Linux-Advocacy Digest #84, Volume #34 Tue, 1 May 01 07:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product (Terry Porter)
Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks... (kosh)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Windows is a virus (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: OEM Windows licenses not transferable to charities (Peter
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Peter
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Peter
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: OEM Windows licenses not transferable to charities ("David Brown")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Paul Floyd)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (pip)
Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks... (pip)
Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks... ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks... ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Goran Larsson)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? ("C. Newport")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:03:08 GMT
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ckmdv$5ns$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Lyx beats Word ANY day of the week. Granted, I'm biased, having done a
> >> maths degree. Ever tried putting equations/obscure mathematical
> >> symbols into Word?
> >
> > Ever tried writing a simple letter with Lyx. It's far easier with Word.
>
> Never really used LyX, but I suppose this is close: I have written a
> simple letter in LaTeX (+vim --- it *has* to be vim). Hell, it's a damn
> sight easier to use than Word once you're used to it.
Very true.
> In fact I've just completed a 23 page document for my degree using LaTeX,
> wih plenty of embedded pictures, tables, lists and equations. I shudder
> to think how well it would have worked under Word.
It shines on the really large documents, too. Did a 1500 page one a while
back. (Word2000 choked miserably on it. Tables screwed up and headers
mangled after every repagnation. Even WordPerfect8 for Linux did a better
job than Word.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 01 May 2001 09:27:11 GMT
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:49:22 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Yeah these Wintrollslike you need to get a life, and advocate your sad
>> Ms OS, in the relevant groups.
Sorry Eric, I wasnt replying to anything you wrote, if I did by mistake
then I apologise.
Flatfish and occasionally Pete Goodwin get me going, but I have never
classified you as a Wintroll.
>
> I appologize. I seem to have a huge mistake by thinking you wanted to have
> serious discussions. After reading the last few dozen responses from you, I
> realize now that you only want to call people names and insult them, while
> keeping your mind completely closed.
>
>
>
>
My mind isnt completely closed, I'll argue the facts with anyone who is
logical and reasonable.
So far you seem to have these attributes.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks...
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 03:30:27 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All hands abandon ship! All hands abadon ship! :)
On a more serious note a posting to fuckedcompany.com might be in order. :)
Get that resume in order and bail fast. If you leave faster then the ship
sinks you can escape blame for its sinking. Also it will be easy to explain
to a unix shop why you left.
kool breeze wrote:
>
>
> Guys...my company has been bought out by a company dedicated to MS.
>
> My Linux port of our SCO UNIX back-end is dead now.
>
> My poor new company is trying to market the new NT system as the "new"
> system.
>
> They are actually yanking people out of support and putting them in
> sales (more MS dedication).
>
>
> The old system has been supported by 4 people for 150 customers (1
> UNIX Server and 1 backup - powered off for spare parts). The new
> system requires 6 NT servers + a PDC + DNS + DHCP + BDC .
>
> I have created client software (MFC/Win32) to front our UNIX backend.
>
> The new system requires 1 support person per 20 clients + 1 local NT
> "expert".
>
>
> Gosh, I REALY REALLY REALLY wish I was flamebait....but I am not
> kidding one bit.
>
>
> I am very sad. Many post here with ideas. Not me. I am in the middle
> (now butt-end) of it all.
>
> I am a right-wing bastard. I hate the *reality* of
> socialism/communism. I love Linux.
>
> I swear to you all, I am not lying. I am majorly in the dog house
> now, being from the "old" system.
>
> I have tried to support linux, but I have been ROYALLY screwed by
> doing so.
>
> I hope you guys win the war. I am 35 and cannot fight the marketing
> guys.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:49:29 +0200
In article <v6pH6.870$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"JD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> "Austin Ziegler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 1 May 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> > I know enough about programming to know that you can't write a program
>> > that uses a library that doesn't yet exist and expect it to work just
>> > because it matched a draft of the API documentation.
>>
>> Which means you don't know nuthin', bub. You've been corrected on this
>> fact a number of times.
>>
> I have worked on many significant projects when the libraries and the
> mainline are written simultaneously. Of course, perhaps the hardest part
> of the development process: the specification of APIs and other interface
> definitions has mostly already been done.
I've given him as example a project that _required_ people
to test their programs against a stub library. The only
thing he had to say was "Guffaw".
> Please, tmax, find something that you really do know how to do.
I've come to the conclusion that his only skill is trolling.
He's been blackballed forever.
--
Stefaan
--
How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just
one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a
battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 01 May 2001 09:54:54 GMT
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:46:30 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > until this linux craze
>
>> Linux is no craze, its been around since 1991, and UNIX before it since
> 1971.
>> Prophets of doom like you have come and gone many times over the years.
>
> Well, it actually wasn't very useful until the first distribution in 1994.
Yeah I know, I bought the Yggrassil Disto in 1993, and X kept locking up
on my 486SLC pc,with 8mb ram!
But it booted of the floopy, read the CD and ran out of ram. It really was
quite impressive, even if I didnt know a thing about Linux at the time.
>
>> > can actually copy and paste properly between 2 windows without the
>> > poor user wondering what gnome/kde/x/whatever app they happened to
> install
>> > and making a mental note of the kernal version/video card/sound
>> > card/printerversion of xyz BEFORE performing the operation.
>
>> Your totally incorrect Mr Wintroll. Pasting between apps is as smooth as
>> this 'Perfect Windows' you keep touting.
>
> Really? How easy is it to copy and paste graphic images? Say, between
> Konqerer and the GIMP?
Honestly I don't know, as I don't use KDE.
By comparison, how easy is it to copy and paste a circuit diagram running
under Protel for Windows, and Windows Notepad ?
>
> How easy is it to copy tables from Aplix and paste them into Star Office?
Sorry, I dont use the bloated monolith Staroffice, and Applix is not free.
How easy is it to paste 10,000 pages of text into Ms Word?
>
>> The kernel, video, soundcard, and printer version have absolutely nothing
> to
>> do with pasting. This is just a Wintroll's fantasy.
>
> Well, then why did you say "Pasting between apps is as smooth as
>> this 'Perfect Windows' you keep touting."? Obviously you meant X.
I said it becausethey have nothing to do with pasting in Xfree86.
>
>> Ever done a search of 'Windows GUI Inconsistencies' ?
>> You'll get about 9000 hits. Still think Windows is perfect ?
>>
>
> Remember that X Windows GUI Inconsistencies will also show up that list of
> hits. Also, my search on google only showed about 4000 hits, with over 1000
> being specifically X Windows related, and a number of others including X
> Windows.
Agreed, so in other words both Windows and X, have inconsistencies?
>
>> > At this point in time Windows is a far, far superior desktop operating
>> > system.
>> Nope, its a far, far superior breaker of the Sherman Antitrust Law.
>>
>> As a GUI, it even lacks remote facilities, this makes Windows a *toy* GUI.
>
> No it doesn't. Terminal Services have been around for about 4 years,
> they're included in Win2k Server, and they have remote services in Windows
> XP for everyone.
Correct me if im wrong, but 'Terminal Services' simply mean text based
telnet services.
I said 'Remote GUI', *not* remote services.
By 'XP has remote services' do you mean Remote GUI ?
Is XP available right now for the masses ?
>
>> > I would enjoy watching a decent Lawyers' Secretary booting up Linux
>> > and having a good cackle at StarOffice.
>
>> Why would she need to boot, her pc would probably just stay on 24/24 ?
>
> You mean 24/7? "normal" people don't do that. They shut down their PC's to
> conserve energy, or the environment. Especially in California.
A pc doesnt have to draw a lot of power if properly set up.
They dont shut down their servers in California do they ?
>
>> Linux uptimes are the stuff of legend to Windows Advocates like you.
>
> Not even. Windows 2K has shown to have uptimes of > 100 days.
So far its reports of stability on COLA have been less than impressive, but
hey, if Ms can finally make a OS that does have that levelof stability ...
allpower to them and their paying customers :)
>
>> Further more she would probably leave staroffice open in a 'virtual
> desktop'
>> like I do as there is no need to close the app, as Windows users do.
>
> Well, its good you like to suck resources 24/7.
Nope I **PAY** for all the resources I use.
>
>> > but as a desktop OS it is severely lacking.
>> Only in your opinion, I have been using Linux as a desktop since Aug97,
> full
>> time, and it leaves Windows for DEAD, in the areas I need.
>
> Perhaps your needs are small.
You must have been having a bad day Eric, I appologised to you earlier, for
comments I made to another poster, but for which you seemed to take offence.
Please don't assume my previous high regard for your posts won't change.
My needs are not met by Windows, what conclusions can you draw about my needs
now?
For your information,I write code, design schematics, design pcb's
write user manuals, letters, and perform all my internet tasks including
newsreading with Linux.
I also do graphic designs and cad designs for front panels and enclosures
with Linux.
I maintain 2 boxes remotely with telnet and X remote GUI with Linux.
I print in 600*600 dpi on a postscript laser with Linux.
I use Linux for my router/firewall/http and ftp server.
I play music, watch mpeg videos, and also play the odd game (Quake) with Linux.
Please tell me again how small my needs are ?
>
>> > Q: Why does Linux suck at drag-and-drop, copy-and-paste, User Interface
>> > Conformity?
>> > A: Because the developers develop using a myriad of libraries. Just like
>> > Windows - (which are sometimes called DLLs)
>> Real Answer: The question is rehtorical, therefore its a non question.
>
> A rhetorical question is a question that is obvious or unanswerable. I
> don't think the question qualifies.
It was rhetorical because the poster told us that Linux sucked *in* the
question. It contained it own answer (however wrong).
>
>
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 22:05:17 +1200
Chad Everett wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:01:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>So what does Linux offer in the way of:
>>Sonar.
>>Logic Audio.
>>Cakewalk.
>>Cubase.
>>SoundForge.
>>.......................................
>>
>>
>>I thought so....
>>
>>
>>Flatfish
>>
>
> Sonar, Cakewalk, Cubase...Are these birthday party
> games or something?
>
No, they are music programs his mummy and daddy bought him so that he can
play chop sticks on his electric keyboard, then print out the manuscript on
his win printer he recieved from Father Christmas.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OEM Windows licenses not transferable to charities
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 09:13:02 +0200
Big Daddy wrote:
> Wasn't there a case in Germany where OEM copies of windows were getting
> bought by a PC maker for like $30 and the courts upheld that it was
> legal.
>
>
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> > To my knowledge (and my OEM license doesn't say so) MS does NOT void
>> > the
>> > liscense if you give a machine to charity. Just because someone
>> > writes it on a web site doesn't mean it's true.
>> >
>>
>> I think Erik is right there.
>> And in europe such a clause would be prohibited, it is unlawful.
>>
Yes, there was as least one such case, in 1999 or 2000, if I remember
correctly.
Peter
--
Windows is just the instable version of Linux for users who are too
dumb to handle the real thing.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:51:05 +0200
begin
This message was brought to you by "jim"
>I think VI and all the useless other editors are an excuse for sad
>little
>40-50 yr old UNIX fat tards like yourself to keep whatever "knowledge"
>you
>have and NOT share it with anyone - problem is, with a click of a mouse
>your
>Gramma can send an email to her friend - and guess what - UNIX didn't do
i>t!
>A smelly Finn didn't do it! It took a man that is richer than your
>dreams -
i>t took a man that would tell you who was BOSS! Oh, and btw I use plain
t>ext, html and the next best thing!
I vote "jim" to be most dumb Wintroll of the month
Peter
end
--
If you can only see this signature, this article is not supported by
MS Outlook Express standard versions.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[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: Tue, 1 May 2001 11:30:05 +0200
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
> I know enough about programming to know that you can't write a program
> that uses a library that doesn't yet exist and expect it to work just
> because it matched a draft of the API documentation.
>
What gives you such an enormously false idea, Max?
If you had ever done any big programming project, you`d know that
this is blatantly false. It is done all the time
Peter
--
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: OEM Windows licenses not transferable to charities
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 12:41:38 +0200
Ayende Rahien wrote in message <9clu43$ios$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9clpjb$6fe$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Ayende Rahien wrote in message <9cl8cq$203$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, found this interesting tidbit also in the EULA (WIN-98 first
>> >> edition). Please excuse the all caps, but that is how it is in the
>> >> documentation
>> >>
>> >> <begin quote>
>> >> 8. NOTE ON JAVA SUPPORT.
>> >> THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT MAY CONTAIN SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS WRITTEN IN JAVA.
>> >> JAVA TECHNOLOGY IS NOT FAULT TOLERANT AND IS NOT DESIGNED,
>> >> MANUFACTURED, OR INTENDED FOR USE OR RESALE AS ON-LINE CONTROL
>> >> EQUIPMENT IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS REQUIRING FAIL-SAFE PERFORMANCE,
>> >> SUCH AS IN THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR
>> >> COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, DIRECT LIFE SUPPORT
>> >> MACHINES, OR WEAPONS SYSTEMS, IN WHICH THE FAILURE OF JAVA TECHNOLOGY
>> >> COULD LEAD DIRECTLY TO DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY, OR SEVERE PHYSICAL OR
>> >> ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.
>> >> <end quote>
>> >
>> >Dude, that is not MS words, that is *SUN*'s.
>> >Yeah, that is not MS who spread FUD, it's Sun, spreading FUD about its
>own
>> >product.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Why is that "FUD" ? Sun is used to making hardware, and it is standard
>> practice with hardware to make such disclaimers. If you look at the fine
>> print that comes with hardware (certainly for individual parts, such as
>> processors - manufacturers of PCs and peripherals are often a bit lax
>these
>> days), they always come with such disclaimers. If you want a part that
>the
>> manufacturer thinks is suitable for life-critical uses, expect to pay
>around
>> 10 times as much for more solid packaging and vastly more comprehensive
>> testing. Sun is being responsible here in saying that their Java
>> technologies have not gone through the equivilent rigourous testing. MS
>> would normally have had to say the same thing, except they use the
cop-out
>> clause claiming they never said their software was suitable for any
>> purposes.
>
>So, when MS says it, it's FUD, even though it's truth.
>When Sun says it, it's a disclaimer?
>
No, this is a disclaimer - it never has been FUD, no matter who writes it.
The cop-out clause (i.e., the part of a EULA dismissing all responsibilities
for the actions of the software) used by MS (and many others, probably
including Sun) is not FUD either. Stating the software's limitations
provides the customer with essential information and provides the supplier
with legal protection - software licences should always include it. The
full cop-out clause is fine for free software (it is unreasonable to expect
guarentees on something you haven't paid for), but for commercial software
it goes against every consumer protection law and principle.
Do you actually know what FUD means? Or did you just fail to read or
understand either the quoted disclaimer, or my posts?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Floyd)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 10:51:08 GMT
On 1 May 2001 09:00:16 GMT, Chris Croughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>What's so "weird" about that?
>
>Er:
>
>h = move left a character
>j = move down a line
>k = move up a line
>l = move right a character
>
>Not everything is mnemonic...
And pressing "l" to move right seems especially illogical - though I'm
using vi to type this!
A bientot
Paul
--
Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr (for what it's worth)
Mail as URL, replace 1st . with @
If more is better, are double standards better than single ones?
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 11:55:02 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> pip wrote:
> >
> > GreyCloud wrote:
> > >
> > > That is because everything in windows runs in ring 0. In linux you have
> > > several ring levels that keep apps away from the kernel and daemons away
> > > from the kernel. This is done for stability. Win9x series may run a
> > > little faster, but it occasionaly croaks on the user.
> >
> > ...also X uses a convoluted client/server architecture and a complex
> > protocol. Good for network apps - not so good for your own computer. The
> > latest Xfree has included a few neat features to address this (DDR). But
> > the tradeoffs are network portability and increased system stability.
> > Take your pick.
>
> Stability.
Me too :)
What I save in 0.05 seconds of menu lag is made up for by the many last
half hours of programming not being trashed when the system locks up.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks...
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:00:35 +0100
kool breeze wrote:
>
> I hope you guys win the war. I am 35 and cannot fight the marketing
> guys.
There is no war. There is just good technology and bad technology.
"I sense a disturbance in the source" - Alan Cox
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks...
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 11:48:38 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Donn Miller wrote:
>> Never once do they consider the needs of the people beneath them. For
>> many bigger companies, that's just the way it is: the bottom line. How
>> much revenue minus capital costs and other expenditures. They could
>> give a crap less about supporting a good cause - the open source
>> movement. As long as paying for all those NT licenses doesn't run up
>> the costs too much, the only thing they care about is productivity.
>
> No, they don't care about productivity. IF they did, they would
> NEVER choose Mafia$oft.
It all depends on your definitions. According to MS, you boost your
productivity by rolling out Windows $FAVOUR_OF_THE_MONTH everywhere as
this allows your email viruses^W^W users to collaborate more effectively.
It's productivity, Aaron, but not as we know it.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- OK, there is the MFC, but it only makes the chaos object orientated.
-- Thomas Nellessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help: Bought out by MS geeks...
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 11:51:07 +0100
Donn Miller wrote:
> You can only hope that MS busts them for license violations, you lose
> your job, and find something better. Or, MS busts them for not paying
> for a license on every single machine, and some bald-headed exec who
> knows nothing about computers will finally listen to you and bring back
> the Linux machines.
>
> I love it when these know-it-alls who love MS so much get busted for
> violating MS's licensing.
<evil>
It is, of course, quite easy to anonymously help the process along by
reporting them to whoever (MS? BSA?) for suspected license violations...
</evil>
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- OK, there is the MFC, but it only makes the chaos object orientated.
-- Thomas Nellessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goran Larsson)
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:51:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Croughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't afford the resource hit either, I think the thing was designed
> to make a Cray run like a Z80 on barbiturates.
You have to keep the editor architecture (e.g. emacs or vi) and the
editor implementation (e.g. GNU emacs or vim) separate. There is nothing
that says that an emacs editor have to be as fat as GNU emacs.
$ ls -l =emacs =vi
-r-xr-xr-x 5 root bin 206948 Jan 6 2000 /usr/bin/vi
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root other 147316 Aug 23 2000 /usr/local/bin/emacs
$
--
Göran Larsson Senior Systems Analyst hoh AT approve DOT se
------------------------------
From: "C. Newport" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:05:40 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Goran Larsson wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chris Croughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I can't afford the resource hit either, I think the thing was designed
> > to make a Cray run like a Z80 on barbiturates.
>
> You have to keep the editor architecture (e.g. emacs or vi) and the
> editor implementation (e.g. GNU emacs or vim) separate. There is nothing
> that says that an emacs editor have to be as fat as GNU emacs.
vi is an editor.
alt.religion.emacs is that way ------------------->
PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS
ob clue - anything crossposed to *.advocacy is a troll.
--
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm
not sure about the universe. [Albert Einstein].
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
