Linux-Advocacy Digest #750, Volume #32 Sat, 10 Mar 01 23:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your computer")
(Bloody Viking)
Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your computer")
("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Dividing OS to groups. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision (Bloody Viking)
Re: Computing Power to Peak SOON! (WAS: Moore's Law, continued...) (Bloody Viking)
Re: Computing Power to Peak SOON! (WAS: Moore's Law, continued...) (Bloody Viking)
Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your computer")
(Ray Chason)
Re: What is user friendly? (Anonymous)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Alan)
Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision (Mike Martinet)
Re: Macintosh as an alternative to Windows?? ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your computer")
("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: What does IQ measure? (Anonymous)
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. (LShaping)
Re: What is user friendly? (Salvador Peralta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your
computer")
Date: 11 Mar 2001 01:59:00 GMT
Masha Ku'Inanna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: No, Gnu's not UNIX.. *ducks quickly*
The infinite-recursive acronym doesn't mention the fun fact that for all
PRACTICAL (but not legal) purposes GNU is UNIX. After all, the GNUware is
found on every UNIX flavour. All that was needed was a filesystem and kernel,
which our friend Linus made.
: If "Unix" implies that one can claim descendancy from the original AT&T
: Unix, then BSD is more Unix than Linux.
I go by "look n' feel" when I call Linux a UNIX style OS. While Linus didn't
use one line of code, he did make a UNIX look-alike.
: But these days it really does not matter, nor should not matter. If one acts
: like "Unix", feels like "Unix" and runs like "Unix" can't it then be called
: Unix, legal BS aside?
Exactly. Thanks to look-and-feel, Linux is UNIX for all practical purposes. If
anything, Linux is a "hyper-UNIX".
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your
computer")
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 03:40:46 +0200
"Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <98e50i$l3f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Exactly because of those features. Most (all?) unixes ship with those.
>
> Still waiting for these Solaris features that Linux doesn't have.
Most of them are in the server arena, btw.
Scalability is one, Linux, even 2.4, just can't compete with it.
Stability is another, although arguable.
Security, I really like to have ACLs.
Support, YMMV, but I like Sun's support better than most of what Linux has
to offer.
Hmm, for some reason all the thinks I can think off the top of my head start
with s.
Like sleep, and sleep depravation, if we are talking about it.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Dividing OS to groups.
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 04:05:54 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > VMS based:
> > VMS
> > WinNT line.
>
> Uh,... I don't think vms is even remotely related to nt at all.
Most of the design team from VMS worked on NT.>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision
Date: 11 Mar 2001 02:15:51 GMT
Adam Warner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I worry for people wanting to reinstall Office in five or ten years time,
: when Microsoft could possibly tell them "I'm sorry, your product is no
: longer supported."
That is yet another reason to reject .NET or the like and go to freeware. That
case as you describe means that .NET sodtware has an expiry date as set by the
maker. Totally sickening. I guess I was ahead of my time back in 1994 when I
lit off my first UNIX.... err.... I mean Linux nachine. Fuck that ultrarich
semi-autistic piece of shit son of a bitch Bill Gates(tm). How much fucking
money does one Homo Sapien need anyways?
--
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.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computing Power to Peak SOON! (WAS: Moore's Law, continued...)
Date: 11 Mar 2001 02:45:20 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Considering the amount of refrigerant I would think would be required
: (at most, a few cups), it's a small price to pay. As far as the
: denaturants, I don't know what they are, but presumably those would
: be the items leaving deposits on a board should there be a leak.
At most, the Everclear coolant shouldn't cost more than $20. Note that in some
areas Everclear is not available due to its use in crack manufacture. In
Chicago, you can't get Everclear but you can in the suburbs.
As far as denaturants, you can't readily know what the substance is. That's
why I wouldn't fuck with denatured booze in a booze-cool system. I would
sooner run the bugger on vodka if price was too severe a constraint. You can
get 80-proof vodka for $16/1.75 litres. Vodka would not be bad for a CPU
coolant. It's fairly pure outta-the-bottle and not badly overpriced. I also
drink vodka so I would have a supply of make-up feed vodka for a CPU cooling
system at any time.
An item missed by overclockers is that every so often you must change out the
coolant. This means downtime so as to drain the system and reload it. You must
wrap up the computer to shut it off to swap out the coolant, about like doing
a motor oil swap aboard a car.
: Heh...personally, I don't know what I want, as I'm not the one going
: to rev up the chip -- but at some point, this is going to be one of
: those issues that will either have to be solved, or the chip melts
: at 10 GHz or so -- and considering the state of software, everyone wants
: computers to be cheaper, faster, more intuitive, backward compatible,
: and consistent. :-)
That is my point with the first posting. While you may not want to "put the
pedal to the metal" on a CPU, we are getting to a point that the manufacturer
is. As we move toward the inevitable liquid-cool regime, normal consumers will
balk. That's only becuse people over time learned to not mix water and
electricity. I'm quite comfortable with electricity and even I balk at the
watercool concept. That's why I'd use booze cooling.
I have expierence with messing with a car engine cooling system, as well as my
being one who gets hot easy. I know my refrigeration. And I know my
electronics.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computing Power to Peak SOON! (WAS: Moore's Law, continued...)
Date: 11 Mar 2001 02:48:52 GMT
B'ichela ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I have heard that r134a is not eactly docile either! Since we
: are talking about cooling a cpu. waht about Absorbion cooling. thats
Now, you get to the range of the alt.energy.homepower newsgroup. For a CPU,
you can't let it heat up too far, so it's not good as a primary energy source.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your
computer")
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 02:49:14 -0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking) wrote:
>Linux is certainly more readily available than Solaris. You can buy Linux at a
>Best Buy, Red Hat of course. And now you can go to a computer store and buy
>Slackware and other major distros. Nope, you don't see Solaris on the shelf.
I've also seen Mandrake and SuSE at Best Buy. You can get other
distros at CompUSA; I've even seen them at Borders.
CompUSA also carries FreeBSD here in Maryland.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 20:02:25 -0700
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
aaron wrote:
> Anonymous wrote:
> >
> > aaron wrote:
> > > Anonymous wrote:
> > > >
> > > > aaron wrote:
> > > > > If you were to follow around one IQ-100 person all day, you would
> > > > > be appalled by the vast number of incredibly stupid things they do
> > > > > in the course of a day, and how many completely fucking obvious
> > > > > connections they miss, how many winning opportunities they pass
> > > > > up (because they either don't understand them, or they fail to
> > > > > even recognize that the opportunity exists in the first place).
> > > >
> > > > now you know why i usually don't read your messages
> > > > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> > > >
> > > > p.s. windows is a pretty cool operating system
> > > >
> > >
> > > Only in comparison to DOS.
> > >
> > > Compared to anything else, Windows is comparable to a Formula-1 body
> > > slapped on top of a Ford Pinto with a sand-injection oil system
> > > and water-contaminated brake-lines.
> >
> > amiga: dead
> > beos: fringe
> > mac: fringe
> > os2: dead
> > next: dead
> > unix: user hostile
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Microsoft propaganda.
no, personal experience.
a generally impassable learning curve = user hostile.
i was using windows to get work done ten minutes after installation.
u can't touch this
> Unix has had fully functional GUI's since the mid 1980's.
xwindows?
nerdo please...
> Not only that, but Unix is very very very consistant; in contrast, DOS and Windows
> both have lots of arbitrary rules with even more exceptions.
why, if that is the case, are they so much easier to use?
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 03:12:50 GMT
I found this link which may add to the discussion.
It's an excerpt from "Overdrive, Bill Gates and the race to control
Cyberspace.
http://www.smartbooks.com/bw705ovrdrvchp.htm
<Begin Quote>
The staff report on Microsoft spelled out action to be taken against
Microsoft in several different areas. One involved the company's
packaging of DOS with each computer, what Microsoft called its
"per-processor" licensing. For some 10 years, Microsoft had been
offering computer makers a huge discount on DOS, provided they
paid a royalty for each computer shipped, even if DOS was not
installed on the machine. The computer makers had a choice: they
could pay Microsoft for each copy of DOS they bought, or they could
simply pay a royalty to Microsoft and get the discount. The per-copy
cost of DOS was about $90, compared with about a $30 royalty per
machine. The biggest computer makers might pay as little as a $7
royalty per machine. FTC staff pushing for action against Microsoft
believed the arrangement dissuaded PC makers from offering
competing operating system software since they were already paying
for DOS with each machine they shipped.
<End Quote>
There are far more interesting tidbits mentioned, including MS getting
a $23 royalty payment for each copy of OS2, and other neat stuff from
the early 90s that the appellate judges may never see.
Alan
On Sun, 11 Mar 2001 00:40:53 GMT, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 3 Mar 2001
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >I'm a little confused here. When exactly was Microsoft "almost giving
>>away "
>>> >the office products?
>>>
>>> When they were forcing OEMs to bundle it by threatening their Windows
>>> licenses, dumping it by using monopoly revenues to subsidize it, and
>>> further ensuring that consumers never saw the price tag for it, no
>>> matter what it was. So if you got a new PC, you got Office; that's
>>> "almost giving away", if you innocently presume it isn't monopolization.
>>
>>You state this as fact. Yet, I've seen no evidence to support this. It
>>hasn't been asserted in any court of law.
>
>You haven't said anything, however, which indicates it is not a fact.
>Another EF AFI, obviously.
>
>--
>T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***
------------------------------
From: Mike Martinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft's .NET Vision
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 20:29:36 -0700
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 17:58:09 GMT, "Bryant Charleston, MCSE"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > I hadn't been paying much attention to their ".NET"/Activation plans, but
> > thanks to the enlightenment of this link and thread, I'll start keeping an
> > eye on it now. I can see that it's implementation will probably irritate
> > more than a few people!
>
> It might irritate most people in the short term, but like a lot of other
> things, after a while Joe Public will accept it as the norm and go along
> unquestioningly with it.
>
> A few years down the line "free" software will be just a memory in the
> minds of the oldies who will regail stories over the table at coffee break.
>
> I think this is their game-plan. Suffer the anger of the small percentage
> who understand what's going on for the longer term advantages of
> reinforcing the monopoly.
>
> Peter
I have to disagree. This is all purely speculation, but from what I
know of non-technical people, they want to use computers like they use
TVs, VCRs or toasters. And although a lot of people will pay a cable
bill, they won't pay a per-use charge to record a sitcom or heat up a
poptart. Software has been largely invisible for these people - they
buy a PC from a department store, everything's on it, they plug it in,
sign on to AOL and they're done. They WILL NOT put up with constantly
re-registering something that in the past just kept working. Most
people don't NEED computers like they need toasters or refrigerators.
They'll go back to (or stick with) older software or they'll stumble
onto someone who'll introduce them to Open Source. I've said it before,
and I'll say it again, .NET/Whistler will help Linux if they're even
marginally annoying. Most people don't think in terms of software and
OSs. They just want to email, get sports scores, download porn, etc.
If MS makes it even slightly more difficult to do these simple things
they'll see large-scale defection. Maybe not TO Linux, but definitely
AWAY FROM XP.
MjM
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Macintosh as an alternative to Windows??
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 03:26:04 GMT
Its quite funny how you hear people dispute proprietry hardware, yet you
never hear the horror stories about device X won't work with motherboard Y.
In the cases of Apple and SUN, both have complete control over the hardware
and software development, thus, ensuring that all components work in sync
with each other, also, by having control over the OS, they can iron out any
quirks between the hardware and software.
Even though these proprietry solutions are generally speaking, cost slightly
more than the cheap, generic PeeCee, it does give the use piece of mind that
the OS and hardware can work co-operatively together.
There will probably be a wolly out there going to crap on about how the
PeeCee with Microsoft allowed the average user to blah blah blah, which is
bullshit. During the 80's, the PeeCee movement into the homes was initated
by the likes of Atari, Amiga, and Apple, whilst in the IBM-compat arena,
most vendors were too concerned picking their bums than developing the
PeeCee beyond the needs of business. The reason why Windows helped the
PeeCee, is that most home users wanted to have a computer at home that was
compatible to what was at work, however, up until then, DOS was rather hard
for the average user, hence, Windows allowed the user to have a PeeCee at
home, and easily transfer files between work and home, hence, the home
office emerged. Although, one could say that a family could have used an
Amiga, Apple, or Atari to do this work, the interoperability between the
PeeCee and alternative platforms was not very good, as as a result Amiga,
Atari and Apple declined in market share.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Customising Wrap-Up Screen. (WAS: "It is now safe to shut off your
computer")
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 16:35:22 +1300
The even if Windows was ready and Itanium was ready:
1. The Itanium is bloody expensive when compared to other 64bit CPU's
2. Windows XP 64bit Server is unproven, hence, the uptake will be flat, if
not, totally non-existant.
3. There is bugger-all software for Windows XP 64bit, and even if there was,
it would be considered "first generation 64 solutions", yet another reason
why there will be a slow uptake.
4. Very soon (I am pretty optimistic), SUN has included a DVD drive in as
an option in their SUN Blade 100 workstation, all that will be needed is a
DVD player, and you will find many geeks/nerds/techno-enthusiasts will go
out and buy a SUN Blade 100.
5. The apps are already there for Solaris, either in 64 bit or 32bit,
either one has no performace loss, unlike 32 bit code on Intels Itanium
processors that will run really shitty (from what I have heard).
6. From what I see, SUN is first trying to win over developer support
(through their "big admin" site and other dinky little things), and once a
significant number of people have jumped on board the Sparc bandwagon, the
finally assult will be on the desktop (which may happen after the next
revision of Solaris that will most likely include GNOME 2.0 (which will have
Natilus)), that will allow the average user to have the power and stability
of UNIX, whilst maintaing the ease of use of Windows/MacOS.
Matthew Gardiner
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Its amazing, even with all the hype about NT, Universities are still
> > teaching UNIX, even after 35 years! 10 years in which NT has been
around.
> > It tells Microsoft and other UNIX disputors, that UNIX is here and it is
> > here to stay, and Linux, which I believe could be classed as a UNIX
> Varient,
> > is one of the many UNIX"s that will be giving Microsoft a thrashing in
the
> > future, what we see now is only the tip of the ice burg, wait until
there
> is
> > a real Linux/UNIX vs. Microsoft war, then you will see some bloody flow.
> > There will be people who will be paranoid of the "OpenSource" words, and
> > instead, opt for a SUN solution (such as the SUN Netra @ $NZ2300 + GST),
> > which will be no serious loss to the Lintel field. The Wintel empire is
> > like the Eastern Bloke, it will enventually crumble unders its own mass
of
> > problems.
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
>
> I think the dam is about to burst the Wintel bubble here.
> The sun blade 100 is only $950 and its the sparc IIe (64-bit). sun is
> pushing hard as there
> is a window of opportunity that just can't be passed here. MS can't get
> their o/s for the itanium
> ready in time and intel can't make the itanium work correctly... it was
> supposed to be out last
> summer but its still not available in quantities yet.
>
> > "Bloody Viking" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:98cbo4$75t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > I just got done customising the Windows 95 wrap-up screen, the "it's
now
> > safe
> > > to turn off your computer" screen. It now says:
> > >
> > > It's now safe to type "mode co80 and light off UNIX, the OS Bill Gates
> > hates!
> > > GNU's Not UNIX!!!
> > >
> > > Thanks! That was after a few hours of quality coding time working on a
> pet
> > > snail billpay proggie in C on Linux. For what it's worth, Linux IS
UNIX
> in
> > my
> > > book, it's a GNU freeware UNIX.
> > >
> > > Ah, the pleasure of having the OS of Big Iron on a PC. UNIX is the OS
of
> > Big
> > > Iron computing, and while we may enjoy it on our boxes, it will always
> be
> > THE
> > > OS of Big Iron. How could anyone pass up the chance to play with an OS
> > like
> > > Linux, a PC freeware UNIX? Maybe some of us are hackers (in the good
> sense
> > of
> > > the word) 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.
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 20:46:35 -0700
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
aaron wrote:
> Anonymous wrote:
> >
> > aaron wrote:
> > > Anonymous wrote:
> > > >
> > > > aaron wrote:
> > > > > If you were to follow around one IQ-100 person all day, you would
> > > > > be appalled by the vast number of incredibly stupid things they do
> > > > > in the course of a day, and how many completely fucking obvious
> > > > > connections they miss, how many winning opportunities they pass
> > > > > up (because they either don't understand them, or they fail to
> > > > > even recognize that the opportunity exists in the first place).
> > > >
> > > > now you know why i usually don't read your messages
> > >
> > > ....must be why you read this one.....
> >
> > what's your iq?
>
>
> IQ score? I have no clue. What I do know is that throughout my entire
> scholastic career, I consistantly scored at or above the 98th percentile,
> and as high as the top 0.5 percentile on a test with 0.5 percentile accuracy.
>
>
> According to http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/combnorm.html
>
> This translates to a 133 (for the 98th percentile score) to
> 141+ (for the "top 0.5 percentile" score.
>
> However, these tests were not specifically constructed for
> differentiating at the extreme upper end, so precision
> of these scores are unreliable..all they can really say is
> "some place above X, which is the upper limit of accurate
> assessment for this test".
see also: mensa
i rest my case
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls.
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 03:36:55 GMT
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There's a general rule: programmers tend to use constructs which are
>faster to write in the selected language, as opposed to the ones which
>execute faster.
Right. That gets to my point. Some of us want to get things done and
do not have the time to spend on details. Low level languages are
more detailed and take a lot of writing to produce better results, if
you have the time. And to the Linux lunatics. There is such a thing
which grownups use, called "tools". Some of you who oppose Microsoft
seem to be stuck in a simplistic sandbox with your Linux bucket and
scoop, not being able to do anything more than a million simple
operations. I imagine that is one reason why you have failed. If a
programmer is not willing to venture into the real world of modern
computing, then he will be left behind in the sand. I would love to
have a more efficient operating system than Windows, but command line
stuff is for the birds.
>Sometimes they avoid constructs which do not produce
>code at all, but are lengthy to write. Therefore the problem isn't the
>progress in programming languages, but in computing power. If you have
>computing power in excess, you may disregard efficiency, but if you
>don't, you can't ignore the resulting code.
The answer depends also on the task at hand. A more complex task will
always require more resources. Basic research is great for those who
enjoy it, but it is not for everybody.
LShaping
>I don't support the idea of
>writing code in machine language, unless really necessary, but reading
>the low level code your compiler produces may help a lot to write
>efficient high level code.
>With some compilers just splitting an expression in two steps, to
>improve readability, is a very costly choice, with others it comes for
>free. When you're in the inner loop of an image processing algorithm,
>just to make an example, the wrong choice can make your program take
>five minutes instead of five seconds.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 19:55:49 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anonymous quoth:
> no, personal experience.
I think you meant "no personal experience."
> a generally impassable learning curve = user hostile.
There is little to no learning curve with modern gui desktop
environments on linux. KDE should be easier than a mac for the windows
user who decides to upgrade to linux.
> i was using windows to get work done ten minutes after installation.
> u can't touch this
Anyone can. The difference is that 10 minutes after getting their
installation done, the windows user still has hours ahead of him
installing the hundreds of other programs he needs whereas the linux
user already got them with their distribution.
>> Unix has had fully functional GUI's since the mid 1980's.
>
> xwindows?
> nerdo please...
A couple of days ago I upgraded from kde 2.0 to 2.1. I installed some
rpm's using the graphical package manager front end. Every library
that came with the kde system plus a ton of applications were upgraded.
Once I completed the installation, I ended the x session and then
typed startx. No reboot necessary. Bam! totally upgraded desktop
environment. You can't just upgrade your desktop on windows like that
without a complete recompile of the kernel. had i not liked the
upgrade, i could've simply switched back to no. No hassles whatsoever
involved.
X windows is simply one part of the superior paradigm that is unix.
>> Not only that, but Unix is very very very consistant; in contrast,
>> DOS and Windows both have lots of arbitrary rules with even more
>> exceptions.
>
> why, if that is the case, are they so much easier to use?
Simple. They aren't. If you think they are, it's because you haven't
tried linux lately.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[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
******************************
