Linux-Advocacy Digest #820, Volume #32 Thu, 15 Mar 01 14:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: .Net to run on Linux (Bob Hauck)
Re: .Net to run on Linux ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Edward Rosten)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Edward Rosten)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Edward Rosten)
Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux (Dave Martel)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (FM)
Re: What does IQ measure? (jim dutton)
Re: Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: .Net to run on Linux
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 18:35:41 GMT
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001 00:18:35 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 21:52:11 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > If you program in Java for windows, you rarely write for windows, you
>> > write for the Java platform.
>>
>> Unless you use platform-specific extensions. Which MS cunningly
>> designed their J++ variant to encourage.
>
>They did this because Java lacked so many features in the early days that
>you HAD to go native to do much of anything.
Only on Windows, apparently.
>> I think he means Windows-isms like COM, ActiveX, ADO, etc. Our resident
>> technical evangalist Erik Funkenbush claims that easy access to those is
>> one advantage of .NET over Java.
>I said no such thing. .Net will likely succeed where Java fails for many
>reasons, none of them have anything to do native windows.
You did say that delays in having a native interface hurt Java. It was
in a thread misleadingly titled "NTFS Limitations". Here's part of it
(took a while to find on Google). We were discussing the supposed
failure of Java and the reasons therefore:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 03:40:34 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It took sun years to get a decent JIT (HotSpot) and years to develop
a standard native interface, and years to develop component models
like Java Beans...
Then there's this, where you basically concede that .NET is not WORA:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 02:05:25 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Microsoft isn't advertising .NET as WORA. Sun did, and failed to
deliver (again) on that promise. The fact is, WORA can never be
attained, since there will always be compatiblity problems between
platforms. The faster developers realize this, the more productive
they'll be, because they can plan for such problems.
>For instance, MS actually submitted the specifications for the .NET CLI and
>C# to the ECMA, something Sun promised to do several times and lied each
>time about.
I think it was in the same thread I mentioned where I pointed out that
the market positions of Sun and MS are not equivalent, and that
Microsoft's desktop monopoly puts them in a position to control the spec
whether it is an ECMA standard or not. Sun is not in such a position,
and could in fact end up losing control of Java to MS if they blindly
follow the standards path. You never responded to this except by asking
"if ECMA is such a rubber stamp why won't Sun submit Java to them".
Which is not to say that I agree with Sun's position, but I can sure see
why they have adopted it.
>.Net is also much more comprehensive than Java (the platform).
>Java has tons of stuff just bolted on, MS makes a very strong push to make
>the services feel like a single cohesive unit.
Ah, yes, the "integration" argument that MS likes to trot out at every
opportunity. Yeah, the other guy may have xyz, but it is just "bolted
on", while ours is "fully integrated". This is marketing-speak and is
virtually meaningless without going into quite a bit more detail about
what "integration" means and how it is better than the "bolted on"
solution the other guys have. It does sound good in the brochure though.
>> See, .NET faces the same obstacles to "write once run anywhere" that
>> Java does. The MS answer to that seems to be to just ignore the
>> problems, since most users have Win32 anyway.
>It's mostly designed for independance between supported platforms.
Note the weasel-words..."mostly" and "supported". I'm still not clear
on how this is different from Java or how it will overcome the supposed
failures of Java. Seems like ignoring the problem to me.
> MS is supporting .NET on Win32, Win64, MacOS and at least server-side
> services on Linux.
I like how you threw in the non-existent Win64 platform to pump up the
count. How many platforms does Java run on, today?
Also, I'll be _very_ surprised if it is anything but server-side-only on
other platforms, and then only the minimum necessary to hook people in
to a Windows migration. Just like the Frontpage extensions.
> MS doesn't want to keep developing special versions of Office for Mac
> and Windows, they want to consolidate that, and they need Office on
> Win64.
They could do that with a normal portability layer, just like everybody
else does. No, they want much more, including content control, pay per
use, more leverage over Intel, and a way to maintain their monopoly in
case of a breakup. All great things for Microsoft, but what's in it for
the users as compared with the Java Platform?
> Much like IBM needed Java to maintain their vast array of platforms,
> MS is finding they need a compatibility layer as well.
The vast array of MS platforms, which they are trying to consolidate and
will soon be only three (XP/NT/2K, CE/PocketPC, Win64) is a far cry from
the span of platforms IBM has.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: .Net to run on Linux
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 19:36:32 +0100
In article <98o0ms$5g6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> All it means is that software on the Windows platform can call apps
> (services) on another platform.
>
> It has nothing to do with .NET running on another OS.
>
> The breakup order specifies that Microsoft will DIVEST the Windows OS.
>
> The .NET platform is a middleware "OS" kept by Microsoft. However, it
> has many purposes and was in development long before the case.
>
> For one thing, it replaces the Win32 framework.
>
> .NET is best understood as the next generation of Microsoft's COM. You
> would
> need to understand their emphasis on component based software to
> understand it.
>
> A big emphasis is to get beyond the "dumb terminal" era of the internet
> with the integrated client.
>
>
In this week's CT (issue #6) one of Microsoft's execs has written an
in-depth article explaining just this (sorry it is not online, I just
checked). He gave quite an interesting over view, and although he
mentioned them only in passing, was remarkably frank about the current
weaknesses in the Win API. However I think a few snags remain that will
allow MS to continue its deplorable business tactics:
1. He specifically mentioned that VC++ will remain able to compile to
binary code directly while using the .NET framework. In other words MS's
primary development environment will be able to bypass the CLR.
2. I believe it was Bill himself who said that MS will never relinquish
their proprietary data, even though they will wrap it in XML.
3. As Ayende said, in order to qualify as a standard .NET must be
implemented on more than one platform. I know nothing of the workings of
the relevant standards bodies, so maybe somebody can enlighten me on
this: must .NET be implemented only at the protocol level in order to
qualify? In other words, although .NET based objects may be accesible to
all, as long as Microsoft makes the content meaningless to competitors
(see point 2 above), they will maintain their hold on the applications
barrier. I have the nagging feeling they will do to SOAP/XML what they
have done to HTTP/HTML: add vendor specific content to drive off
competitors, although they implement both standards.
Just my thoughts, comments are welcome.
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 18:38:57 +0000
> > Incidentally, AFAIK, postscript is text. Not totally unlike a markup language,
> > it's a big text file that describes how to print formatted text and graphics.
>
> Actually Postscript is more like a language, not unlike FORTH.
Bzzzzt. Right!
> > From what I can tell, GIMP output a Postscript file and then sent it on to
> > Mr. Goodwin's printer without going through the appropriate driver (that is,
> > without telling the printer what it was getting.) This is because the GIMP
> > assumed postscript by default, rather than using the "standard" printer
> > setting that was set earlier, as everyone is now aware.
>
> That's pretty much it.
No that's not it. By default, the print queue doesn't need to know the
file type, the filter figures it out. In this case, GIMP was passing it
extra false information. It is OK to pass PS to the default queue (what
GIMP was doing). It isn't really OK to label it as raw.
> > However, the idea that 'there's something wrong with the whole model' because
> > the GIMP has its own route to printing separate from the standard and 'all the
> > applications' you've used under Windows don't is more debatable.
>
> I thought it odd that it seemed to be OK to people here to allow any old
> application to have its own drivers to talk to hardware. I thought the
> whole point of an OS was to do all that. Otherwise we're back to the days
> when there was no X or Windows and everyone invented their own API to do
> raster graphics.
Name me an OS where an app can't have its own printer driver.
> > Windows applications used to use their own printer drivers instead of the
> > generic Windows interface a lot more than they do now: WordPerfect 5.1 for
> > example. This is because the developers wanted to be current and use all the
> > capabilities of the latest hardware.
>
> It gets easier once a decent model is in place. Certainly all
> applications I use make use of this model. Hence my surprise when I came
> across one on Linux that bucked the rules.
There is a very good model in place under Linux (similar to the windows
model, but rather more versatile). All apps use it. In 1 case I have
heard of, an app misuses it (GIMP). I'd like to point out that all apps
on my box work perfectly using this model.
> Yet Windows seems to have a decent driver model, bad tech support not
> withstanding.
About printers? If so, the model is very similar to Linux, but not as
versatile.
> So you would agree that this is a configuration problem that ought to be
> solved by either Mandrake or The Gimp, and not "my idiocy" as some people
> want us to believe?
I'd agree that it's a GIMP or MDK problem _NOT_ a Linux problem as you
origionally claimed with glee (read the subject header).
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 18:40:34 +0000
> > > Except 100% of the apps I use on Windows use this unified model. I've yet
> > > to see one that doesn't.
> >
> > Well you do have one. Try using edit.com as shipped with win95 and
> > newer. That dumps raw text straight to the printer.
>
> Except I wouldn't do printing from Edit, I'd use something else. Even
> Notepad isn't a good tool for printing (as it sets stupid print margins),
> I'd use PFE instead.
>
> However, they all print correctly. Unlike The Gimp.
You said that you haven't seen one. I pointed out one. Just coz its bad
doesn't mean its not there. Anyway, now you can no longer claim that you
don't have an app on your windows box that can't dump raw data to the
printer.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 18:45:50 +0000
> > > > Yes you have. You claimed that GIMP sending PS to your printer was the
> > > > wrong thing to do. I can't be bothered to dig up any more.
> > >
> > > No I haven't. I said The Gimp was wrong in that it printed Postscript as
> >
> > Well, yes you did.
>
> What I said all along was that The Gimp got it wrong.
Not to start with.
> > > The way that it was wrong was that it ignored a
> > > system wide configuration setting and did its own thing.
> >
> > It did send iot to the right queue, though, which is what the system
> > copnfiuration tells it to do. The system config doesn't say anything
> > about rawness, but I'll freely admit it's dumb to mark data as raw by
> > default.
>
> Thank you.
I have been agreeing with you on this from very near the beginning.
> > > As I said
> > > before, you're not listening.
> >
> > I'm listening to what you say, but I'm disagreeing.
>
> So you disagree when I say The Gimp got it wrong? Above you appear to be
> agreeing with me.
I forget exactly what I'm disagreeing with you about, but it isn't about
what you just said.
> > > > So in conclusion, PS does a very good most of the time in most
> > > > situations. If postscript is so bad, then point me to a much better
> > > > solution.
> > >
> > > It's not bad, but it is a fairly complex solution on a printer which
> > > requires more intelligence etc. on the printer.
> >
> > Or, it you OS has a sensible filtering system, then the processing can
> > be done on the host insted. That way, I can use my dumb Star Micronics
> > LC-100 (colour) Dot Matrix as a postscript printer if I wish.
>
> Yet for some reason UNIX is the only OS that uses PS as it's standard.
> Windows doesn't, neither did OpenVMS.
Yet for some reason, Windows is the only OS that uses the windows print
system as the standard. UNIX doesn't, neither does OpenVMS or RiscOS or
BEOS or MacOS.
> > It makes a good solution, since any app can generate a file on a
> > computer which has no printer drivers, and have the file reluiably
> > printed on any printer (assuming a woprking GS).
>
> It makes one solution. When it works.
Eh? Windows only works when it works too. Set up properly, if you dump
PS (non raw) to a queue, you will get a correct printout.
> > > You have trouble listening.
> >
> > You have trouble understanding the difference between lintening and
> > disagreeing.
>
> I think I was right the first time. You appear to be agreeing with me.
You were qwrong about some things. I was disagreeing about those.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 11:40:49 -0700
Another one bites the dust!
=====================================================
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/17629.html>
By: John Leyden
Posted: 15/03/2001 at 16:09 GMT
"...The poverty relief organisation, which operates in 30 countries,
is on the brink of the move after becoming increasing fed up with the
effort needed to deal with recent virus outbreaks, and suffering
infection from the Emmanuel bug"
"Kerry Scott, IT director at Action Aid, said the effect of viruses on
the charity had pushed him to consider using Linux far more seriously
after initial reservations about the availability of suitable
applications, particularly word processing packages..."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 15 Mar 2001 18:36:53 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said JD in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 2 Mar 2001 13:51:54 -0500;
>>Think of it like this: GPL is free sort of like our Income Tax is 'voluntary.' In
>fact,
>>our Income Tax isn't 'voluntary', and GPL isn't free. Another common misusage (by
>>almost all parties in the US) is that the US is a Democracy, which technically it
>isn't.
>>In fact, the misusage of the term 'Democracy' has often caused confusion.
>>
>>If GPL is a license of free software, then you wouldn't have multiple rules and
>redistribution
>>encumberances.
>
>Says you. And purely because it is necessary to provide the entirety of
>your argument, as incorrect as it is. GPL software is free; a
>distribution and development license will only cost you adherence to the
>GPL (which costs you nothing but support of free GPL), but that hardly
>prevents GPL software from being "free", in either the oft-cited "free
>beer" or "free speech" connotations.
I think one important question to ask is, what makes GPL software
free, where proprietary/commercial software isn't? It seems to me
that a lot of arguments being thrown around here are of the variety
that "no one forces you to use the software" which is somewhat odd -
no license can affect my or your freedom in that regard.
--
A commune is where people join together to share their lack of wealth.
-- R. Stallman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jim dutton)
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: 15 Mar 2001 18:55:19 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Your lengthy signature is the most annoying thing I've seen on
>USENET for some time.
>
>On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>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.
What?
=========================================================================
Visit my homepage:
www.bishopdutton.org and www.pat-acceptance.org
=========================================================================
**whoop whoop chany alert**
now me, i wouldnt call chanby a philistine.
he's a fanboy. an angry one ... much like the angry ape in the passage
from Measure For Measure that i quoted above. and accordingly we see
chabny once again adopting the cartoontoothed battle-postures of Quake
Arena in order to give his inferiority complex a temporary boner, a
sad, tiny, angry, miniature boner that will last long enough to drop
doomed legacyless chanbyseed across multiple pages of the japanese
preteen rape comix that he holds so defensively close to his heart.
-cb
>Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 19:21:16 -0600 (MDT)
>From: What happens if I press THIS button? <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Talk-List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: This is the side of Tawnya that GunHed won't tell anyone. (snip)
>There was a lot that caused me to no longer want to be with Steve. Some
>of it was the fact that he was too .. rigid. To me, he had no sense of
>humour and he took all my questions to be personal attacks. Yes, I
>admit that I was a bitch to him for the last year. That's because I did
>not want to be with him. Since April of '94, I told him that I wanted
>out of the relationship. But he wouldn't let me go. He refused to let
>me leave him even though he knew I wasn't happy with him. So, I started
>arguments at any opportunity I could. I made his life a living hell
>trying to get him to let me go, but he wouldn't. (snip)
>It was almost fateful the night that Steve and I got into a monstrous
>argument. It was a stupid argument over which wordprocessor was better:
>WordPerfect 6.0 for DOS or MS-Word6.0. For nearly 2 hours, we argued.
>Finally, Steve cut the "TALK" session that we were holding at 6:58pm,
>MST, on Thursday, March 9th. Since I had a class at 7, I simply logged
>out and went to class. I came back at 10pm, MST, and there was a very
>nasty letter in my box saying that I "fucked up" and he was leaving me
>because "he was tired of my bullshit and how I was treating him like
>shit". It was then that I realized that I was finally free of him. I
>didn't leave him, he left me. (snip)
>Monday morning when I went back online, I found out that Steve had
>started spreading that I cheated on him. I tell you this. I did not
>cheat on him. It was not until the 10th of March, the day AFTER Steve
>left me, that I finally agreed to go out with John. AFTER he had left
>me.
>
>Then, he swore to me that if I did not leave John then he would come
>after me with a shotgun. Now that seems a little farfetched as he won't
>come to New Mexico, where I have always lived and he also swore that if
>I came to California, then he would have a shotgun ready for me and/or
>have me arrested.
>
>But for what? I never once said that I would go see him, and I don't
>think that he owns all of California. He has threatened to do too many
>things to me, anything from Netdeath to reality death. And this hasn't
>been just because I left him, but because I wasn't lett him control me
>any longer.
>
>When he came here in January of '94, it was a happy time. Until I saw
>that he lived for control. I went on IRC one night just to check my
>mail and to say Hi to anyone I knew, I was kicked off by a dork who had
>taken over #talk. But because I didn't go into catatonics, Steve went
>crazy.
>
>He stomped around my room with fists clenched and there was a wild look
>in his eyes. Now I'm 6' and weigh approximately 200 (give or take 5
>lbs) lbs and I know how to defend myself. However, I was afraid of what
>Steve was going to do as he slammed his fist against the wall (which
>caused it to boom out loudly) and I knew that if he were to strike me, I
>wouldn't be in a good position to do anything against him considering
>he's 6'0 and weighs nearly 300lbs. Basically, I was not safe with him,
>or so I felt.
>
>Probably by now, all of you are bored stiff. I admit that this is not
>what you designed this talk-list for. But please, realize this. I did
>NOT cheat on Steve. He dumped me and there was someone here who was
>willing to go out with me. John is here, with me, in the same area as I
>am. He's not pushing marriage on me. Steve was going to make me either
>have his children or raise them, whereas I didn't want either. Also,
>John shares my love for animals, whereas Steve would rather seem them as
>roadkill. (snip)
>I leave the judgement up to God's hands, as we humans are too flawed to
>judge ourselves. Only the Purest may decide.
>
>Toni A. Anaya
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 13:00:31 -0600
Your comment would indicate that they *DID* switch. The article says only
that they're "considering", and even if the IT director does decide to
switch, that doesn't mean that those on the board of directors will agree.
"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Another one bites the dust!
>
> =====================================================
>
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/17629.html>
>
> By: John Leyden
> Posted: 15/03/2001 at 16:09 GMT
>
>
> "...The poverty relief organisation, which operates in 30 countries,
> is on the brink of the move after becoming increasing fed up with the
> effort needed to deal with recent virus outbreaks, and suffering
> infection from the Emmanuel bug"
>
> "Kerry Scott, IT director at Action Aid, said the effect of viruses on
> the charity had pushed him to consider using Linux far more seriously
> after initial reservations about the availability of suitable
> applications, particularly word processing packages..."
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
