Linux-Advocacy Digest #2, Volume #34 Fri, 27 Apr 01 20:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: MS and ISP's ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Sony: Linux Inside (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!! (Chad Everett)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Goddess")
Re: Microsoft hit new security 'level' :-) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are liars.
("David Casey")
Re: Primary and secondary missions ("David Casey")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: t. max devlin: kook (Peter Hayes)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Re: IE (Giuliano Colla)
Re: MS and ISP's (Chris Ahlstrom)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:13:20 -0500
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Problem #1 no network neighbourhood icon. Although I set up Samba easily
on my
> Linux box, her pc lacked the above NN facility. Could I restore it ...
nope.
> Tweakui fails to work, Windows help is non existant. I have no interest in
> buying 'secrets of the windows registry' so I can manipulate a terse,
binary
> database, that will render her machine unusable should I screw up the
editing.
Did you have the "Client for Microsoft Networks" Installed? And did you
have "I want to share my files" checkbox checked?
I've never heard of this problem if these were installed.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS and ISP's
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 01:07:16 +0200
"William Shakespeare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tomaz Cedilnik wrote:
> >
> > "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >
> > > after all. And as far as being "only" able to use it, that's due to
> > > MS's illegal activity, not any lack of competence on my part. I can
> > > also use Solaris, HP-UX, SCO, Linux, Mac, and probably any other OS
you
> > > throw at me. Ironically, as you noted, I am instead using the
crappiest
> > > one of the bunch: Windows.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > What illegal activities are the reason you can use windows "only"?
>
> I cannot speak for T. but the reason I am using Windows is mostly
> because there are certain apps I really like that only run on
> Windows. Also, the only way I can access Internet video is with
> Windows. The only way I can use voice chat or IP telephony is with
> Windows. Also, my subwoofers on my speakers will only work with
> Windows. If I want to use a webcam, I can only use Windows. I also
> have OS/2 on disk here but it is too hard and lacks some apps I like.
> I think Linux is way too hard for me. Be has a serious lack of apps
> and drivers. BSD and the other Unixen are way too hard and may mean
> buying a new box. Mac means buying a new box and once again I cannot
> use some apps.
>
> I really hate MS and but I am stuck with them, like million of
> others. MS' stated plan all along has been to force you to use their
> shit. That is the way with all despicable monopolies. Study
> economics.
Be doesn't have the applications & drivers, Mac is too expensive, all other
OSes are too hard, and you blame MS for this?
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sony: Linux Inside
Date: 27 Apr 2001 16:26:27 -0600
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Glitch wrote:
> >
> > http://www.msnbc.com/news/565026.asp
> >
> > Linux on the PS2
>
> Yes. I received e-mail on it as well. Kplug.org says its official.
Too bad I still can't order a Vaio without Windows or Word on it.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:53:05 +0100
pip wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
> > >> Word - Lyx, Ted, Abiword
> > >
> > > Maybe you should get staroffice and word perfect just in case as well.
> > Good point, I liked WP when I tested it, starofice is too bloated tho
> > and I think either would be too slow on her pentium 90 ?
>
> Pentium 90.... er... yes I remember them :) Maybe vi? :-) No, I think
> that WP with enough RAM and a light wm may just be ok but you can count
> out staroffice (I have never liked it much anyway). Abiword is quite
> good so maybe that would be the best choice (I can't remember if it has
> ms-doc filters or not). I think that there is a Gnome/Sun project to
> separate out staroffice into separate chunks and bonobo it, so it may
> well improve in the future (fingers crossed).
See www.openoffice.org for sun's opensource office suite derived from
staroffice - I assume this is the project you are refering to.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:54:22 +0100
> If you want to see windows mess up, you should try dealing with some of
> the errors I've had at work of late. It's almost as if Gate$ is
> taunting me!
> I'm just waiting for the message that says:"There's been an error - what
> are you gonna do about it?"
That question is easy to answer - wipe the crap and upgrade to Linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 27 Apr 2001 17:17:54 -0500
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:43:51 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:06:44 GMT, Wade Blazingame <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You know, I would think that this "vague explanation" IS THE VERY CRUX OF
>> THIS POST - why didn't you post it?
>>
>> And yes, I too have noticed the inexplicable price difference in Dell
>> workstations / PC's when configured with Linnux instead of Windows.
>
>It is not hard to explain. Two reasons:
>
>1. Selling Linux cheaper would make MS unhappy. An unhappy MS is an
> unhappy Dell.
>2. Because they can.
Maybe Dell gets kickback for every Dell system that ships with Windows.
No kickbacks with Linux, so they charge.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:00:13 +0100
> Did you have the "Client for Microsoft Networks" Installed? And did you
> have "I want to share my files" checkbox checked?
>
> I've never heard of this problem if these were installed.
>
You don't need to have 'I want to share my files' ticked to connect to a
server as he seems to be trying to do - this is only needed to use your
machine as a server. It would still probably have been worth trying this
though - if you can't connect to the server to copy files this may have
enabled him to connect the server to the workstation and do the copy this
way.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 22:48:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:06:37 +1200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
><snype>
>> Alan Turing, the father of modern computing and namesake of "Turing
>> machine" and "Turing test" in today's vocabulary. Among the fields of
>> CompSci that he researched or helped found: computability, artificial
>> intelligence, and cryptography. His single biggest claim to fame was that
>> he was an important part of the British (MI6? I forget) effort to crack the
>> German Enigma machine in WW2.
>>
>> As I recall, around the mid-1950s or so, the law got wind of the fact that
>> he was openly homosexual (how dare he!). As was policy at the time, he was
>> forced to take hormones that would suppress all sexual urges and turn him
>> into an asexual being, which was (obviously!) better than living the
>> sinful, evil life of a homosexual. Within a few years, he committed
>> suicide by ingesting cyanide.
>>
>Well, that doesn't sound too good. Regardless of his sexual orientation,
>he sounded like quite the genius.
Indeed...but we can't have those eeeeeeevil, sinful homosexual
geniuses perverting our knowledge pool, now, can we?
(Smirk.)
Albert Einstein had a statement about that:
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds.
In his case, I'd say it was more than justified. :-) But one has to
be careful, lest one pay a quack more attention than justified.
(Not that Alan Turing was a quack, of course.)
(Side issue: Linus is married, AFAIK. Bill Gates is, too.)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 11d:18h:30m actually running Linux.
Microsoft. Just when you thought you were safe.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 22:51:11 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 23 Apr 2001 07:23:14 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Bob Hauck wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:46:06 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>>
>> [NAMBLA]
>>
>> > > What has a group of sick weirdos have to do with legal sexual relations
>> > > between two people of the same sex?
>>
>> > Because they think that your young lad is fair game and also think that
>> > it should be made legal.
>>
>> Maybe now would be a good time to point out how many heteros are charged
>> with child molestation every year. Most of them think your young lass
>> is fair game and it should be legal. Does that have anything to do with
>> the discussion, or is it just a diversion?
>
>And *How* *many* heterosexual child-molestation organizations are there?
Would child pornography rings count?
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I like 'em young, but not *that* young!
EAC code #191 11d:20h:31m actually running Linux.
We are all naked underneath our clothes.
------------------------------
From: "Goddess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:42:52 -0700
"jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9cbajs$3f9u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > jet wrote:
> > >
> > > The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > > message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, jet
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote
> > > > on Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:34:06 -0700
> > > > <9c077p$2rlc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > >
> > > > >Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> jet wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > [snip for brevity]
> > > >
> > > > >> I think she was complaining that Lara Croft represented
unrealistic
> > > body
> > > > >> proportions
> > > > >
> > > > >Well, um, duh. And so what?
> > > >
> > > > Well, there might be one advantage to being, erm, proportioned like
> L.C.;
> > > > presumably, she can hold the automatic weapon in front of her and
> > > > the kickback from said rifle would keep her from tipping forward.
:-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ah, so, it's all for the sake of science. :)
> > >
> > > > I would think a more logical physique would be lithe and
> > > > skinny, with a sports bra/shorts type outfit for hot weather as
> > > > she runs around from dangerous point to dangerous point trying
> > > > to keep from getting shot. Mind you, in cooler weather, camos would
> > > > probably work a lot better.... :-) but really, her current green
> outfit
> > > > would stick out like a sore thumb anywhere she wanted to try to
hide.
> > > > Realistic? Yeah right...but then, guess what the target market is?
> > > > Hint: it's not post-pubescent females...
> > > >
> > > > However, one might also go for squat and muscular; L.C.'s waist
> > > > looks wonderful, but I doubt it gives her the ability to
> > > > breathe deeply should she need the energy. (Think a combination
> > > > of opera singer and SWAT commando. :-) )
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>and that that somehow prevented young girls from entering
> > > > >> into Math/Science.
> > > > >
> > > > >Barbie dolls didn't stop me.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I wonder who the dumbass was who programmed in the
> > > > "Math is haaaaaaard" into them at one point.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't see the problem with that. So what if math is hard? It was
hard
> for
> > > me at times. I think taking that away sends a worse message: girls
can't
> do
> > > or shouldn't attempt hard things.
I can agree with that. Most of my friends (boys AND girls) found math hard.
I didn't though. I did help them with their homework. But yes, math, for
most people is indeed hard. My husband teaches math and he knows that most
find it very hard. Some work at it even if it's hard to do and most don't,
even boys.
> > > J
> >
> > What a unique way of looking at that. I would've expected you to be
> > humorless about such a situation, guess it goes to show you shouldn't
> > judge someone by their cover.
>
> Me, houmorless?
He's been listening to others. :-)
> >
> > You can tell when someone is truly successful when they don't let
> > something silly like a childhood doll stand in their way. Congrats.
> >
> > --
> > - Brent
>
> Thank you.
Hey! What am I? I never even had a Barbie doll. :-)
Marg
> J
> >
> > http://rotten168.home.att.net
>
>
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Microsoft hit new security 'level' :-)
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 22:58:32 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> David Brown wrote:
> >
> > Ray Chason wrote in message ...
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley) wrote:
> > >
> > >>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/18516.html
> > >>
> > >>Roll on .net so that we can all let Microsoft look after our
> > >>valuable data. What a joke they are. :-)
> > >
> > >While this is a major gaffe on the part of Microsoft, I'm willing to
> > >be fair. If a binary-infecting virus for Linux existed in the wild,
> > >this could in principle happen to Linux as well; and the usual bit
> > >about not being root would only mitigate the damage, and would be
> > >of no help at all if the infected binary was installed setuid root.
> > >
> > >Those of us who habitually compile from source would probably be
> > >unaffected.
> > >
> >
> > You would think that MS would be able to compile their security patches from
> > source and thus avoid infection problems.
>
> This indicates that Mafia$oft's compilers and/or linkers are themselves infected.
Or that, being unable to compile and/or link, they've outsourced also
those activities, after DNS.
The only difference being that maybe they've been unable to find an
external source which was equipped to compile their stuff using Linux.
--
Giuliano Colla
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:07:11 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Zippy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > actually, my system runs absolutely PERFECTLY. i'm a hardware tech with 9
> > years' experience in the business, am relatively fluent in basic and C,
> and
> > am capable of solving any hardware problem on a Mac, PC or Linux box.
>
> There is not such thing as a Linux box.
It's sad to learn such a thing. My customers will be bitterly
disappointed when they'll learn that we've been developing for months on
a number of non-existing boxes, and we will deliver them a non-existing
box running the software they need!
--
Giuliano Colla
------------------------------
From: "David Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles,soc.men,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.military.folklore
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are
liars.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:36:20 -0700
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to warn you that Aaron is a well known troll, facts, logic,
or
> common sense doesn't seem to matter to him.
> You are simply wasting your time talking to him.
> I found that my NTS ratio improved significally after I killedfiled him.
[follow-ups set]
Not sure which group you are posting from, but I'm reading this in
us.military.army. We're all too well aware of Aaron and his unusual way of
spending time away from his Russian mail order bride. Just wish we could
convince billh to killfile him along with the rest of us and we'd be set!
Dave
Wish You Were Here!
------------------------------
From: "David Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Primary and secondary missions
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:55:11 -0700
"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >No, you have it backwards. Propagating DNA is the primary mission.
> >Getting laid is merely a supporting operation.
>
> Duh. I was joking. Note the smiley?? You really are not very swift,
> are you?
Kulkis is weird like that. If you want, you could join billh and help bash
him on us.military.army, but it might get you killfiled by most of the
regulars since Kulkis goes for quantity of posts over quality of posts.
Normally, I like giving Kulkis a few kicks in the head every now and then,
but lately it's just no fun. He usually doesn't even reply to me since he
knows I'll back him into yet another corner and continue to beat on him
until he cries for his momma. Sort of like he did back in the Gulf War... I
mean the Gulf War Cleanup Operation in June of 1991 when he deployed there.
For the first time. After being turned down for PLDC (again). Go figure.
Dave
Wish You Were Here!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:14:16 GMT
Piggybacking since I seem to havae missed this the first time. :-)
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:38:48 +1200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Chronos Tachyon wrote:
>>
>> [Crossposting trimmed a bit]
>>
>> On Sat 21 Apr 2001 03:06, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> [Snip Aaron-babble]
>> > As for writing...? I have no idea how homosexuals write.
>>
>> *Waves sheepishly*
>Matthew Gardiner *Waves sheepishly* back
>
>Matthew Gardiner
Had I not been told, I wouldn't have guessed.
*shrug*
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random sheep here
EAC code #191 11d:21h:40m actually running Linux.
The Internet routes around censorship.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:15:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:23:37 +0100
<9c3gll$bkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Look, you twit, of course you see the politically active ones because
>>> they are politically active. Well, duh. You don't see the millions of
>>> hohosexuals who aren't that politically activated. It is plain ignorant
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> I can't believe you wrote that.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO
>
>D'OH!
>
>:)
I'm not sure I even *want* to go there... :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random creamy filling here
EAC code #191 11d:22h:04m actually running Linux.
[ ] Check here to always trust monopolistic software.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.support.fat-acceptance,alt.fan.jackie-tokeman
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:18:46 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:26:23 +0100
<9c3gqr$bkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> >> You don't see the millions of hohosexuals who aren't that
>>> >> politically
>> ^^^^
>>> >> activated.
>>> >
>>> > redirect to: soc.support.fat-acceptance
>>> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>>>
>>> What have politically inactive homosexuals got to do with fat
>>> acceptance?
>>
>> You mistakenly mentioned people with a cream-filled, chocolate-covered
>> cake fetish.
>
>
>I make silly mistakes on the keyboard when I get tired and dring too much
^
>coffee. My coordination goes *way* off.
Case in point. :-) :-) :-)
Well, it could be worse, someone could have accused you of
being a thespian. :-) Or maybe a masticator. :-)
(Who's Jackie Tokeman, anyway?)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random malapropism here
EAC code #191 11d:22h:06m actually running Linux.
This is a voluntary signature virus. Send this to somebody.
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: t. max devlin: kook
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:20:24 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:16:35 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Said Peter Hayes in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:44:36
<...>
> >> One click on the icon to select the icon, one double-click to run the
> >> app, that's what. The desktop is a metaphor, not just a cute-looking
> >> menu.
> >
> >Whether you see the desktop as a metaphor or a menu is irrelevent.
>
> Irrelevant to what?
Using the desktop. It matters not one whit whether we see the desktop as a
copy of our Start -> Programs menu or some metaphor for our selected apps,
the end result is the same.
> I thought we were discussing using the desktop; I
> would suggest how you use it might be relevant. (!)
>
> > It's how
> >intuitive it is that matters.
>
> How intuitive something is must be considered a result, not a cause, or
> the meaning of the term 'intuitive' simply vanishes, and you are left
> with it's idiomatic meaning, "familiar".
If it's intuitive, it'll be evident to the user.
> >I know from many non-computer literate users
> >who have difficulties with double-clicking that single-clicking is much
> >better.
>
> And who should know more than people who don't know anything?
They're ideal test subjects for the "intuitiveness" of a system, how
quickly and easily they can get to grips with the basics and start doing
useful work.
Double-clicking just interferes with that process. Tell someone they can
launch their app with one mouse click on its icon and they'll catch on
instantly. Tell them they've to click the mouse button twice within x
milliseconds ("quickly"), and at the same time not move it off the icon
between clicks and it'll take them anything from a couple of minutes to
several days practice.
> People have "difficulty" with single-clicking, too,
?
> and would prefer a TUI at
> every turn (telepathic user interface), at least until the OUI
> (omniscient user interface) becomes practical.
Or the VCI (Voice control interface).
> Until they become
> familiar enough with the idea that the icons on a desktop are metaphors
> for objects, and one can either just touch them (single click, select)
Why "select"? I have 29 icons on my Windows desktop. Single clicking any
one of them does nothing meaningful. In KDE they're launched. What possible
justification is there for a single click that does nothing and serves no
useful purpose?
> or 'open' them (with the magic of technology, reduced to merely
> single-clicking twice in succession.
>
> I know from many computer novices that getting to the control panel
> where you can increase the double-click window to make it easier to use
> the desktop metaphor can be difficult, so I usually do it for them.
>
> >The user has to double-click within a given time, or not much if anything
> >happens. Double-clicking within a few tens of milliseconds only comes with
> >practice. Arthritic users find it excruciatingly difficult.
>
> Believe it or not, that's been considered, and every system that uses a
> double-click typically has some way to increase the window, and often
> even to expand the 'spot' for the double-click, because having to keep
> the mouse on the same pixel for both clicks can also be difficult.
In a multi-user environment, one person's double-click window is someone
else's 2-clicks-to-rename-something window. Instead of renaming your file
you launch it. OK, in a properly managed multi-user environment we can all
have our own preferences, but for every one of those there'll be hundreds
where there's one login for all, if there's a login at all.
> You learned to walk, I think you can handle two clicks within a few tens
> of milliseconds.
It's not me I'm concerned about, it's the newbie, the newbie who perhaps
knows nothing about computers but knows more than the rest of us put
together about their chosen field.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:39:58 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jerry Coffin wrote:
>>
>> What DEC computer used 8-bit bytes before the IBM 360 series did?
>>
>
> Easy! The pdp-8!
>
> Late 60's.
Well its been awhile since I used a pdp8 but it was a 12bit machine. It
did have a 'swap bytes' instruction but that swapped 2 6bit 'bytes'. I
always like to think of the pdp8 as the first risc processor as it had
such a small instruction set. It was a great machine to learn on though.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:36:08 GMT
Michael Pye wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > >Until it collides head first with 'cola logic', at which point it will be
> > >summarily dismissed as troll bait.
> > >As most, if not all facts are in cola.
> >
> > As a long-time user of NS4, I would say it is definitely not troll bait.
> > Its just plain old bullshit.
>
> User? You can't comment until you have tried to develop for it. How do you
> know how the sites are supposed to look? You don't even know that you are
> getting the version that is stripped down at the server side to try and
> offset the inadequacies of your browser.
Are you really sure that the efforts to create fancy effects are worth
while? Whenever I speak with the man of the street, and I tell them that
they can turn images off in their browser, they're very anxious to learn
how to do it, and when I tell that I often use a text-only browser
(Lynx), they ask me if something similar is available for Windows.
So if NS4 provides me a stripped down version of a page, I'll stick to
NS4 (with images, Java script and CSS turned off, not to speak of the
Shockwave plugins, of course).
--
Giuliano Colla
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS and ISP's
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:43:35 GMT
William Shakespeare wrote:
>
> I cannot speak for T. but the reason I am using Windows is mostly
> because there are certain apps I really like that only run on
> Windows. Also, the only way I can access Internet video is with
> Windows. The only way I can use voice chat or IP telephony is with
> Windows. Also, my subwoofers on my speakers will only work with
> Windows. If I want to use a webcam, I can only use Windows. I also
> have OS/2 on disk here but it is too hard and lacks some apps I like.
> I think Linux is way too hard for me. Be has a serious lack of apps
> and drivers. BSD and the other Unixen are way too hard and may mean
> buying a new box. Mac means buying a new box and once again I cannot
> use some apps.
You'd better check again. Linux support pretty much everything you've
mentioned.
Oh, now I get it, that remark about subwoofers... you're joking!
Ha ha!
Chris
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
