Linux-Advocacy Digest #960, Volume #32 Wed, 21 Mar 01 03:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux (Ed Allen)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Craig Oshima")
Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism (.)
More FUD from Ballmer (Ray Chason)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Craig Oshima")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("John S. Dyson")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("John S. Dyson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:01:02 GMT
In article <jXAt6.2613$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <rBnt6.88480$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Not everyone uses supercomputers. For the masses, Win2K is the fastest
>> >clustering solution you can buy (or can't buy, as the case may be).
>> >See www.tpc.org.
>>
>> At $20K per CPU I hardly think masses of people will even look at
>> W2K.
>
>Then that would exclude Unix, which is way more expensive than that.
>Win2K has been growing rapidly in that space due to its low-cost,
>super-performing results.
>
Since M$ made a big noise when they sold the millionth license
less than two months ago we can all figure out what a hot item it is
NT 4 has sold more than that over the same period.
Ir won't "take off" until it is preinstalled on almost every
desktop.
That is the plan for XP isn't it ?
--
GPL says
"What's mine is ours,
If you make *OUR* stuff better the result is still ours."
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 02:04:06 -0500
green wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > green wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Which really sucks if you own a Pentium III, doesn't it....
> > >
> > > no one had a pIII at that time. but it was as I recall optimised for a p
> pro
> > > so it dosn't suck as much as running it on a 486.
> >
> > Are you saying that people who run NT servers RIGHT NOW, TODAY aren't
> > using PIII's to run them???
> >
>
> no just running it on a pII or pIII or athlon or what ever dosn't "suck" as
> mush as unning it on a system that was around in the day it was made.
>
Regardles... NT doesn't take full advantage of advanced processors,
becuase you can't recompile the code for the processor in your box.
How much you wanna bet that Microsoft's much bally-hood performance
benchmarks *DO* use kernals that are recompiled for the target CPU?
In which case, those benchmarks have little relevance to the customers
who are get CD's with 80486 code and NOTHING ELSE.
> nothing to do with nt just technology we run stuff on has progressed to
> where what was slow and clumbsy is now bearable due to faster and biger
> (memory wise) hardware.
>
> People who run < nt4 should be considering ther options by now....
People who run Neutered Technology should have their balls cut off.
--
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.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Craig Oshima" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Craig Oshima" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 23:16:51 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Craig Oshima wrote:
> > If you ever get the chance to observe a usability test, especially one
> > examining a product you're involved with, you should try to find the
time to
> > do it. Nothing opens your eyes like seeing user after user (selected
from
> > representative populations) struggling on the same things over and
> > over--things that are so obvious to you and me.
>
> "struggling on the same things."
>
> I thought Windows was an "intuitive interface" with such a shallow
> learning curve that even the complete novice can be self-sufficient
> within minutes.
>
> Now, Craig...try being HONEST WITH YOURSELF, and realize that what you
> just said CONTRADICTS EVERY SINGLE CLAIM WHICH YOU AND OTHER WINDOWS
> SUPPORTERS HAVE MADE ABOUT ITS SO-CALLED "EASE OF USE"
>
> Craig...are you there....are you willing to be HONEST WITH YOURSELF?
>
> Or is your self-identity so entertwined in the Microsoft cult that
> you will make such a glaring admission and STILL insist that Microsoft's
> products are "easy for novices to use."
Yeesh.
Alright Aaron...First of all, I think I've made it patently clear in this
thread that I have not sold my soul to Microsoft. I am not arguing that
Windows has some amazingly wonderful user interface. And I wouldn't be
wasting my time in *.linux if I wasn't hoping to find something better. I
never suggested that "novices can be self-sufficient in minutes" with
Windows...try not to put words in my mouth. You can SHOUT at me and you
call me rude names, but for *normal* users, I stand by my opinion that
Windows is more approachable and has a shallower learning curve.
Second, as to my experience with seeing users struggling in usability tests,
the fact is that no one can foresee every user problem, even if *you* are
the only user. I don't care if you're developing on Windows, Macintosh,
Unix, BeOS, or whatever else. And the whole point of doing these tests is
to find problems so you can resolve them. I'm guessing that you don't
actually design or develop application software though (because you are
clearly doing IT support), so the whole concept of user interface design may
be lost on you. The honest truth is that when you design and build
applications on ANY platform, you have to understand your users and their
needs. (Most "world-class universities" these days call this "gathering
requirements".) You should then verify that your design works by testing it
to uncover major problems, then fixing them (this is called "iterative
design").
Lastly, I'm going to respond to a few of your comments from other threads in
this same topic here. Sorry for breaking the threads, but I'm not going to
keep wasting my time debating with you all over the place.
Regarding my claim that normal users will not test drive 15 GUIs, you say:
>Yes, they are all pining for all the car companies to make the exact same
>model, and for all the TV manufacturers to make the same exact design,
>and that the grocery store to sell only one variety of one brand of
>bread, and every other product.
Right. You're expecting me to accept that the average car buyer test drives
15 cars? Or tries 15 varieties of bread? You are correct in asserting that
variety is important...I agree. But the different varieties of bread and
car are TARGETED for different tastes or demographics. I want a particular
kind of car, and it narrows down my choices...my wife wants a different
kind, and it narrows down our combined choices. We test drive two or three
cars...not all cars that are manufactured. Are Unix GUIs differentiated in
such a way that users can browse a catalog to narrow their choices, and find
one or two that are designed with their typical needs in mind? Explained
all in one place and all in language they can understand? No. (Although
this might be a good approach for Linux to support widely divergent user
populations.)
> So, why should *YOU* and *I* be forced to use the SAME GUI when we
> have different wants?
As stated above...we shouldn't. In fact, I've been arguing all along that
things *you* like in an interface are not necessarily appropriate for normal
users. You and I, on this conclusion at least, are in violent agreement.
> Craig, you talk like an inexperienced, uneducated cultist.
>
<deletia>
>
>IS ****ANY**** of this getting through your thick, maggot-infested skull?
I'm *so* trying to be civil, that I'll again pass on the invitation to
devolve into pointless name-calling.. But I confess that I *am* getting
tired of your far-flung and abusive mouth.. If you are as unpleasant in
person as you are online, I feel sorry for people that have to deal with
you. You have some infamy for colorful flames on various newsgroups, so I
guess that's just your style. But I have more important things to do than
waste my time sparring with you, so consider yourself killfiled.
Regards,
--
Craig Oshima
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism
Date: 21 Mar 2001 07:45:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "." wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > "." wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> > "." wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > "." wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > Shades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > 8<SNIP>8
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > First of all, Aaron R. Kulkis is considered a
>> >> >> >> >> > blithering idiot by both COLA and COMNA
>> >> >> >> >> > participants. Secondly, if you think that
>> >> >> >> >> > there are no irrational, childish, idiotic
>> >> >> >> >> > NT advocates, then you might want to lurk
>> >> >> >> >> > about on some of the various IRC nets.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Actually, kulkis and chad meyers are almost exactly the same person.
>Substitute
>> >> >> >> >> "linux" for "windows" appropriately, and you absolutely cannot tell them
>> >> >> >> >> apart.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Wrong.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> You appear to be the only one who thinks so, again, just like chad.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > I know what the fuck I'm talking about.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> With a few things yes, just like chad. But but your paranoid political
>philosophies
>> >> >> >> are IDENTICAL to chads.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > I have the university
>> >> >> >> > education
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> So does chad, and so do I.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > AND the real-world experience to know what the fuck
>> >> >> >> > I'm talking about.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Chad says he does too.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Chad, on the other hand, spews Microsoft propaganda.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> You spout the same paranoid conspiracy theorist crap.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > I wonder how much they pay him each month to post his propaganda.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Ah, theres that paranoia again.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > And yes, Microsoft DOES pay people to post on this and other newsgroups.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Alright kulkis, ive asked you before and youve patently refused, but how
>bout
>> >> >> >> some absolute evidence of this statement?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > You forget the discovery of the "astroturfing" campaign so quickly?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > For those who don't get it...that was Microsoft's decision to start
>> >> >> > financing a campaign of paid correspondance to *LOOK LIKE* "grassroots"
>> >> >> > support.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > fake grass => astroturf.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Right, I remember that, but I also dont remember seeing ANY kind of evidence
>> >> >> that there were ever microsoft plants in COLA. I'm not saying that it hasnt
>> >>
>> >> > Got alzheimer's?
>> >>
>> >> Got a link? Thats all im really asking for. Lets say for the moment that I am
>> >> moderately retarded and have no capacity for retention at all.
>>
>> > Then discussing anything with you is pointless, isn't it.
>>
>> Now aaron, you're coming dangerously close to simply admitting that you have exactly
>> zero evidence to back up your claim. I'm ready to believe it, really I am, but
>> I do not believe that which I read simply because YOU type it.
>>
>> Seriously, I really would like to see a link or SOMETHING.
> http://www.google.com/
> search for Microsoft astroturf
> http://www.computerworld.com/cwi/story/0,1199,NAV47-74_STO30565,00.html
Yes yes, I know about all of these. Theres nothing in any of them lending any evidence
in support of the theory that there are people being payed by microsoft to post FUD in
COLA.
Thats the point. Again, I would very much like to believe this, but have seen no
evidence
at all (let alone hard) of its truth.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: More FUD from Ballmer
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:56:45 -0000
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20010320S0002
Long on FUD, short on specifics. The thrust is that IBM's support
of Linux doesn't matter much, Linux is a toy, we here at Microsoft
can't steal^H^H^H^H^Hinnovate it, etc.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Craig Oshima" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Craig Oshima" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 23:47:21 -0800
> Oh, really. All workers need is M$-Office, and nothing more?
> So...they access the various databases through what, exactly?
> Do they go in with word-pad and edit the raw binary files?
Who says they need to access databases? Could you be making some kind of
half-assed assumption here? Is it possible that not everyone that uses a
computer has the same requirements you (or your users, pity them) has?
<deletia>
>
>> It certainly at
>> least meets what I would call "basic functionality." I grant that it's
>> another hour or so for me to continue adding development tools, MSDN,
>> various Adobe applications and some miscellaneous utilities. I don't
>> imagine you're happy with just the basic Linux install?
>
> You are obviously a complete brain-dead idiot who has not spent
> a SINGLE day working in a corporate IT department.
Gee, given that I'm installing C++, Interdev, Photoshop and so on, whatever
gives you that idea? You're right!!! Well, not about being a brain-dead
idiot (despite what you think), but I've NEVER worked in a corporate IT
department, and fortunately, I've never HAD to. It may be hard for you to
understand, but there are actually people (and...can you believe this
craziness?...we consider ourselves engineers too!) that have to design and
implement the programs that you have to install and support.
I *have* however, had to SUFFER with corporate IT departments in the
past...Oh, the stories!
>
> Now, you donkey-raping shit-eater, go cash your cheesy little check
> from Bill for Shilling for his MANY-TIMES CONVICTED criminal enterprise,
> and SHUT THE FUCK UP until you are willing to discuss truth and facts.
>
> IS ANY OF THIS GETTING THROUGH YOUR THICK, MAGGOT-INFESTED HEAD?!?!?!!?
It'd be nice if Bill sent me checks, but he don't. It'd also be nice if you
suddenly grew up, but I imagine that won't happen either.
--
Craig Oshima
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "John S. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 01:59:30 -0500
"-kn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message =
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> .-
> | "Jeffrey Siegal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> | news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> || Les Mikesell wrote: > There is no reason to associate the success =
of Linux
> || with anything > in the GPL, particularly since Linus has made it =
clear that
> || the > kernel can be extended through the module interface without > =
creating
> || a derived work on the other side of the interface.
> ||=20
> || No it can't, really. The COPYING file that comes with the kernel =
only
> || clarifies that the GPL does not apply to user programs, and does =
not
> || specifically mention modules:
> |
> | There is nothing special about modules in this respect. They use =
normal
> | system calls.
>=20
> modules are 'linked' against the kernel, live in the same address =
space, use
> also internal kernel functions and not just normal system calls.
>=20
Actually, Linus relaxed some of the GPL restrictions against the Linux =
kernel
sometime after alot of other people had contributed code to the Linux =
kernel
under the GPL. No-one has complained, but it really wouldn't have done =
anyone
interested in the Linux kernel any good... It was at least a minor =
violation of
at least the spirit of the GPL, and likely a legal violation.
John
------------------------------
From: "John S. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 02:00:49 -0500
"Peter Seebach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message =
news:3ab84a3b$0$48741$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Then I wonder who or what does. I am guaranteed that I can always =
patch
> >a bug in gcc.
>=20
> No, you're guaranteed that you can always patch a bug if you happen to
> have access to a patched version. There are versions of gcc for which
> you cannot get source, because the people to whom they are distributed
> are choosing not to further distribute them or their source, which is
> permitted.
>=20
> >Can you patch a bug in the BSDLed code from Microsoft's ftp.exe?
>=20
> No. So? I can't patch a bug in the original gcc based on work Cygnus
> has done for someone else, unless that someone else gives me a copy of
> the work done for them. I can, however, do whatever I want with the
> BSDL'd code - the code is free.
>=20
> >>Source code distribution isn't required by the GPL... Go ask Cygnus
> >>for all of their GPLed source code: they don't have to give it to =
you.
>=20
> >Should I copy section 3a of the GPL for you or are you willing to =
read
> >it yourself and come back then?
>=20
> Read it more carefully. If I give you a piece of GPL'd code, I am =
obliged
> to give *YOU* source.
>=20
> Neither of us is obliged to further share this with anyone else.
>=20
In fact, if someone has paid Cygnus for support (that is BIG bucks), =
then they
are probably not very likely to give the source code away to the 'little =
guy' who
cannot afford the cost of access.
John
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
