Linux-Advocacy Digest #248, Volume #33 Sun, 1 Apr 01 07:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism (Mathew)
Re: Communism (Mathew)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Java, the "Dot-Com" Language? ("gbp")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Formatting a floppy (GreyCloud)
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Jeffrey Siegal)
Re: Multitasking (GreyCloud)
Re: FW: Ethics of Circumventing OS (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro (Matthew Gardiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,misc.survivalism
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 20:12:00 +1000
On Sun, 1 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Roger Perkins wrote:
> >
> > Just a hint here, Max. aaron is very good at playing with words. For
> > example, he calls people communists AND nazis. He then gets his no doubt
>
> Two sides of the same totalitarian socialist coin.
>
> If Communism and Nazism are fundamentally opposed to each other, then
> why did Hitler and Stalin freely borrow repressive techniques and
> population control techniques from each other?
Because if these techniques worked,why not use them?
The same reason U.S. military strategists study every powerful military
entity since the Babylonians to Hitler,to Ho Chi Min.
The same reason why the U.S. kidknapped German scientists during WW11.
>
> Obviously, they are MUCH more closely related than what fucking
> asshole communist sympathizers like you are willing to admit.
>
>
>
> > very small balls in an uproar because communist and socialist are
> > interchangeable terms when discussing this topic. Child can't make up his
> > mind. Trash him like I did and it's alot easier to have an adult
> > conversation here.
> >
> > Roger "I vas just followink ORDERS!" Perkins
> > CHAIRBORNE!
> >
> > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001
> > > >Roger Perkins wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Again you illustrate both your stupidity and your ignorance. Ignoring
> > your
> > > >> childish use of caps, show me that law that makes democracy illegal? I
> > > >
> > > >Let's see...Roger swore to uphold and defend the Constitution from all
> > > >enemies, foreign and domestic...and even claims to teach at a college,
> > > >and the old fuckhead doesn't even know what the Constitution says.
> > > >
> > > >Care to cite ANY section or sections of the US Constitution which
> > > >supposedly establish the US as a "democracy" ???
> > > [...]
> > > >Note that there is NO provision for the people to directly vote on
> > > >anything. Therefore, the US Federal government is *NOT* a democracy.
> > >
> > > What about the one where we elect representatives? Since every citizen
> > > has a right to vote in these elections, the US Federal government is a
> > > democracy. A democratic republic, in fact.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > >See above. Any STATE government which attempts to practice "Democracy"
> > > >will be struck down.
> > >
> > > In which state does a citizen not have a vote? Besides Florida, I mean.
> > >
> > > >Case in Point: Colorado recently passed a law regarding homosexual rights
> > > >by "popular referendum". It was struck down the US Supreme Court on
> > > >the basis of Article IV, Section 4--that the law was (supposedly) passed
> > > >using 'democratic' methods (which are illegal) instead of the
> > Constitutionally
> > > >mandated republican procedure of getting the law passed in the
> > LEGISLATURE.
> > > >
> > > >Any State or Federal "law" which is not passed by the legislature is,
> > > >in fact, not a law.
> > >
> > > Nor is any state or federal law which *IS* passed by the legislature,
> > > but then later, as in this case, struck down by the courts.
> > >
> > > And, yes, referendums are proof that the US is a democracy.
> > >
> > > --
> > > T. Max Devlin
> > > *** The best way to convince another is
> > > to state your case moderately and
> > > accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 20:15:49 +1000
True
On Sun, 1 Apr 2001, Brian Turner wrote:
>
> > Did you know that in Russia, Ronald Reagan is more popular than
> > ANY of their political leaders in the last 20 years...
> >
> > Do you know why?
>
> Because the Russian Communists are rats, they came to power by coup, imposed
> puppet dictatorships on their neighbors, and ran their country for their own
> enrichment rather than the public good. Reagan was against these rats so he
> must be a good guy.
>
> The idea that Reagan is a freedom fighter is ridiculous. He did the same
> thing the Russians did in Eastern Europe-- imposed puppet dictatorships on
> neighbors. Only his puppets (Rios Montt, Roberto D'Aubussion, Mario
> Sandoval, Napolean Duarte, etc.) were far more violent and psychopathic than
> the EE stooges.
>
> The Contras activities consisted of sneaking across the border from
> Hondurus, blowing up stuff, assasinating Sandinista nurses, teachers, gov't
> workers, etc. and then retreating. All against an elected government (via
> 1984 internationally monitored elections). It takes major propaganda to get
> this spun as "freedom fighting". Unlike Cuba or EE, the Sandinista's NEVER
> banned opposition parties. And promised to have elections every 6 years.
> The 1986 election was moved up to 1984 to try to appease Reagan. They
> determined that Reagan not only wanted an election, but the right side had
> to win. Had the Sandinistas won the 1990 election, Bush would have
> denounced it as fake (despite int'l monitoring on this one too) and
> continued contra attacks.
>
> The Afghan "freedom fighters" are currently running Afghanistan. Does it
> seem "free" to you? Now, this case is different from Latin America in that
> there truly was Russian imperialism there, but if one cares about freedom,
> you don't support a resistence group with no popular base and a program even
> more evil than the one being expelled. The motivation of these "freedom
> fighters" was not Russian imperialism per se, it was the #1 crime of the
> Russian imperialist regime, namely, educating women.
>
> If you want to say Reagan is a freedom fighter because he brought the USSR
> down, then please explain how. Most historians think it fell because Gorby
> told the Russian people they'd no longer go to the gulag for protesting.
> So, they protested the fact that they had no civil rights, the grocery
> stores were empty, and the regime was enriching themselves. Gorby was
> unwilling to use violence to suppress it (unlike the Central American juntas
> who would bash your kid's head in with a rock, rape and bayonet your wife to
> death in front of you, then slice your intestines out and leave the whole
> pile in public in a bloody heap for demonstration effect).
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:19:12 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> If I'm so "anti-government", porker, then why am I *IN* the government.
>
> Betcha don't have an answer for that. do you....
If that's the case, why do you lie about that government service, wannabe
"war-hero". No go polish the wreath border around that Presidential Unit
Citation you claim to have been awarded, wannabe.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:21:07 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Yeah, right Perko...I'm so "anti-government" that I'm a currently serving
> soldier...going on my 3rd enlistment.
And still not an NCO. What's that tell you.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:23:44 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Especially those in the Special Forces Groups.
>
> Hope that helps
Then you have spoken to them I suppose. Name 1 dozen Special Forces
soldiers currently serving with whom you have spoken.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:26:58 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> ...so says the supposed officer who has never even served in a war zone.
Where have I served? When? When have I been shot at? Where? You haven't
a clue, wannabe "war-hero".
------------------------------
From: "gbp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Java, the "Dot-Com" Language?
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:30:02 GMT
>Sun is, no doubt, taking a big hit to its bottom line.
>
>Perhaps Dell, which has be same profit level as Sun BEFORE the
downturn,
>will buy Sun for it's midline server hardware business, which it
would
>promptly convert to Linux, an OS that delivers on its promises.
Since this thread is already WAYYY off topic I'd like to add my
view...
Most of the good IT companies, read IBM, Oracle, SUN. Are trading
about at the same point or higher than two years ago when this media
fueled internet bubble started.
People shouldn't be so suprised that pets.com etc etc didn't make
it. Is it really that much harder to get dog food at the
supermarket?
I think a lot of good came out of this. There are all kinds of
development tools that weren't around 2-3 years ago, esp. in
relation to server side web programming. A lot of people learned a
lot of cool stuff even if the projects they worked on were financial
failures.
I think that its unfortunate that so many people are in the stock
market that don't use common sense or take the time to read up on
what they are doing with their own money. A lot of people get their
financial advise from TV and thats just sad.
I'd like to see the government take a more active role in directing
the IT industry towards some more productive things. Needly to say
the talent to do this hasn't been around for a long time. You have
Gore who pretty much alienated the whole IT industry with his pompus
attitude (you think he had 10 years of programming experience from
the way he talks). And Bush is pretty much on the other extreme. He
doesn't pretend to know anything about IT and he doesn't even
pretend to care-- at least he's honest.
I'd like to see the government contribute tools to help the US keep
its lead in the software industry. If they can send someone to the
moon why can't they write a decent OS or JVM.
Linux has gotten pretty far without anyone getting paid to write it
(well almost no one). I think that a lot of people would be will to
work on the government pay scale for a while if they were involved
in a really interesting and usefull project. When the project is
done the license could be free in the US and fee-based for other
countries.
OK sorry, way off topic. To sum up: java is better than c++ :)
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:33:34 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> So, what you're saying, then, is that we AREN'T supporting an
> insurgency in Chile. I notice how you snipped where you said that
> the reason the USSR didn't like us was because we were supporting
> insurgencies.
What did we support in Chile, KuKuNt? Do you even have a clue. Now take
the both sides of the coin...what did we support in Nicaragua? El Salvador?
Guatemala? You are clueless.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:35:00 -0700
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> : >
> : > Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : >
> : > : Start doing all of these things on Windows anything, adding one at a
> : > : time. Any bets on when it starts sputtering, slowing down to the
> : > : point of uselessness, or totally locking up and crashing?
> : >
> : > In such a case, any operating system would be bogged down
> : > immensely, simply because the nature of those tasks requires
> : > much CPU power and RAM.
>
> : Amiga and OS/2 can do this. Can Win-anythng? Did not think so...
>
> I know for a fact that this is nonsense. I used
> to operate an Amiga 2000 Video Toaster unit for
> video post-production, and I was never able to
> put such incredible strain on the system without
> causing major performance troubles.
>
> Running ADPro, Imagine, and DOpus alone was strain
> enough, even with 36MB of RAM on board, let alone
> firing up the toaster switcher and Lightwave 2.0.
>
> : > : that scan is gonna look good? U think that MP3 will be smooth. U
> : >
> : > Uh, speed has no effect on "how it looks" in scanning.
> : > What affects the appearance of a scan is the density
> : > of the scan, such as 150dpi vs. 600dpi vs. 2400dpi.
>
> : Yes but on Win-anything you cannot scan and do anything else.
>
> That's not the point. You claimed that the rate
> at which a scanner picks up color affects the
> quality of the final image, which is nonsense.
>
> : > And an mp3 file's quality is going to be dictated by
> : > the parameters used in compressing it, not by the
> : > speed in which it's compressed you moron.
>
> : Not at all. Win-anything typically skips when playing MP3's if you
> : are doing much of anything else.
>
> *sigh*
>
> You need to keep to the topics that you initiate.
>
> You claimed, again, that speed directly affects
> the quality of data which is either collected
> or modified, which is complete and utter bullshit.
>
> : > : think u can type full-speed in the WP. What do you think those videos
> : > : will look and sound like? U think u won't burn a coaster in your CD
> : >
> : > Choppy, as they would under any OS under such strain.
>
> : They look good on OS/2, Amiga, and maybe BeOS. Do they look good on
> : Win-anything? Course not.
>
> "Maybe BeOS"? First you say it does, and
> now you suggest that you're simply guessing
> that it would, based on your own mindless
> delusions?
>
> *sigh* This guy is too much.
>
> As I said, no OS would be able to do what you are
> suggesting on PC hardware. Ever. You're simply
> talking out of the wrong oriface.
>
> : > : drive? U think u will be able to play any of those games at all? You
> : > : are wrong.
> : >
> : > : Or try this. Open up more than 260 programs all at once and run them
> : > : and work on them at the same time on an ordinary PC system. U think
> : > : Win-anything can do this?
> : >
> : > : Yet there are OS's that do this all the time, and easily. And u can
> : > : buy and run them right now.
> : >
> : > Really? Please enlighten us, what OS would this be exactly?
>
> : OS/2 can run 250-300 programs at once without a lot of problems. I
> : know a guy who did it. And he did not have a lot of memory or a very
> : fast chip. Can Win-anything do that? No. And I know the Amiga can
>
> "I heard" usually means "it's bullshit".
>
> I can tell about all of the things we've all
> "heard" about GNU/Linux, only to find out that
> they were either untested, untrue, or merely
> theorectical suppositions.
>
> : run 110 programs at once on 50 MHZ and 16 MB, without even slowing
> : much. Can Win-anything do that? No.
>
> Again, prove it. Show me a resepctable
> source that has actually done this, and
> I mean something other than your own
> anecdotal supposition.
>
> : >
> : > BeOS?
>
> : BeOS can multitask better than Win-anything.
>
> Really? How exactly? Please explain exactly
> how well tasks are threaded in BeOS, and why
> they are better than threads under WindowsNT.
>
> Or are you simply saying this, because it
> makes you feel smarter?
>
> Note to BeOS users: I'm not knocking BeOS,
> just trying to see if talkers are walkers.
>
> : > You are full of shit, plain and simple. There is no way that
> : > any operating system could handle all of those situations
> : > simultaneously, unless it was running as efficiently as
> : > theoretically possible on at least a 4-way SMP box, with
> : > at least an 80% performance gain on each chip (and if
> : > you had a clue, you'd know that most SMP systems only
> : > add 30% to 40% of a performance gain per chip on a
> : > typical klunking PC.
> : >
> : > Not Linux. Not BSD/OS. Not WindowsNT. Nothing can be
> : > expected to perform flawlessly under those conditions
> : > on PC hardware.
>
> : OS/2 and Amiga OS routinely run under similar loads. Does OS/2 start
> : swapping like mad? Of course it does! But it stays up!
>
> Uh huh. Unless you can provide proof of this, either
> through a specific scenario that someone else can test,
> or through a white paper explaining why OS/2 could
> handle such a load, your argument is nothing but a
> very large steaming pile of caca. And there is little
> else that most OS/2 advocates offer these days.
>
> : > Please. Give us a small break from this nonsense.
> : >
> : > It's obvious that you have absolutely no idea
> : > what you're talking about, so please spare this
> : > group from your idiotic notions, and come back
> : > when you have a clue.
> : >
> : > Twit.
>
> : Just speaking from experience, friend. You Win-users are so isolated
> : you have no idea what some other OS's can do. Windows is not the only
> : OS out there. You guys need to get out once in a while.
>
> *sigh* You proceed from a false assumption,
> as you seem to do in most of your arguments.
>
> Who said I'm a "Win-user"?
>
> I said I like Windows2000. That doesn't mean that
> I use it exclusively.
>
> Currently, I use NetBSD, BeOS, IRIX,
> and occaionally Windows2000.
>
> In the past, I've used Amigas extensively, as well as
> Macintoshes, and PCs running GNU/Linux, SCO UNIX,
> and BSD/OS. Tell me, how often have you worked with
> SGI Skywriters? How about Sun SPARCStations? How
> about 68k NeXT systems? Your claims sound suspiciously
> like those of a person who has no experience outside
> of consumer-grade hardware.
>
> If there is anyone here who has nearly
> zero experience outside the world of
> iX86-based PCs, it's you.
I thought I smelled smoke several threads away. :-)
Sometimes its hard to keep the topic of this thread together.
My wifes PeeCee (HP) with an HP scanner and software during a scan
session, is almost unresponsive to a cancel command. You are right
about the hardware side of things regarding the PC hardware and its
performance under loading conditions.
Things just bog down. If I was a rich man I'd probably look into an
Alpha or Sparc III. But I'm not and have to face the realities and
limitations of what I can afford. I can get a low end sparc for $950
new, but I'd have to see what it can do for me.
In earlier days, on the old venerable VAX 785, we added a graphics
terminal to it and installed Regis support. That poor old machine
really slogged down just running one fractal program. But then again we
only had at most three users logged on. Had to back away from that
mistake and start re-educating ourselves of our needs and budget.
Purchased 3 Sun workstations to get the needed performance up and lower
our yearly maintenance and license contracts.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:40:01 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Translation: Bill Hudson, kollij grajuit, can't handle this freshman
> level analysis.
What you bring to the table rarely, if ever, qualifies as freshmen level
analysis.
And yes I did receive a degree in science. You see, I was never removed
from school, and I was never found guilty of an offense that is, at best,
described as not only illegal but dishonorable behavior, as you were. That
you were found to be such is no surprise to anyone that has seen you on
usenet.
------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Siegal <[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: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:42:58 -0700
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Exactly how do you imagine a separate library that existed before
> the GPL'd component would become 'derived from' this GPL'd
> component if they happen to be linked together at some future date?
It does not.
> Yet the GPL prohibits distribution of GPL'd components that link
> to anything but standard system libraries.
Exactly. The GPL's terms apply to the GPLed code, not to the separate
library. If you want to distribute the GPLed code, you must also
distribute the source code to the entire program under the terms of the
GPL, including any libraries used by the program (ignoring the GPL's
exceptions). This is an obligation on the distributor of the GPLed
code, nothing more. If he can't meet this obligation, then he can't
distribute the GPLed code.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multitasking
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:43:07 -0700
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> 8<SNIP>8
>
> : The Amiga was definitely an impressive machine -- and I still hear rumors
> : of it coming back. :-) (Maybe it's because Microsoft hasn't ported NT
> : to it yet...)
>
> Sadly, I've been reading about those same rumors since '94.
>
> They never came to fruition, so I wouldn't get my
> hopes up if I were you. :-(
My poor old Amiga is keeping company with the spiders in the attic.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: FW: Ethics of Circumventing OS
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:49:15 -0700
Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 19:09:24 -0800, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Found another monkey stuck in a coconut? That glitz sure gets them
> > > >don't it. :-)
> > >
> > > Sorry, but that one flew right over my head?
> > >
> >
> > When in panama the natives used to hollow out coconuts and bore holes in
> > the sides.
> > Then they's put tin-foil inside or something shiny. The coconut was
> > tethered.
> > The monkey sees the shiny foil and sticks his hand inside and grabs the
> > shiny foil.
> > He can't get his hand out because his hand is now a fist and won't pass
> > thru.
> > He's so greedy that he won't let go. The native then just has to walk
> > up and get the monkey... still the monkey won't let go.
> >
>
> Did they learn that trick from the Kalahari Bushmen?
>
> And if so - how?
>
> --
I really don't know, but the San Blas indians seemed to know the trick.
> Regards,
>
> Karel Jansens
> ==============================================================
> "You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
> ==============================================================
--
V
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 22:57:59 +1200
Administration: Caldrea Volution www.caldera.com, has all of what is can do.
GUI: Use the same GUI right through out the company. When the user uses Linux at home,
he/she simply chooses the same GUI has he/she has at work.
Fool Proof: If you follow the rule of using only a user account for normal operations,
+ use the ReiserFS Journalling filesystem, one can be assured that it is as fool prrof
as Windows.
Matthew Gardiner
Warren Bell wrote:
> Rick wrote:
> >
> > WesTralia wrote:
> > >
> > > Warren Bell wrote:
> > > >
> > > > With all the stuff I'm hearing about Windows XP and the WPA, that will
> > > > require you to have MS activate your PC after makeing any hardware
> > > > changes, makes me wish there was somthing out there to compete with
> > > > Windows. I mean really compete.
> > > >
> > > > Linux is a great OS and is getting better all the time, but the average
> > > > computer user won't want to use it. What I think Linux needs is a
> > > > light, user freindly version that anyone can use. Somthing that's
> > > > stripped of most of the server functions and is made for a single or
> > > > multi user home system. Somthing that even the untechnical user can use
> > > > without too many problems. Here are some things that I think would be
> > > > needed to make this work:
> > > >
> > > > - A standard GUI that all Linux distros could use.
> >
> > What do you mean by standard? Any distro can use any GUI.
>
> I know, and there's a lot of them. Windows has a common GUI. You know
> what to expect when you jump on any windows computer. When you start
> mixing GUIs it gets confusing. It also seems more grounded if there's
> one set GUI. If Suzie's manager at work set up all the machines with
> fvwm and she has KDE at home it's going to be confusing for people.
>
> > > > - A GUI that's feels lighter and faster.
> >
> > Faster and lighter than what? I use fvwm2 with GNOME and KDE libs/apps.
> > Its pretly light and snappy.
> >
>
> Yeah that is. But it doesn't looks as klean and together as KDE ore
> Gnome. But I just upgraded my machine to the latest XFree86 and KDE2. I
> stand corrected. It runs pretty sweet.
>
> > > > - All the most used admin (root) functions available from point and
> > > > click.
> >
> > Since Im not a sys admin, I may be wrong, but arent three GUI tools for
> > most fo those things?
> >
>
> Yeah but they don't work flawlessly yet. But they're getting there..
>
> > > > - All makers of the lighter distro to follow standards so all the
> > > > distros are similar.
> >
> > If all the distros are similar, why have different distros?
> >
>
> I think we should still have different distros for the regular users,
> but maybe a light, easy version for somthing untechnical people can use
> now. Somthing fool proof that can give Windows a run for it's money.
> Maybe a Winux if you will :)
>
> > > > - Of course, more programs that people need for everyday use.
> >
> > They're coming.
> >
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to see Linux come out with somthing that would really compete
> > > > with windows and give people who arn't tech savvy a choice. Any
> > > > thoughts on this? Any distros that are trying to move twards an OS like
> > > > this?
> >
> > Mandrake is one of the easiest around to install and use.
> >
> > >
> > > Sounds to me that you are describing the Mac OSX. I haven't used it or
> > > even seen it in "person" but I like the idea of the Aqua GUI, Unix kernel,
> > > and the fact that you can use either the command line or the GUI for real
> > > work.
> > >
> >
> > From many reports, MacOS X is really for leading edge people at the
> > moment. By summer it should have the consumer bugs worked out.
> >
> > > I just wish the Mac people would port OSX to the PC and sell the OSX separately.
> > >
> > > In fact, that's my quiestion for the day: why don't they?
> > >
> >
> > Becasue Apple makes most of its money from hardware. They have
> > historically had great OS's and expensive hardware with big profit
> > margins. If they port to x86, the hardware sales go away.
> >
> > --
> > Rick
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
