership, if you
>understand what I mean.
The auto "correction" features can be a real pain. Here in Norway, people
often use English language versions of software (as you point out, MS cannot
distinguish code and text, so local language versions, especially of
"smaller" languages, tend to have more bugs and compatibility problems -
things like Excel being unable to read its own csv files because it gets
confused with decimal points and decimal commas). We often see documents
were Word has helpfully capitalised the Norwegian word "i" (meaning "in") to
"I".
I heard a nice story about a bank in Britain that wanted to send a special
offer letter to its 1000 richest customers. They hired a programmer to
write a script which searched through the databases and send out letters.
An example was run with a customer called "Rich Bastard", and everything
went fine, so they ran the script and sent out the letters. A few days
later, complaints started coming in from all the people who got "Dear Rich
Bastard, " letters!
------------------------------
From: Robert MacGregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:42:09 GMT
I love Linux, I really do, and have used it for years as my li'l home
web/mail/dhcp/firewall server and have always enjoyed my opportunities
to administer it (which I always love is practically never).
And I've been going back and forth on switching my desktop to it for
just as long. Each release of Redhat that I've seen (7.1 is the latest)
and the strides being made with KDE and all... It gets more and more
appealing.
My biggest reservations are that I have such an attachment to my windows
apps.. I've seen some nice apps on Linux, but with all the various
opensource things out there, a lot of what I have seen has been less
than impressive to me, a GUI-spoiled brat (hey, I admit it.. and I grew
up with Macs... but the GUI thing is just as important to me as the
engineering under the hood.)
I have a list of my most dear apps and I humbly beseech anyone to
comment on best-match equivalents, if any, on Linux:
* MS Outlook
* Internet Explorer (i sooo hate Netscape these days.. it just sucks,
compared to IE!!!!! <not trying to troll!!! please don't hit me!!>
* Dreamweaver Ultradev
* ERWin (a top notch database modeling tool.. i'm a web app developer)
* TOAD (a tool for oracle application developers)
* Rational Rose
But then there's ones like Flash and QuarkXpress which I know aren't
available for Linux and I need them both desperately!
Thanks for any suggestions..
BTW.. I know Quake III is available for linux.. will it take full
advantage of the 3D processing of my GeForce 256?
Thanks,
-Robert
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How much do you *NEED*?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:18:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Yep, you'd best get kde 2.1 if you want stability.
Doesn't appear to be a package for Mandrake 7.2
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:48:11 +0100
Edward Rosten wrote in message <97h7i4$95r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Preemptive multitasking, dual mode and protected memory are vast
>> improvements.
>
>I woudn't call them vast improvements, since they don't seem to work very
>well.
>
>Besides, doesn't Win311 have this when its running 32bit apps?
>
They are big improvements, but neither Win3.1 nor Win9x does them properly
(NT makes a much better job). Win3.1 can pre-emptively multi-task DOS
sessions in a limited way, but other tasks (16-bit or 32-bit) are
co-operatively multi-tasked. Win9x co-operatively multitasks 16-bit
sessions (including a fair amout of key system code, such as the GDI,
although the proportion has been decreasing with each new revision on
Win9x), but pre-emptively multitasks 32-bit apps. Both have protected
32-bit memory and unprotected 16-bit memory.
Win9x can vaguely multi-task 32-bit apps (not nearly as well as NT), but key
parts of the GDI provide a single-task bottleneck. 32-bit apps are
protected from each other, but since any app can stomp all over the open
16-bit OS memory, it is easy to bring the system to a halt.
>
>
>> These features are tacked on and the result is a shining example of
>> "second system syndrome".
>
>They were tacked on to Win311 to make 95. This shows up quite well
>because you can tack most (if not all) of them on to Win311 as well.
>
>
>
>> Backward compatibility often entails horrific
>> design compromises. However, it is plain dishonest to say that it is
>> "not much different" from Win 3.x.
>
>I really don't believe there is, if you kept up with Win311 updates.
>
There is a fair difference, but one thing that is often forgotten is that
Win3.11 can actually do everything that most people need. Most users don't
need pre-emptive multi-tasking because they only use one app at a time -
co-operative multi-tasking works fine (assuming the apps co-operate
properly, which is not always the case with Windows apps).
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: why open source software is better
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:11:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craven Moorehead
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:58:03 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil
>hunt) wrote:
>
>>The only thing i use Windows for is playing games. I will only use
>>it for programming when someone pays me to do so at my normal
>>consulting rates.
>
>You expect someone to write your OS for free though. Or at the very
>least give you all his source code. Good one, Do you live in a trailer
>park ?
Do you completely misunderstand the concept of a community? You get the source
code, and can acquire the OS for free (though can easily pay for it if you
want a nice box and extra documentation), but can contribute back to the
community by coding (or paying for the software, or writing documentation, or
providing help/support to others). The internet was built on free software,
and without it you wouldn't be sitting here typing now.
However this is mute as a lot of people do get paid to work on the OS.
>People should be rewarded for their work and intellectual property
>should be protected. Why should I give people my fancy highy optimised
>code ? What's in it for me, a warm feeling in my loins ?
People should have the right to do what they want with their "intellectual
property", including giving it away. There are lots of different reasons why
people want to do this. Because they agree with the free software philosophy,
want to contribute back to the community, want to start a open project that
they feel they'll need help completing, because it's a hobby or to gain
experience. Too many to list here, and the reasons can either be selfless,
selfish or somewhere in between.
> You can get the same effect by pissing in your pants.
If that's what you prefer...
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Breaking into the Unix field: FreeBSD vs Linux (RH7)
From: Tor Slettnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:11:27 GMT
Great answers if you want flamewars. But hey, these _are_ advocacy
groups after all. :->
>>>>> "Masha" == Masha Ku'Inanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Masha> Focus on the BSDs if you wish to learn UNIX, only because
Masha> they are a direct evolution from UNIX(tm). Some call BSD
Masha> UNIX, and this is subject to debate by others. All the UNIX
Masha> variants out there are descended from AT&T's original
Masha> implimentation, and/or Berkley's variant. Some mix features
Masha> of both. Linux is a clone of UNIX, a work-alike, and never
Masha> contained UNIX code and was never directly descended from
Masha> UNIX.
This is true, but not very relevant. Despite the fact that *BSDs
contain some (albeit a small) original UNIX source in the kernel, most
Linux distributions are in many ways more similar to commercial UNIX
systems from a user/administrator perspective. A couple of examples:
- The "init" mechanism. (Linux distributions, sans Slackware, use
SysV-style scripts in /etc/init.d/ or /etc/rc.d/init.d/, whereas
*BSDs and Slackware lump all startup code together in a few
scripts such as rc.local). Most commercial UNIX flavors do it
the SysV way, which when you think about it is superior.
- The automounter. The Linux automounter reads SUN automounter
maps (via NIS/NIS+/LDAP), BSD has its own format, which, quite
frankly, I never understood. Maybe it has a point to it, but I
haven't gotten it. (Actually the BSD automounter, 'amd', is
available for Linux also, but it seems nobody is using it).
- Journaling filesystems. AFAIK, there is none for *BSDs, whereas
Linux now has both ReiserFS and ext3fs. (Solaris supports
journalling on UFS by adding the mount option 'logging').
Masha> Besides, the BSDs run Linux binaries.
Most, but not all. Typically, it runs those Linux binaries for which
the source is available anyway, but fails with VMWare, StarOffice,
Win4Lin... These utilize features of the Linux kernel.
Masha> You'll also get to see two different "open-source"
Masha> licenses. Linux requires your source code be made
Masha> publically available, if it is GPL'ed, whereas the BSD one
Masha> does not. In that sense, the BSD is considered by some to
Masha> be the truly "free" license, because it does not tell you
Masha> what you should or should not do with your work.
Those "some" tend to be somewhat uninformed, and see only the surface
of things.
The BSD license will allow you to enhance someone else's publicly
available program, and then redistribute the ehancements in binary
form only (without providing the source code back). This tends to
result in:
- Code forks, because someone else will be forced to re-invent
the wheel. This is why there are so many BSD flavors.
- Commercial hijacking, with all associated woes (code obsolescence,
hidden bugs..)
In contrast, the GNU license guarantees that all software you use
today will be available (and supportable) forever. If the author goes
bankrupt (in the case of a company) or gets hit by a truck (in the
case of a person), the software doesn't disappear with them.
Masha> Linux is stable. FreeBSD is considered more stable by order
Masha> of magnitude. NetBSD is considered to be the most
Masha> cross-platform version. OpenBSD is considered the most
Masha> secure OS in the world.
"Is considered" seems to include fewer and fewer people as you add
claims.
FreeBSD is obviously more stable in the sense that fewer things
change. But it is not by any means more robust - at least,
objectively speaking.
For instance, a year or two ago the FreeBSD kernel would cause a
reboot if Apache was under extremely heavy loads. (I don't know if
that is still the case).
Solaris will at times reboot when certain versions of Netatalk is
installed, because of the 'ddp' kernel module. Also, with certain
versions of 'ipnat' (a firewall/filtering program).
I've had Linux crash on a SMP system a couple of times when running
Win4Lin (which requires a patched kernel). And yes, because I am
doing experimental stuff with the kernel for the ARM processor, I have
situations where it fails to load or crashes on my Corel Netwinder.
All of these examples are "extreme" in the sense that most people
won't encounter them. For a production system, all these kernels are
"100%" stable, meaning that they will provide years and years of
uptime, will not be affected by misbehaving applications, etc. etc.
Any differences you or I could find will be mostly academic.
Your second claim, that NetBSD "is considered" the most cross-platform
version, is also only true as far as you are talking about BSDs. I
mentioned that I run Linux on a Netwinder (debian-arm). A typical
distribution like Debian supports processor families like x86, ia64,
sparc, alpha, powerpc (powermac, chrp, prep), m68k, arm (netwinder,
riscpc...), mips, pa-risc -- and unofficial ports have been made to
other architectures like the palm pilot.
That's just Debian. I dare say that Linux runs on just about anything
you can find, even a few bread toasters out there.
We often hear the claim that OpenBSD is the most secure OS in the
world. Yet, the standard installation does not provide a
cryptographic filesystem or built-in role management, to take a couple
of examples.
The default installation is probably as secure as can be for a widely
available OS. It is debatable, however, whether OpenBSD's
distribution model would promote security to the same extent as that
of Debian's Advanced Package Tool (apt). In Debian, you install and
update packages on a running system by simply doing something like
"apt-get dist-upgrade". By default, your APT "sources" (where you get
your updates from) include http://security.debian.org/, which would
post updates when required.
Just like OpenBSD, Debian also has a security team that does proactive
code reviews. They tend to leverage from each other, so that when a
hole (or other area of code improvement) is found by the OpenBSD team,
it will be incorporated in most Debian installation out there in a
matter of days.
Masha> www.freebsd.org for FreeBSD, www.openbsd.org, for OpenBSD,
Masha> www.bsd.org for BSD in general, www.linux.com for linux in
Masha> general, um.......Others escape me at the moment ..
Take a look at http://www.rootprompt.org/, there is a side bar with
lots of UNIX/Linux links.
Masha> Learn the CLI before the GUI. You'll understand how those
Masha> commands translate to a GUI environment better.
While this is wishful, new users are likely to give up very soon
unless they get the instant gratification that a GUI gives.
I learned UNIX in 1989 (on HP-UX workstations running at my
University). Mostly, I played with X11 applications. While the UNIX
command line definitely is extremely versatile, cool, and addictive,
you really can get a kick-start by playing around with X.
(To see the point about instant gratification, compare tcpdump and
ethereal. tcpdump no doubt has more options and lets you do more
things, however, ethereal is much more useful to the occasional packet
sniffer who wants to diagnose a problem and have it presented in a
understandable format).
Masha> Unlearning Windows habits can be difficult, though.
KDE2 is a good environment to start in for Windows users.
>> Are the commands in Linux pretty much the same as in other Unix
>> systems, like FreeBSD, Solaris, SVR4, SCO and AIX?
Masha> Some are. Options are a little different sometimes.
Linux commands and options usually reflect those of
e.g. Solaris/HPUX/IRIX... a bit more than those of *BSD. Often they
are a hybrid. For instance, the 'ps' command supports BSD like syntax
("ps aux"), SysV like syntax ("ps -ef"), AND GNU syntax ("ps
--format=...."), depending on the number of hyphens in the option.
-tor
--
Får i ulveklær
------------------------------
From: "Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 05:05:08 -0500
> I have a list of my most dear apps and I humbly beseech anyone to
> comment on best-match equivalents, if any, on Linux:
I have to agree with you at this point that the GUI desktop apps are not
there yet. They're getting closer as time goes on - I'm surprised by the
progress they've made just over the last few months that I've been tracking
Linux - but that said, here are my picks / observations:
>
> * MS Outlook
Ximian's Evolution is getting there. Interface is pretty good; still buggy,
but it's not finished yet.
> * Internet Explorer (i sooo hate Netscape these days.. it just sucks,
> compared to IE!!!!! <not trying to troll!!! please don't hit me!!>
Try the latest build of Mozilla, or Opera. I'be been using Mozilla, but
recently DL'd Opera and find it's fast and works well so far.
> * Dreamweaver Ultradev
Good luck. I brought this up recently and was basically told I was a pussy
and/or moron for not writing out my web pages long-hand. Die-hard Linux
users seem unwilling to admit that casual users may want a graphical design
tool to build web pages, integrated with site management tools.
The responses I got (beyond "HTML is not a graphical medium") were:
- use a word processor like the one in StarOffice / OpenOffice and save as
HTML. This doesn't give you the site management features, of course, and a
word processor is not focused on site creation.
- use Amaya. This is the w3c's graphical web page editing tool, but the
interface is ABYSMAL, and it doesn't really do all that much. It's primary
selling point is that, since it's from the w3c, it is standards-compliant.
This is a huge hole in Linux applications availability, and I think that
once Linux becomes a more viable and popular desktop OS, vendors will rush
in to fill this ridiculous gap.
> * ERWin (a top notch database modeling tool.. i'm a web app developer)
> * TOAD (a tool for oracle application developers)
No idea.
> * Rational Rose
Look into ArgoUML for a free tool, or, if you're looking for a commercial
product, I'm using ObjectDomain, which is coming along quite nicely.
Version 3 is right around the corner. Has a free DL version that does
everything, but will not store more than 30 entities.
> But then there's ones like Flash and QuarkXpress which I know aren't
> available for Linux and I need them both desperately!
No idea on those.
> BTW.. I know Quake III is available for linux.. will it take full
> advantage of the 3D processing of my GeForce 256?
I would think so. I DLed the demo, ran great on my machine (but I just have
TNT2 Ultra)
For migrating Windows users, Linux isn't ready yet for prime time on the
desktop. But, it's getting closer all the time, and it makes sense to stay
on top of things so you'll be ready to go when the glorious day comes that
you can throw out your WinWare.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
