Linux-Advocacy Digest #95, Volume #33 Mon, 26 Mar 01 01:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Brian Rourke)
Re: Linux dying (Brent R)
Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism) (Charlie Ebert)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (FM)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Brian Rourke)
Re: Linux dying (Brent R)
Re: Linux dying (Brent R)
Re: Has Linux anything to offer ? (Ed Allen)
Re: Linux dying (Brent R)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:00:38 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 04:22:17 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
*snip*
>
>The best hope right now is BeOS, have you tried it? It installs onto fat
>partitions and is pretty usable. The desktop is a little hard on the
>eyes.
>
Thanks for the advice. I haven't tried it, but I'll have a look.
>> I think that in the long run the chances will be better for Linux and
>> other alternatives if the companies trying to market distributions
>> were honest with people about as many of the headaches they may
>> encounter as possible. Sure it might hurt sales in the short run, but
>> in the long run irritated newbies will do more damage. I would love
>> to be told up front how much work and learning will be required, and
>> then I'm happy to do it. I remember back in the early days of the PC,
>> when software and operating systems came with relatively thorough
>> manuals. Now it's mostly slick, mindless crap. Even some good books
>> have trouble dealing with specific problems or
>
>What's worth doing is rarely easy. You shouldn't go into to ANYTHING
>thinking it will be a breeze! As Darth would say: "Never underestimate
>the power of the Dark Side."
>
Well, Darth was right. And in my little areas of specialization I
like to burrow into the difficult areas as much as anyone else, so I
can understand the desire not to have something dumbed-down just for
newbies.
I don't expect it to be a breeze, but I do expect road-maps that
non-specialists can understand. And I do expect full documentation
from companies, as well as full disclosure of any limits to its
function, especially when being installed on fairly common equipment.
However, you make a very good point in that Linux is obviously
something that requires the time, effort and money more commonly to
people in the industry or to hobbyists. I already have enough
hobbies, so maybe I need to throw in the towel for now.
>You could not be more right about manuals. Remember when PC software
>came with hardcover manuals and special boxes to protect them? These
>days Windows comes a friggin' pizza box with just a CD and a teeny'
>little pamphlet telling you how to cut and paste. Of course don't get me
>started on the Mandrake manual (have people in France ever heard of
>indexes?)
I remember those days well. It was possible to become self-educated
just by buying the software, without having to search for more and
more books, websites, etc just to tell you what a good manual used to
tell you before the Era of the Pizza Box in which we now suffer.
Yes, that Mandrake manual is a monument to incompetence.
>
>> >> Your posts are contemptible.
>> >
>> >This is Usenet, home of accusations of contemptibility. I'm taking you
>> >seriously. Really.
>> >
>>
>> Touché. Well I guess I missed that you were taking me seriously at
>> first. You're obviously a trained professional, and it may have
>> seemed to you like I was dumping on your field. That wasn't my
>> intention, and I'm sorry that's how it struck you. I hope you can see
>> that I wrote my original post in response to much frustration over
>> issues that probably seem childishly simple to you but are giving me a
>> big headache.
>
>Calm down, it's just a computer. Excitable people generally don't live
>too long, it's unhealthy. In the larger scheme of things computers
>matter so little it's pretty amazing. But computer are fun and you
>should enjoy them. People who like Linux generally enjoy the little
>problems they run into configuring it, it's like solving a puzzle or
>anything else related to technology (old cars, Harleys, that kind of
>thing).
>
>Relax. Breathe. Be calm. Think of the moment.
>
Yes, Zen master. Actually, it's possible to be annoyed and disgusted
while remaining calm, even when working with computers.
>If you get bored go back to Windows. You just may not be that into
>getting Linux to work, it's all right.
With all of the glitches in Windows, it's never boring...
I may check out these other distributions, or I may wait until newer
versions come out that can deal with my hardware...
>Also BeOS. Check it out.
>
>> As for your suggestion about assembling a new system with Linux in
>> mind, I think it's a good idea. Alas, it's not an affordable option
>> for me these days. I think that the way hardware is designed in a
>> proprietary way (if that makes sense to say) is sinister.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Brian
>
>If you can afford a computer from Gateway you can afford a much better
>homebuilt computer for the same amount.
Ahem. Some people use computers that belong to their employers.
Thanks a lot for all of your helpful advice.
Brian
The late spring sunshine flooded,
like a bursted tepid star,
the pink Boulevard. The people
beneath crawled like wounded insects
of cloth.
Wyndham Lewis
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:52:04 GMT
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : Seriously... it's a bargain market right now... the chance that
> : Microsoft will be in business 5 years from now is a lot better than a
> : Linux company's chance. Even though I have conflicing views on their
> : products, Microsoft is a sure bet and solid as a rock.
> : --
> : - Brent
>
> M$ has decent cashflow but NO serious potential for growth at this point.
Well, there's potential for MS stock to become undervalued, and if it
does it might be wise to snatch some up. Not just MS but a lot of solid
tech companies (ie. not RH or Turbolinux or Egrater) might become
undervalued. If so, that's the time to modestly purchase.
> It used to. But Linux, Java, IBM, and the near-saturation of the U.S.
> desktop market have changed all that.
>
> There is little potential for growth in revenue from sale of new PCs,
> because there aren't that many new PCs being sold (compared to years
> past). Most of the growth markets for PCs are in the Third World,
> where M$ is unlikely to derive significant revenue.
>
> There's little potential for growth in sales of MS Office, by far
> Microsoft's most profitable product line. Most of the people who want
> Office already have it, and most of those who have Office 95 or 97
> have little need for, or interest in, "upgrading" to 2000.
>
> There's little potential for growth in retail operating systems.
> Sales of W2K have been unimpressive, even counting business desktop
> preloads (and many of those get re-imaged right back to NT4).
>
> With Java being used for practically all new distributed software
> development, M$ has set out to kill it with .NET. In the process, it
> is killing VB, which is perhaps the *one* development tool that, in
> spite of its many flaws, stood a chance of generating a continuing
> stream of future revenues for M$. Its replacement, VB.NET, is a
> better language than VB, but it is not even close to being compatible
> with legacy VB code.
>
> In the server world, M$ has very little credibility. NT finally
> became capable of serving small networks as a fileserver and print
> server with NT4 SP5, but even then it was hideously costly (both in
> terms of the large number of NT boxes and licenses required, but the
> number of administrators those boxes required, compared to ANY other
> solution, even Netware). And it's been downhill ever since. W2K
> offers some advantages in theory, but very few in practice, and, as
> already noted, its sales have been insignificant.
I'd agree there. Unix vs. NT is a no brainer. Why go with something that
claims to be as good as the UNIX? It's just easier to stick with UNIX.
> As much as I'd like to credit Linux with being the catalyst for
> Microsoft's bleeding, it really is only getting started. Linux
> certainly helped expose Microsoft's incompetence in the server world,
> but that would have been fairly obvious even without Linux's help.
> With the expiration of various SSL-related patents and the
> availability of various Java (and other) Web application servers for
> Linux, the few remaining niches held by Microsoft's IIS and ASP
> technologies are likely to rapidly fade.
>
>
>
> Worst of all, Linux now has several important pieces of free desktop
> software that it lacked until recently - most notably the Konqueror
> Web browser (part of KDE2) and not one but *two* free office suites
> that are nearing 1.0 status - KOffice and Gnome Office. And since
> these are free, they are portable, and will run not only on Linux but
> FreeBSD and other Unix-like OSen as well. AbiSuite and Open Office,
> when finished, will even run on Windows, and Star Office, which is
> free in the sense of price but not freedom, already does, and has for
> some time. Most of these can even import and export MS Office
> formats.
I've never understood the Konqueror argument. Most Linux-users don't use
KDE because it's too "Windows-like", and I would rather not use KDE, so
for me Linux still lacks a decent browser. I've become disillusioned
with free software lately... if you're not paying for it chances are
that the authors aren't going to be in that great of a rush to address
the consumers problems. IOW the competitive edge of proprietary software
pushes it to make it better.
Now of course this is not always the case (especially in MS' case, they
are only now starting to address stability?). But... I've seen too much
flawed software to be that enthusiastic over free software. In terms of
office software for Linux, I will admit that my experience is limited to
Gnumeric and StarOffice 5.1 so I could be wrong.
> Thus, even on the desktop, there is no compelling reason for most
> folks to run Windows anymore, and, even if they do run Windows, there
> is no need for them to run any other Microsoft product.
MS seems to finally be getting the hint that there is a substantial
percentage of it's users that wants stability. They seem to be catching
up fast and they're finally ditching the MSDOS-16bit/Win32 hybrid kernel
for the superior NT kernel. So their products are catching up to what
would be considered decent software.
Linux did at least accomplish some of it's mission, it got MS to clean
up it's act in terms of stability (at least... somewhat). Being a
passionate follower of this or that software product always seemed silly
to me, I just want something that works.
> The Wintrolls here might not realize this, but Microsoft certainly
> does, and that is why every major M$ exec is dumping shares as quickly
> as he possibly can.
>
> Joe
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
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: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:53:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>[1] Subject to the possibility of a world-wide oxygen drought,
>>I may restrict my support.
>
>That depends on if you believe in free speech. As a believer in free
>speech, I must, in an abstract way, at least, be a Kulkis advocate,
>merely by defending his right to use oxygen and waste bandwidth on
>Usenet.
>
>--
>T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Well put.
But I believe with all the emulation of AK's e-mail address and
these bogus wintroll postings, I do believe there is an waste of
oxygen somewhere.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: 26 Mar 2001 05:45:43 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "." wrote:
>>>
>>> Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > The best hope right now is BeOS, have you tried it? It installs onto fat
>>> > partitions and is pretty usable. The desktop is a little hard on the
>>> > eyes.
>>>
>>> Are you insane? Be has all but abandoned beos development in favor of
>>> BeAI. BeOS is an incredibly niche operating system and will never, ever
>>> see anything but video streaming and the errant desktop or two.
>
>> Really? I didn't know that. Honestly I've only used BeOS literally 3
>> times, I was offering it as a suggestion.
>
>> Incidentally, what is BeAI?
>
>Its the operating environment that apparantly all forthcoming Sony
>entertainment hardware will be running. They just signed a huge contract.
Just for the record, it's BeIA, presumably for "Information Appliances."
Dan.
--
Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of
Congress. But I repeat myself.
-- Mark Twain
------------------------------
From: Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:04:41 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 04:10:47 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Brian Rourke wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 03:30:37 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Brian Rourke wrote:
>> ><snip>
>> >> I have tried to install three different Linux distributions on my PC,
>> >> and each attempt has failed in exactly the same way. Though my hard
>> >> drive is partitioned in exactly the way the manuals instruct, the
>> >> installation software always fails to detect my hard drive and
>> >> reboots.
>> >
>> >1) Did you get an error message?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> >2) If so, what exactly did it say?
>>
>> No device found on which filesystems can be installed, or something to
>> that effect.
>
>When you get an error message when computing it's usually helpful to
>remember *exactly* what it said, no matter what system you're using.
Yes, you're right, I know. I'll try to copy it down. Unfortunately,
the screen goes blank pretty quickly after the message comes up.
>
>> >3) If not, why do you think it fails to see your hard drive?
>>
>> I think it's a matter of hardware compatibility.
>>
>> Brian
>
>Did you have a formatted Ext2 partition on that disk? And what programs
>are you using specifically and in what order?
I have a primary partition, and an extended partition with three
logical drives on it. All of them are formatted FAT32 for Windows,
and only the primary partition has programs on it, Windows and all of
my software. I'm not sure how to figure out where the programs are on
the drive, sorry.
The late spring sunshine flooded,
like a bursted tepid star,
the pink Boulevard. The people
beneath crawled like wounded insects
of cloth.
Wyndham Lewis
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:57:02 GMT
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R wrote:
> >
> >Seriously... it's a bargain market right now... the chance that
> >Microsoft will be in business 5 years from now is a lot better than a
> >Linux company's chance. Even though I have conflicing views on their
> >products, Microsoft is a sure bet and solid as a rock.
> >--
> >- Brent
> >
>
> Seriously, anybody who thinks Linux will just blow away is a
> total fool.
Don't think I said that it would. I'm talking stocks here...
> Even if the commercial market turned away from the product,
> Linux will still be there and be developed. It already has
> a loyal user base and that user base is unshakable.
No doubt, or until Linus decides he's tired of developing the kernel.
Then Linux may be in trouble, and Linus does now have a family.
> Anytime you put a FREE product on the market against a commercialized,
> expensive, copyrighted product - the FREE product will win.
God I can't believe you actually believe this. People are willing to pay
for quality. What you get with Microsoft is... well I'm not sure. Maybe
with the newer Windows it will mean quality but for the time-being it's
familiarity.
I'm talking $$$ here not OS politics.
> And Microsoft will eventually turn into an applications vendor
> just as I predicted. They've already pretty much said so.
Huh?
<snip>
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:00:17 GMT
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <%ntv6.29040$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <3abe4f75$0$48801$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jan Johanson wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Seriously... it's a bargain market right now... the chance that
> >> >> >Microsoft will be in business 5 years from now is a lot better than a
> >> >> >Linux company's chance. Even though I have conflicing views on their
> >> >> >products, Microsoft is a sure bet and solid as a rock.
> >> >> >--
> >> >> >- Brent
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Seriously, anybody who thinks Linux will just blow away is a
> >> >> total fool.
> >> >
> >> >blow away? disappear? not likely, not soon at least. but, so what... what
> >> >good is it if you have a great underground user base of loyal linux users...
> >> >so? all we can hope for as that they'll just go away quietly to their own
> >> >little world... far far away from reality...
> >> >
> >>
> >> The only thing which will blow away far, far from reality is you.
> >>
> >> Microsoft has already developed the common sense to admit they
> >> were defeated when they announced they would support Linux under
> >> the .NET initiative.
> >
> >How quaint and naive. I don't know what's funnier, the fact that
> >you believe that, or the fact that you posted it on the Internet
> >for everyone to see.
> >
> >ROFL...
> >
> >-c
> >
> >
>
> Well,
>
> If I'm quite "naive" as you put it, then why in the fuck is Microsoft
> doing it?
>
> Chad. Let me say one more time that your the biggest most ignorant
> jackass of a wintroll on the internet.
>
> It is quite possible you will be preaching the benefits of Windows
> even AFTER Microsoft decides to quit selling an operating system
> emulation.
>
> It is my most sincere wish that you treat train crossing warnings
> with the same regard as you treat the Linux threat against Microsoft.
Does someone make a "Linux for angry, unstable people" distro?
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Has Linux anything to offer ?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:01:02 GMT
I had read a rumor that M$ was hiring Linux users so they could speak
from familiarity when they posted and would be believed more readily.
Until I read Brent's post it seemed too Machiavellian for any company,
even M$.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bash, gcc, gdb, grep, awk, sed, piping, redirection, etc. etc.:
>EXCELLENT but also available for Windows.
>
>So, no, not really.
>
This is a classic lie. Start with the truth and then claim that the
criminal ripoff is "just as good" as the real thing.
It almost makes sense when the real thing costs much more than the
cheap imitation but stands out as the attempted con job it is when
Windows costs much more.
As has been pointed out in another thread, M$ has no truly
multitasking system except NT and even the implementation there is
poor.
If you start formatting a floppy then everything else on the machine
suffers, even updating the application windows on the screen.
M$ version of "piping" runs the entire lefthand side of the "pipe"
into an OS named temp file and then the righthand side is run with
that temp file as its input.
That is M$ redefining pipes not piping as used by multitasking OSes.
>> Is the fact that Linux is free and used by people who do not want to pay for
>> anything the only reason it is used?
>
>Not at all, most people who use Linux probably have illegal versions of
>"other OS's" sitting around like *cough* *cough*. We don't like to pay
>for shite.
>
Now that he has established "credibility" by use of the above lie
which ended by him "admitting" that Linux was not superior he can
clinch the con by "admitting" to being a thief.
His pretense that the rest of the Linux community is as dishonest
and stupid as he appears is supposed to be accepted because of his
previous "admissions".
>> Finally where would the sales of home computers be today if the only
>> operating system was Linux?
>
>I don't know, probably much lower as it's learning curve is much
>steeper.
>
Yes Brent believes that everything with a steep learning curve is
obviously inferior to whatever is easier to learn.
Like the Sopwith Camel that Snoopy pretended to fly is obviously
superior to a 767 jet because the learning curve is not only not
as steep but the journey from novice to mastery is so much shorter.
Remember that Brent is pretending to be a stupid thief. Still
clever enough to learn Linux but somehow stupider than the reader he
wants to keep away from trying Linux.
I don't think we have a term for a paid spreader of disinformation
whose job includes branding himself a stupid thief and then claiming
to be just a typical community member.
Any suggestions what we should call these ? Conman is too generic
and WinConMan is is not catchy enough. WinConner ?
--
GPL says
"What's mine is ours,
If you make *OUR* stuff better the result is still ours."
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:04:17 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3abe4f75$0$48801$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Seriously... it's a bargain market right now... the chance that
> > > >Microsoft will be in business 5 years from now is a lot better than a
> > > >Linux company's chance. Even though I have conflicing views on their
> > > >products, Microsoft is a sure bet and solid as a rock.
> > > >--
> > > >- Brent
> > > >
> > >
> > > Seriously, anybody who thinks Linux will just blow away is a
> > > total fool.
> >
> > blow away? disappear? not likely, not soon at least. but, so what... what
> > good is it if you have a great underground user base of loyal linux users...
> > so? all we can hope for as that they'll just go away quietly to their own
> > little world... far far away from reality...
> >
> > >
> > > Even if the commercial market turned away from the product,
> > > Linux will still be there and be developed. It already has
> > > a loyal user base and that user base is unshakable.
> > >
> > > Anytime you put a FREE product on the market against a commercialized,
> > > expensive, copyrighted product - the FREE product will win.
> >
> > really? EVERY time? can you name some others?
>
> Let's see, StarOffice.. oh no, that's right...
StarOffice is more popular than Office?
> How 'bout Linux, for example? Oh no, that's right...
Linux is more popular than Windows?
> BSD? Nope.
BSD is more popular than Windows?
> Or WinE? Nope.
Does anyone feel the need to run Linux apps under Windows? Well, except
for CYGWIN of course.
> Apache even? Not in the corporate world, at least.
Yeah you're right with that one. MS is not a server company just yet.
> That's just to name a few off the top of my head.
>
> -c
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
