Linux-Advocacy Digest #679, Volume #32 Tue, 6 Mar 01 20:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Whats the difference between BSD and Linux? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: What does IQ measure? ("Edward Rosten")
Microsoft screws itself again! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: .NET is plain .NUTS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Mircosoft Tax (.)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: GPL Like patents. (Ian Pulsford)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Austin Ziegler)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Brock Hannibal)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux on it's way back to (Bloody Viking)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 23:53:56 +0000
>> No. You think it is cryptic. It isn't cryptic for me, so it isn't
>> cryptic in general.
>
> I see, delusions of grandeur. If it isn't cryptic for you, therefore it
> isn't cryptic for anyone else. How long have you held these delusions?
You are being particularly barinless today. I don't find it cryptic,
there for, it isn't cryptic for everyone, or, for the general case, you
can't say that it is cryptic.
>> >> There are plenty of apps to choose from in Linux. In fact there are
>> >> more than enough to meet my current needs.
>> >
>> > Your needs?
>> >
>> > What about the rest of the world???
>>
>> What about my needs? I have enough to meet my needs, that's why I use
>> it.
>
> And your needs express everyone elses? It gets worse! Put your analyst
> on standby, baby!
I forget what the point of the subthread was, but IIRC, I was pointing
exactly that out about your argument: pointing it out by example.
>> >> > Who gets the devices and drivers designed first, huh, Linux or
>> >> > Windows?
>> >>
>> >> So why does Win2K have an HCL, then?
>> >
>> > Wassat got to do with anything?
>>
>> Not all hardware works under windows.
>
> True, but even less works on Linux.
Depends what hardware. 'Doze supports only PC hardware. It's moniter
support is also crap. That is one thing Linux consistently supports
better on the PC platform.
>> >> Why is all my hardware fully supported under Linux?
>> >
>> > Why is mine "supported" but doesn't actually work without manual
>> > intervention?
>>
>> Why do you assume that your bolloxed[*] install in the norm?
>
> Because other people have complained of the same problems!
I have never seen anyone complaints involve the sheer number and variety
of problems you seem to experience. That is why your install is bolloxed.
>> >> Why did it all work first time?
>> >
>> > Why didn't mine?
>>
>> Why did mine every time I have installed Linux?
>
> Why does Windows install perfectly every time I do it?
Why doesn't it for me?
(there's a hole in my bucket)
>> Er, no. I just told X to start in a higher res mode. I didn't do any
>> futzing with moniter properties. I am fortunate enough to have now had
>> 2 moniters that ren't damaged by bad screen modes. I switched off the
>> protection ages ago so I could play with it. So, no, no futzing with
>> moniter drivers.
>
> Funny, in order to get my monitor to work on Linux, I had to at least
> give it a basic specification.
I just checked, you need to do that under Windows too. But Linux doesn't
need a whole driver.
>> Oh, and why didn't the moniter come with drivers for the Mac? because
>> MacOS isn't too brain dead to comply to a standard such as VGA and so
>> on.
>
> Perhaps because the list of monitors that work with MAC are much
> reduced?
This moniter works with a Mac. It came with a Mac adapter. The Mac
doesn't need drivers.
>> Why didn't it provide drivers for solaris (despite supporting SUN's od
>> screen modes)? Same reason.
>
> See above.
Why didn't it need drivers.
>> It's just a fscking moniter. Moniters do not need drivers.
>
> The OS needs to know what kind of monitor you have attached. Same thing.
Not really. And under the cases where it does, windows really falls down.
Try getting an old 56khz workstation moniter working under 'doze. Now try
under Linux.
>> > What have upgrades to do with games? 8)
>>
>> Try playing unreal tournament on a P133 w/ RIVA128 chipset.
>
> It works. Slowly, but it works.
Not well enough. Anyway, my Riva128 card died this morning. Try the same
with a SiS6326.
>> >> Yep they show it all right. Fresh, clean design. Skinnable, all the
>> >> modern features, working, now.
>> >
>> > I meant buggy and unstable.
>>
>> Well, I meant what I said.
>
> Fresh and clean appears to equate to "buggy and unusable".
I've found it useable and more bug free than windows.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:01:56 +0000
In article <9817nv$k9h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>> The console under Windows really sucks. It is slow and you can't easily
>> change its width.
> The console is only there to give diehard ex. unix guys an easy entry
> into gui-land. Once they are fully there, the cli seems like a bad
> dream.
Which would explain perfectly why I prefer th command line, especially as
I used windows foe years before I used UNIX.
>> > Because Windows has better apps.
>>
>> I have more useful apps under Linux than windows.
> Didn't know they have apps there too. I thought that there is just the
> kernel, the compiler and the cli.
Yep that's all.
I don't type documents or borws the web or waste time on cola. I jus type
`ls' all day.
-ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whats the difference between BSD and Linux?
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:09:26 +0000
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>That won't help. You know the best of the text editors supplied with
>>Win9X and up---edit.com? That uses the old convention of ctrl+ins and
>>shift+ins (which I prefer since I was much more used to them being an ex
>>Qbasic hacker :-)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Is that possible?
> ;-)
It doesn't support it, and its nasty to do, but you can get an
approximation to OO in QuickBasic.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:16:22 +0000
> A true IQ test would have to
> involve pictures and patterns, and perhaps have some mathematical
> basis, because these are the only ideas that translate well all over
> the world.
I don't believe there is a true IQ test. People are good at different
thing.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Microsoft screws itself again!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:17:29 GMT
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/01/03/05/010305opcringely.xml
Interesting article which prooves NT IS faster than W2K.
And now that the news is OUT, Microsoft is attempting to BURY IT FAST!
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: .NET is plain .NUTS
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:20:09 +0000
>> >> > Even books. You can scan them, run the bitmaps through optical
>> >> > character recognition software, and completely copy the book
>> >> > digitally with little chance of discovery (other than your own
>> >> > popularity).
>> >>
>> >> But you then have to print it. Bear in mind that a 650M CD is about
>> >> 50p, but to print a book without very specialised is quite
>> >> expensive,
>> >> and depending on the book, lower quality.
>> >
>> > 300-600 dpi laser printers is good for most books.
>>
>> Yep. If 300-600 dpi is suitable for a particular book, then that book
>> is probably printed on very cheap paper, using a very cheap bulk
>> printing machine, making the copy very expensive.
>>
>> If its an expensive book (eg one with very high quality colour plates),
>> then nothing short of a top notch color laser printer would get you the
>> same quality, unless you spent a fortune on glossy paper.
>>
>
> Barnes and Noble is now doing exactly that...because print-on-demand for
> small circulation books is less costly than the production costs of
> short-print runs..especially full-color stoff.
They can afford the very expensive equipment needed to make the
individual print outs cheap.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 13:22:33 +1300
> > Other operating systems aren't relevant. It's Windows that went from 6
> > floppies to 150Mb with no apparent improvement in the environment.
>
> Not apparent because you refuse to look.
By all means, show me how you can justify over 100Mb for the petty
advantages you get going from 3.1 to ME.
> > Hardware support is also not that big an issue. Drivers are small, and
> > easily written (easily written badly?).
>
> Not seen the LiveWare! drivers for the SB Live, have you? Each individual
> driver may be fairly small (usually less than a meg), but when you have
> thousands of them, they add up.
In my Win98 install directory, there's just over 20Mb of Driverxx.Cab.
The entire directory takes up 170Mb. They certainly add up, I don't
dispute that. I dispute the idea that they can contribute substantially
to this massive increase in size.
> > Win 3.1 had wordpad
>
> No, it had Write, a much inferior word processor (not that Wordpad is all
> that, but it has a lot more than Write)
It's just a newer version of the same thing. Write lets you process
words, wordpad lets you process words. It's interesting that wordpad is
still named write.exe too.
> > a terminal proggy,
>
> Nowhere near HyperTerm.
Bollocks. Same app, just more evolution. No different to wordpad, and
the improvements still don't justify the size increase.
> > a defragger
>
> Nope, no defragger in Win 3.1.
Fair enough, the defragger was part of dos. Win 3.1 requires dos to run
anyway, but there's always the possibility that people installed it on
pre-6-dos.
> > media player.
>
> A wav and MIDI player/recorder. Hardly the full featured audio/video applet
> that WMP is.
Yet still more evolution. They haven't really CHANGED anything, just
updated it.
> > No web server or plug and play, but I
> > doubt 'plug and play' support accounts for any significant amount of
> > space.
>
> It's certainly takes code, and code takes space.
Of course, but not huge amounts. If the code to add PnP support is
approaching even 10Mb I'd be shocked.
> I didn't even mention programs like NetMeeting, MSN Messenger, FrontPage
> Express, and many more...
None of which I install, yet my install is still well over 150Mb. (98 not
ME too)
> > So what accounts for the increase in size by a factor of 15 or more?
>
> The architectural changes alone take up a lot. There's an entirely new API
> with thousands of functions.
Do you have any details? The newer bastardized Win32 they created for
Win95 used to occupy 20Mb suchandsuch 16 bit DLLs, and now consists of
85Mb in blabla 32bit DLLs?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:21:31 GMT
In article <983ulp$1ql$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Rosten wrote:
>> A true IQ test would have to
>> involve pictures and patterns, and perhaps have some mathematical
>> basis, because these are the only ideas that translate well all over
>> the world.
>
>I don't believe there is a true IQ test. People are good at different
>thing.
>
>-Ed
>
For instance, most Windows users are extremely good at immitating rocks.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:22:58 +0000
>> But you don't have to use the other drivers. I'll admit that to me it
>> seems silly.
>
> Well, it defaults to postscript, which is what I printed the first time,
> until I selected The Gimp's EPSON driver.
Save it. Go and live in ignorance for all I care. I'm not going to
explain the linux printing system to you again. Read some of my previous
posts.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 10:31:37 +1000
mlw wrote:
>
> Craig Kelley wrote:
> >
> > mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > OK, we have bitched long enough, how do we fix it?
> >
> > Use a different license, of course. :)
>
> Yes, but then we run into the crap that is going on already.
Remove the colonising effect of the GPL. I concider it fair enough to
require derived work to be released under the GPL but remove this bit
and related parts:
"These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and
can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on
the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this
License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire
whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it."
IanP
--
"Dear someone you've never heard of,
how is so-and-so. Blah blah.
Yours truly, some bozo." - Homer Simpson
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 19:45:06 -0500
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> > A true IQ test would have to
> > involve pictures and patterns, and perhaps have some mathematical
> > basis, because these are the only ideas that translate well all over
> > the world.
>
> I don't believe there is a true IQ test. People are good at different
> thing.
BULLSHIT.
There is are VERY strong correlations between doing well on a well-designed
IQ test, and the ability to quickly learn and perform well at any other
randomly selected task. (Quickly as compared to the rate at which
an IQ 100 person [statistical mean] would learn).
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> | Edward Rosten
> | u98ejr@
> This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
> | .ac.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 19:49:24 -0500
On 6 Mar 2001, Steve Mading wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: On 6 Mar 2001, Steve Mading wrote:
>:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>: No. They only have the right to distribute it with strings
>:>: attached. The software must be redistributed under their license. If
>:>: the software is library software, the GPL requires work that so much
>:>: as links dynamically to it to be released under the GPL (or so RMS
>:>: says. Whether such a draconian condition is enforceable remains to
>:>: be seen)
>:> You are deliberately not mentioning the existence of the LGPL, which does
>:> NOT have that requirement. Sure, a library released under GPL would
>:> have that requirement, but this doesn't matter given that libraries
>:> are typically released under LGPL not GPL.
>: Not necessarily true, Mr Mading. First, there are a number of GPLed
>: Java classes out there. In Java, *everything* is a library. How does
>: RMS's interpretation of library foolishness square with this? Second,
>: there is at least one significant library under the GPL and not the
>: LGPL.
> Were you planning on mentioning what it is?
readline <http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/readline/rltop.html>, and GNU MP
(GMP) <http://www.gnu.org/software/gmp/gmp.html>. That's two examples.
> : Third, RMS himself has been arguing recently that libraries
> : should be under the GPL and not the LGPL -- and has renamed the LGPL
> : from the "Library GPL" to the "Lesser GPL" in accordance with this
> : change of mind.
> Screw him. The GPL thing he started is bigger than he is now. People
> won't be obligated to use his newer versions except on software he
> writes. RMS deserves credit for starting the movement, and getting
> everyone thinking about what's wrong with a field where science is
> impossible because nobody's sharing their work. But he needs to
> recognize that not everyone is as radical as he is on the issue.
There's only one significant problem with that thought... most people
who use the GPL also include the "this version or any later..." clause
which means that RMS and the FSF *do* have a say in the matter...
This whole argument is about RMS's irresponsible crusade at the cost of
useful dialogue.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 16:52:05 -0800
From: Brock Hannibal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, . wrote:
> > > As for IQ tests, I've yet to see one that leaves me feeling confident it
> > > was somehow a test of my intelligence, as opposed to being a test of my
> > > learning. A vast majority of them are in English for starters, and I've
> > > seen some almost vocabulary-testing questions... this isn't an
> > > indication of how smart you are in my book. How well you learn ANY
> > > language is not a test of intelligence.
> > > A true IQ test would have to involve pictures and patterns, and perhaps
> > > have some mathematical basis, because these are the only ideas that
> > > translate well all over the world.
> >
> > Do you mean like the Stanford Terman-Binet test?
>
> I dunno, I'm nowhere near Stanford, and I tend not to pay attention to
> the names of the tests (although I'm pretty sure they usually just say
> 'IQ test').
> A quick google search turned up plenty of references to Terman Binet (and
> stanford-binet?), but no actual samples of it... do you know of an online
> location for it?
>
Actually I'm referring to the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth
Edition. It's copyrighted material. You can get the whole test kit for
$744.00. It includes a whole bunch of stuff to test non-reading
subjects such as verbal questions, puzzles, blocks and so on.
I don't think any samples are published on the web.
For information see http://www.riverpub.com/sales/ordering.htm
There are even tests for non-verbal subjects where the answers involve
pointing and other indications for people with hearing or speach
difficulties.
The Weschler tests are also interesting.
With all these tests a lot of care has been taken to check that they
are not biased in favor of one particular skill such as reading.
There are special tests for bilingual subjects and so on.
None of the good ones are simple written tests. All require a trained
administrator.
--
Brock
"One thing counts in this life: Get them to sign
on the line which is dotted...A. Always. B. Be.
C. Closing. Always Be Closing."
http://www.swingout.net/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 7 Mar 2001 00:53:25 GMT
On 6 Mar 2001 23:27:15 GMT, Steve Mading wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: Not necessarily true, Mr Mading. First, there are a number of GPLed
>: Java classes out there. In Java, *everything* is a library. How does
>: RMS's interpretation of library foolishness square with this? Second,
>: there is at least one significant library under the GPL and not the
>: LGPL.
>
>Were you planning on mentioning what it is?
gdbm, readline.
>Screw him.
Couldn't agree more !
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 7 Mar 2001 00:55:44 GMT
On Tue, 06 Mar 2001 23:21:05 GMT, Giuliano Colla wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> Those numbers add up pretty quickly, huh ? THe bottom line is that
>> modern software requires space.
>
>You're right in principle. But what's modern in Windows?
The applications and the development tools (including IE 5). The desktop
functionality, which is comparable to that offered in KDE/GNOME. The core OS in
Win9x is a piece of junk, but in terms of dev tools for writing user friendly
applications, they're ahead, not behind.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: 7 Mar 2001 01:06:14 GMT
On Tue, 06 Mar 2001 17:12:22 -0600, WJP wrote:
>On 6 Mar 2001 18:35:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>I totally agree with your last remark, Mr. Rebbechi, however, this is
>one subject that can prove to be a problem when a person is considering
>the "switch" to Linux - after having already purchased a Windows box.
This is difficult if the PC is very new -- if they purchase a box with
the intention of installing Linux, but don't insist on a preload, they
are in trouble. It's a lot less of a problem with old hardware, which is
more likely to be supported. Even the super-proprietary neomagic chips
are supported nowadays.
>For instance: I have a "home-built" PC, (in fact, two of them). I
>attempted to get the most "generic" hardware that I could obain (and
>afford) when building each of them.
My question here would be, with what intention did you build them, and
how new were they when you attempted the install ? If you build, you
obviously need to check that your hardware will work with the OSs you
want to use.
>Perhaps my question is: d oesn't this situation preclude individuals
>from switching to Linux?
Not really. It doesn't make it easy, but usually the problems aren't
insurmountable, and can be solved by purchasing a cheap video card
(Matrox Millenium II is dirt cheap on Ebay, and a decent card)
and waiting until the new card is supported. Besides video cards,
most componenets should work.
>Am I willing to return to the market place and shell out more money for
>"supported hardware" that provides the same functionality that I already
>have with Windows? Why should I have to?
You don't have to. You can choose to run Windows on Windows-only hardware.
Obviously, you can't run Linux on Windows only hardware. It's not Linux's
fault that Windows-only hardware exists.
>And, as an aside, I did a web search the other day for Linux drivers for
>my ATI Rage 64 video card. And, to my amazement, I found a set of
>drivers - at a cost of $89 (US) - which is not too far away from the
Complete waste of money. You can get decent video cards for less than $30-
>price I originally paid for the video card. It appears that I will be
>"stuck" with the svga Linux drivers for awhile, at least.
Yes, that's another option -- stick with the low performance drivers until
support arrives.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Linux on it's way back to
Date: 7 Mar 2001 01:09:34 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: No, it doesn't. It means that Linux needs to play by the same rules as
: everyone else.
A game where Microsoft makes up the rules as it goes along.
: Win 95 does add real functionality to 3.1. It's not just Win 3.1 with
: a pretty face tacked on. In fact that's part of the problem -- the
: fact that it's burdened by so many layers of compatibility. There's
Which is why 95 has that new improved crash function, the blue screen of
death. So, you're right. It has a new functionality over 3.11 after all.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
