Linux-Advocacy Digest #47, Volume #34 Mon, 30 Apr 01 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Austin Ziegler)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The upgrade ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows is a virus (Michael Vester)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Gary Hallock")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Brent R)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product ("Gary Hallock")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Interconnect")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Brent R)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Interconnect")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Osugi Sakae")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Brent R)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (JS PL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 22:44:31 -0400
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 29 Apr 2001
>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 27 Apr 2001 12:50:03
>>>>>>For example: the architectural plans specify where the beams must go,
>>>>>>their shape size and material.
>>>>>>Yet, on a software project, the implementation details are not
>>>>>>dependent on the API almost at all.
>>>>>So any random arrangement of code will support any API you imagine?
>>>> Not *any* random arrangement of code, but *many* arrangements of code.
>>> Well, if its "many", then my point is made and you have lost the
>>> argument (again). You don't have any way (other than whether the app
>>> works with the library) of knowing which of the "many" ways is the
>>> "correct" one for an API. Therefore, designing the API and writing the
>>> code to support it are not two independent things.
>> As usual, Maxie is wrong -- and having been corrected on this in the
>> past, we must assume that he is maliciously lying at this point because
>> he doesn't have a real argument.
> Bite me, troll.
You don't know what the word means, liar.
>> An API doesn't specify implementation of the library/program/plug-in
>> (much the same thing these days); it specifies the interfaces of the
>> library/program/plug-in for other pieces of code to use. If I say "the
>> instance method 'between' for class 'String' will accept two integer
>> values specifying the start and the end of a substring that will be
>> returned to the caller," I have just (partially) specified an API. The
>> API will also contain a functional specification similar to this:
> And you're willing to call other people malicious liars, simply because
> you find it easy to hand-wave the entire issue with a parenthetical
> "partial"?
No, I just didn't feel like wasting my time with you. The full
specification of said library would include the expected behaviours
when the start is not provided, the end is not provided, neither is
provided, when the end is less than the start, and when the end is
greater than the length of the string. I am pretty sure that covers
nearly all of the cases -- I might be missing one or two, but once
those are specified, then people can actually USE that method,
regardless of whether it's implemented SBCS or DBCS or whatever else.
> Yes, Austin, that is the point.
The one on your head, right?
> ANY description of an API
> is going to be partial, and that is why programmers might sketch
> whatever they want in rough, but to write a program, you need the
> library to actually exist.
False. I've already demonstrated your lack of knowledge.
> Having an API alone might THEORETICALLY be
> enough, but in practice, it simply won't do, and the idea is silly. You
> CAN NOT write a program which requires a library which doesn't exist!
> How are you going to tell if the thing even works?
*sigh* Just go away, will you? You've had people who develop software
for a living tell you, a mere putzing bit-pusher.
> [...]
>> Have you facts? We can't accept your beliefs here -- they've been shown
>> time and again to have less substance than cloud castles.
> You haven't a clue enough to understand my language. Stop making an ass
> of yourself by pretending its my fault.
The only fault is yours; your beliefs are less useful than cloud castles.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 02:54:42 GMT
Better get used to Win2k Gary because by year end, it will be the
standard pre-load within a certain company replacing the Win95 that is
currently pre-loaded.
Flatfish
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:32:08 +0000, "Gary Hallock"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>> Linux on the desktop? A joke at best, some poor fools job at worst.
>>
>> Take a P166 with 64 meg and load Linux Mandrake 7.x on it and Win98SE
>> and see which one is more responsive. Linux is slow as shit... So much
>> for Linux on legacy hardware, unless of course you like looking at a CLI
>> then Linux screams....Of course any newbie forced to use the cli will be
>> screaming as well. Try loading kde or Gnome and see the system crawl.
>>
>
>W2K on a laptop? A joke at best, some poor fools job at worst.
>
>Laptops are much more likely to be powered on and off making the boot
>time important. Take at look at the boot time for my T20 with 256MB of
>RAM and 700Mhz PIII.
>
>W2K - 7-8 minutes
>Redhat 7.1 - 1 minute, 7 sec
>
>Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The upgrade
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 03:01:07 GMT
That is one area where Linux is far superior. I have an old Thinkpad
755 which is a 486/66 that i let the kids play with. It doesn't have a
CDROM or network card so I took the hard drive and slapped it into my
Thinkpad 765 and installed Linux.
Completely different hardware and not even close.
I then took the hard drive and put it back in the 486 and it worked
perfectly.
I then configured X and all was well.
Experience tells me that there is no way Windows would have been able
to do that.
Flatfish
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:36:16 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I upgraded my 400MHz Pentium PII to a VIA system with an AMD Duron 850MHz.
>
>Windows 98 SE reinstalled everything and had to reboot a few times to
>complete the change over. It also sometimes crashes on shutdown.
>
>Linux SuSE 7.1 just... worked. Hey!
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 13:28:14 -0700
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 05:52:12 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Ace Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > Nigel Feltham wrote:
> > > >> Windows does the job it was designed for: Corrupt user's data, and
> > > >> keep the dimwitted moron's expectations so low that they are easily
> > > >> impressed by a whole 36 hours of continous uptime.
> > > >
> > > > I wish my win98 system would stay up that long - I have almost totally
> > > > given up bothering with win98 on my dual-boot system in favour of mandrake
> > > > 7.2 now it has got so unreliable everytime I try to start IE4 the system
> > > > locks solid and I am so pissed off with the hassle I don't want the bother
> > > > of yet another reinstall knowing I will only have to repeat the process in
> > > > another few months when it trashes itself again.
> > >
> > > So why the hell DOES windows always trash itself every few months?
> >
> > Sloppy programming
>
> Bit-rot.
>
> Most apps you install then de-install, especially the sloppily written
> ones, leave behind a few entries in the Registry and/or other configuration
> files. Eventually there's no space left and the system becomes very flaky.
>
> Re-install time
>
> Peter
A perfect example of why text files are better for configuration.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 23:07:00 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Better get used to Win2k Gary because by year end, it will be the
> standard pre-load within a certain company replacing the Win95 that is
> currently pre-loaded.
>
You're behind the times. I never use W2K. Yes, it came installed on my
Thinkpad. Yes, all the new Thinkpads coming in have W2K installed. But
we are rapidly moving to dual boot with Linux. No one wants to use W2K.
It servers no useful purpose. The only thing that anyone ever uses W2K
for in that "certain company" is running Lotus SmartSuite. And there
are alternatives to that. In a company where Unix is already dominant
on the desktop and servers, it only makes sense to go with a Unix-like OS
on laptops.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 04:58:09 +0200
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Call you a moron. An immature moron at that. Maybe I'll stick you
> >> in my killfile too--your .sig is annoying, and you never write anything
> >> of merit anyway.
> >
> > Better watch out, or you'll become Item "M"
>
> Go on! See if you can make it in to the Sig!
>
> You will be immortalised in irrelevand usenet history!
That's not fair! I try and I ry, and B.B. gets there with 3 posts ;-(
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 03:12:20 GMT
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> :> Both daughters love math and do great at it. My twelve year
> :> old wants to solve the Twin Prime Conjecture (she also wants
> :> to cure cancer using molecular biology, so we will see where
> :> she ends up).
> :>
> :> --
> :> Andrew Hall
> :> (Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
>
> : People who brag about their kids irritate me.
>
> To Brent: Do you have children? If not, you will hopefully understand
> when you do. If so, then shame on you. What could possibly be more
> worth bragging about?
>
> To Andrew: You have every right and every reason to be very proud of
> your daughters. I'm sure they will accomplish great things.
>
> Joe
You shouldn't brag about anything. I don't. It doesn't mean you
shouldn't be proud of your kids, but braggin is irritating to others and
one shouldn't delude himself into thinking that it isn't.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 23:13:16 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Terry Porter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're using Whistler, a very late Windows OS, and a ancient version of
> RedHat, ver 6.2 in fact, when Redhat is at version 7 currently. Whats
> the matter, couldn't you affort the $10 for the latest version of Redhat
Actually, Redhat is now at 7.1. Now with the 2.4 kernel, XFree4, and KDE
2.1.1 standard. Much better than 7.0 and worlds away from 6.2.
Everything "just works" now.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:29:19 +1000
:D I love GIMP it's such a good application. A favorite of mine is the
screen and or window capture utility. How much for just a screen capture
utility for Win2K? Let alone paying for Paint Shop Pro or equivalent.
I'm running RH7.0 Xwindows on an AMD 600mhz, 256MB RAM, video card is an 8MB
i780. Never had a problem with slow response from X.
Put simply Linux is excellent. I'm looking forward to getting my DSL
(broadband) internet access so I can download the newest versions and heaps
of FREE apps. I'm learning OpenGL with a view to getting into 3D graphics
programming, playing around with some other free tools such as Blender and
CrystalSpace. To do this on windows you would need big $$$.
Linux -> Win2K $400.00
Blender ->3D Studio Max $3000.00 or more
CrystalSpace -> WinEquivalent $??
Question is why would anyone really want to run Windows?
surrender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:TKSG6.6928$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Unknown"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote something like:
>
> > Linux on the desktop?
> > A joke at best, some poor fools job at worst.
> >
> > Take a P166 with 64 meg and load Linux Mandrake 7.x on it and Win98SE
> > and see which one is more responsive. Linux is slow as shit... So much
> > for Linux on legacy hardware, unless of course you like looking at a CLI
> > then Linux screams....Of course any newbie forced to use the cli will be
> > screaming as well. Try loading kde or Gnome and see the system crawl.
> >
> What about WinXP on a p166 with 64M huh?
> cause if you take the latest mandrake (well 8.0 ~= 7.2), you need to
> compare it to the latest windows...
>
> BTW I'm running gnome 1.4 on a p200/48M and I don't have any problems.
> Currently I'm running pan, gftp, xchat, opera, xterm, gimp and playing an
> mp3 with xmms and it's still extremely responsive. And all this is done
> after having the system (with X!) run for nearly 3 weeks.
> Ok, gimp takes some time to load, but when compared to photoshop, that's
> nothing!
>
> PS A friend of mine, running win98 on a p2-350/64M had his pc crash
> yesterday while he wasn't even using it. Must be because of the high
> uptime he had already achieved: 1week and 5days
>
>
> --
> Greets,
> surrender
> --
> $ apt-get moo
> (__)
> (oo)
> /------\/
> / | ||
> * /\---/\
> ~~ ~~
> ...."Have you mooed today?"...
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 03:25:26 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Donn Miller wrote:
>
> > OK, I WILL agree with you on that point. This machine is a P166, 64
> > megs RAM, and the last time I tried xine w/XFree86 with a 42 meg music
> > MPEG video, it was dropping frames like crazy. It looked like a slide
> > show. But Media Player under Win ME suffered very little frame
> > lossage. Amazing. Of course, remember that MS tuned Windows ME
> > specifically for this sort of thing. ME is not very good in general,
> > because most things seem too damned slow on ME. But when it comes to
> > playing videos (both RealPlayer, Windows Media, and MPEG music video),
> > Windows ME has been outstanding. I find ME unusable for much else.
> > Well, you know that MediaPlayer is probably using some sort of direct
> > access to the video HW for optimum performance, so Windows does outshine
> > Linux in this respect.
>
> For some reason my Linux system graphics is slower than Windows graphics in
> general. I can only assume this is something to do with my Voodoo 5500 and
> XFree86. Since 3dfx has been swallowed by NVidia, I'll have to upgrade
> eventually.
Everyone I've ever talked to has experienced this. Remember that X runs
as a process on top of Linux (X isn't Linux after all), while the GUI is
compiled in with Windows. Some may say that this was a poor choice but
Windows does seem to redraw faster.
It's been suggested to me that Windows just seems like it's running
faster because it allows you to move your mouse when the system has
temporarily or permanently frozen, while Linux has a much more truthful
representation of where the mouse is on your screen.
> > Unfortunately, there's much more to computing than multimedia, so I only
> > reboot into Windows to play music mpeg vid's. Of course, you know that
> > music videos are much more demanding on CPU time than MPEG movies,
> > right, because now you've got a continuous stream of sound as well as
> > the video portion itself to deal with.
>
> I've yet to see both audio and video work on Linux. I can get one or the
> other but not both. Which application where you using?
>
> --
> Pete
I'm actually very pleased with how audio works on Linux, actually I
generally boot into it when I want to listen to music. I can listen to
music and play a game (like Solitaire or whatever, just while I relax to
the music) and not have to worry about the song skipping. I usually
start up mpg123 from a non-GUI terminal and it plays solid as a rock...
where as under Windows I take a chance when I play music, as it may
crash the whole system.
Nowadays that's the only reason I boot into Linux though, it's my
Stereo- OS.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:47:20 +1000
[<snip>]
> On a side note, I hate emacs.
Perhaps I'm a little strange, but I like Emacs. If you do the tutorial it's
really a very handy little editor.
It allows you to edit say HTML or C, C++ source, with nice context sensitive
highlighting.
For writing documents I prefer to use Abi Word or StarOffice.
------------------------------
From: "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:41:00 +0900
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 11:40:58 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I don't know what you are complaining about, Linux is awesome for the
>>desktop, and laptop.
>
>
> Linux is a bad joke on the desktop. Maybe for geeks who like playing
> with Emacs, but it is dead before it even had a chance.
1. Why exactly is Linux a bad joke on the desktop? I have been running it
as my desktop for close to two years now. It is a great desktop os, much better
than Win98, for what I do. ymmv. So, why is linux a bad joke?
2. Why is linux dead on the desktop? Here in Japan it seems to be growing
in popularity, mostly for servers, but also on desktops. This is just my
impression, from things I see and hear, mind you.
My windows machine at work is pretty much down for the count. It is so
bad that my superviser actually asked me to try putting linux on it.
See, they don't care what os I use, as long as I can get my work done.
When windows loses most of its fonts, occasionally reboots for no
reason, and requires expensive software to do what I can do with free
software in Linux, they know I cannot get my work done.
(Funny thing is that I posted a while back saying that I was impressed
with my win98j machine at work because it had survived everything I had
installed on it (gimp, mozilla, perl, latex, emacs, a whole lot of
windows "shareware" (trying to find a good text editor) etc.).
Then it suddenly starts screwing up. Oh, well.)
Linux is catching up to Windows on the desktop very rapidly. With a
preinstalled, preconfigured KDE box, most users prolly wouldn't know the
difference. When it has fully caught up to Windows in the minds of
unbiased "typical" users, what will MS do? How will they compete? Maybe
start including something like winzip with the stardard install? Include
a pdf viewer? All that stuff they could have been doing all these years
but haven't?
Windows XP is a supposedly a huge upgrade from win98? Aside
from stability, what does it have to offer? WiMP and a new version of IE?
That is it? Ok, pretend I had a windows box and bothered to put XP on it.
What is MS going to include in the next release (about 2003 maybe?) that
justifies me paying for it? A new look to the gui? Some stupid software
like WiMP that gets bolted onto the os? Don't care. Not worth $100. Some
new MPAA, RIAA approved content control bits deep in the os? Who's
computer is this anyway?
--
Osugi Sakae
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 03:38:53 GMT
MH wrote:
<snip>
> I'll hang around. I still like and use it.
I pretty much have the same attitude. I'm not really opinionated in
either way, it's just an OS. It's pretty fun to tinker with and it is a
way to learn the UNIX way.
I primarily use Windows. Why? I love the combination of IE and NS mail
in Windows. There are good mail/news programs in Linux, I agree, but
they are predominantly text-based and that just isn't my thing. Also, in
Windows I haven't really run into the dependency problems I had under
Linux. I haven't tried Konqueror yet despite the good reviews, I gave up
on trying new Linux apps after the PAN frustration I ran into about a
year ago (it needed to upgrade library after library... I gave up
eventually).
Still, Linux is pretty fun to mess with, and I love using it as a music
player... the music doesn't skip at all if you run the music player in
non-GUI (I use mpg123). And there's the fact that UNIX's are becoming
the standard for web server's, so if you want a future in
administration, it might be wise to at least learn it.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 00:06:48 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> I don't like the built in burner in XP
> (can't do labels in my version), and don't want to pollute my computer with
> adaptec.
Drop an email to Microsoft. They'll put label capability into XP if you
ask.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
