Linux-Advocacy Digest #233, Volume #34 Sat, 5 May 01 21:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: where's the linux performance? (kosh)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) (Ed Allen)
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Dave Martel)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: To Aaron (Matthew Gardiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 00:45:03 GMT
On Sat, 5 May 2001 15:36:36 +0200,
Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <9d0h3d$3ig$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Damn, you people are thin-skinned, aren't you? Out of God-knows-how-many
>> > knee-jerk-reflex flame postings I have received, only one (ONE) have
>> > bothered to post something akin to a Linux advocacy (thanks to Salvador
>> > Peralta). Get the point by now? With advocacy like this, you are not
>> > convincing anyone new, you are only preaching to the converted.
>> >
>> > Mikkel
>> >
>> With all due respect Mikkel, but your initial post *did* sound
>> inflammatory. If you *sound* like yet another wintroll, don't be
>> surprised to get knee-jerk-reflex flame postings as a reply, which was
>> the entire point of my original post (minus the sarcasm this time).
>
> Hi Mart
>
> The purpose of my initial post was of course to provoke some response, hence
> it sort fits the definition of "trolling"
True
> (and I like the word
> "inflammatory", it makes me sound like a dangerous agitator :-) ). And some
> flaming was thus to be expected.
Then take it on the nose ?
> However, I had hoped for some more
> intelligent responses that I actually got,
Intelligent posts will always return intelligent replieson COLA.
> and that (some) people could
> perhaps distinguish my line from a mere "lets-poke-the-penguins" troll.
I couldn't.
>
> I took a hint from one of the others posters (Terry Porter - definitely not
> my friend after this!)
Damn, and I had such high hopes.
> and went and looked for past postings in Deja (now
> Google). And there has undoubtably been a lot of Linux-bashing going on
> here, I must admit.
You'd know this if you had been reading COLA for any length of time.
If you'd read the FAQ on usenet conventions, you'd know that the guide says
"how long should I wait before posting to a new group?"
Answer: '3 months'
"what if I can't wait 3 months ?"
Answer: wait 6 months.
> However, I would say that the typical Wintroll post
> seems to contain at least one unsubstantiated and unreasoneable degrading
> remark of the Linux OS as such (such as "Linux sux, and you're all losers",
> or other niceties).
Not at all, that's typical of a flame baiter. Wintrolls are usually
(the exception is Ubertroll) much smarter than this.
> I don't think that I went to that level,
You didn't, but your definetly a Wintroll.
> but OK - people
> here seem to be pretty sensitive.
You'd know that if you had bothered to read COLA before jumping in
boots first.
> I think that I'll make a lot of the
> regular poster's day, and simply disappear from here .....
It doesn't make my day, you have every possibility
of making a good Wintroll, given time and patience.
Study Eric Funkenbusch, he's not a wintroll, but a
quite good Windows Advocate, and conjures no
illusions about his position.
>
> Mikkel
>
>
>
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 00:48:28 GMT
On Sat, 05 May 2001 10:36:09 GMT, Weevil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9cui2m$nib$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > In article <9cu8nu$8dv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup reveals that
> the
>> > >majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
>> > >official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of
> Linux.
<snip>
>>
>> Hmmmm ...... maybe. But if I look at the most recent postings, we have
>> within 24 hours these:
>>
>> "If Windows is supposed to be so "thoroughly" tested..."
>> "The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT"
>> "Windows NT: lost in space?"
>> "Windos is *unfriendly*"
>>
>> All MS bashing to boot. I failed to find any initial Linux bashing threads
>> in the same period, however. Totally non-scientific statistics, I know,
> but
>> still ....
>
> Oh, I see. You're simply lying.
I thought that at first too.
>
> That, or you lurked here for a long time waiting for a 24 hour period in
> which Linux wasn't attacked by one of the many wintrolls in here.
I also thought this!
>
> Come to think of it, though, there has never been such a period in my year
> or so of reading COLA. There is ALWAYS some thread with a title like,
> "Another Linux OOPSIE".
Hahahah I also thought this!
>
> So I was right the first time. You're simply lying.
Well,... whats a self confessed Windows advocate doing
on COLA ?
Motif, Sherlock!
>
> --
> Weevil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
> would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
> -- Bill Gates
>
>
>
--
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: where's the linux performance?
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 18:36:53 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux trully multitasks so new programs loading are given equal preference
to everything else going on also. Once as app is loaded is it very fast
however many don't load very fast. What you get for that though is that you
can tell it to open a bunch of apps and keep working on other apps and it
has almost no impact on the speed of the app you are using. In general I
don't worry about app load times since I load the app once and then just
leave it running.
I figure I might need the app again so I very rarely close an application.
It doesn't seem to affect system performance doing that either. However on
a system like that kmail should load in about 7 secs or so. When you leave
apps open for 2 or 3 weeks at a time sometimes a lot longer a few seconds
on startup time don't matter.
Jonathan Martindell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm just a beginning Linux user. I've recently tried Linux-Mandrake 7.2
> and
> then Linux-Mandrake 8.0 and also Caldera OpenLinux 2.4. I've been very
> disappointed in the performance of all of these. My machine, I think,
> should be more than adaquate: 708MHz celeron fcppga cpu, 256 meg rams, 10
> gig partition for linux (20 for windows 2000) on Ultra66. I've tried
> running KDE, Gnome, and Icevm. Programs like KMail take over 10 seconds
> to
> load. StarOffice takes a really long time too. When I'm using win2000 I
> never have this problem. Even on comparable software. Forte for Java and
> StarOffice both load many, many times faster in windows vs linux. Do you
> think that my linux isn't configured for maximum performance? I've spent
> some time looking through websites and have noticed an increase when I use
> the hdparm tool but nothing extrodinary. If this is the extent of the
> linux
> performance than I don't think I'll be sticking with it. However, if it
> just requires more work than setting up windows and you ultimately get
> greater performance than I will definitely stick with it. I enjoy
> tinkering
> with computers in that way. What do all of you think of this? Do you
> know
> of any websites that show the results of linux benchmarks? Any help would
> be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
>
> Sincerely,
> Jonathan
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 01:54:53 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <NuXI6.6002$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> > You seem quite fixated on your opinion that Microsoft
>> > has transgressed the letter of the law in producing a better
>> >
>>
>> What "better product" would that be?
>
> That'd be Windows.
I know I'm pissed but please stop. How can you write that without a
smiley?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 01:53:16 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <5_EI6.4720$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 03 May 2001
>> >I hope that even you can admit that any
>> >law that consigns us all to DOS forevermore
>> >is a bad law. :D
>>
>> That's pathetically moronic, Daniel. I can't believe you put your name
>> to such silly comments. Do you think we'll believe you're being
>> light-hearted, and somehow forget you're trying to excuse criminal
>> behavior?
>
> You seem quite fixated on your opinion that Microsoft
> has transgressed the letter of the law in producing a better
> product for sale.
Stop it. It hurts laughing this much. Better product? Whale oil
beef hooked. :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 01:46:40 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <FsXI6.5997$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> > Microsoft does not have the strange supernatural
>> > powers you attribute to them.
>>
>> No, they have monopoly power and they abuse it.
>
> Calling them "monopoly powers" does not make
> them any less magical.
First you say 'Microsoft does not have the strange supernatural powers
you attribute to them' and then 'Calling them "monopoly powers" does
not make them any less magical'? You are very confused indeed.
They are a monopoly. The findings of fact show this. They are not
fighting the FoF (they can't because they screwed their case so
badly) but the remedy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 00:59:00 GMT
On Sat, 05 May 2001 21:50:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Linux was/is and will continue to be a miserable failure as a consumer
>desktop OS until it wakes up and starts offering an end result that is
>superior instead of an inferior result based upon theoretical superior
>technologies.
You and windows deserve each other. Why don't you quit whining and just
fuck off troll?
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 01:00:38 GMT
In article <9d17mc$90v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ayende Rahien quoth:
>> Okay, how do I get del to work correctly and not put ~ instead of
>> deleting?
>
In ~/.inputrc add the line:
"\e[3~": delete-char
or start by copying /etc/inputrc into ~/.intputrc and edit it.
bind -l
will list all the functions which can be mapped like that.
>> And in history, I think he meant F7 like, when you got a
>> windows with all your recent commands.
>
>right. as I said above, you just create an alias in your .bashrc.
>
> alias foo='tail -20 .bash_history'
>
>Then type 'foo' in a new bash session.
>
Instead he may prefer:
fc -l
It defaults to 16 lines of history.
Or to get closer to what he may be expecting:
fc -e emacs 100 200
To get the list into an edit buffer where they can be changed
or reordered as needed.
>Of course you can't do pop-ups from a cli unless you are running a
>terminal session in X and write ( and alias ) a tcl/tk or perl/tk
>script to do it. If I have time this weekend, I'll be happy to write
>a script for it. Shouldn't take too long even though I'm not so
>great at tcl.
>
>> And how do I get tab completion to work on bash, for that matter?
>
>Ummm... you hit tab? Works fine on every system I've ever run bash
>on. If it doesn't work on the windows flavor, I'm sure its on the
>todo list. Perhaps problemmatic in the windows implementation of
>bash, but one that is not endemic to bash itself, which is simply
>another reason to run linux.
>
Perhaps Windows turns it off so people won't get an 'unexpected'
action when the try to use it.
Under the section on builtin variables:
`disable-completion'
If set to `On', Readline will inhibit word completion.
Completion characters will be inserted into the line as if
they had been mapped to `self-insert'. The default is `off'.
So:
set disable-completion off
may be all you need. If so I suggest it belongs in your .bashrc or
whatever the Windows equivalent is.
--
Microsoft Motto: Illegal we do immediately.
Unconstitutional takes a little longer.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool.
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 18:53:18 -0600
On Sat, 5 May 2001 13:14:44 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9d109q$g7c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Don't make the mistake of trying to claim MS is against Open Source.
>> > They could care less if someone gives their code away. What they care
>> > about is that the GPL prevents businesses from taking advantage of code
>> > paid for by taxpayer dollars.
>>
>> Since when has the GNU project been supported by the taxpayer?
>
>Who said it was? I'm talking about code developed at JPL or the NSA (such
>as Secure Linux, which is government funded, but GPL'd)
>
>> And you also seem to be saying that they are annoyed that they can't make
>> money off other peoples work? Well so what? Do you think anyone cares
>> about MS that much?
>
>Federal law prohibits work developed by the government from being
>copyrighted. That means it can't be GPL'd by law, but it still is happening
If that's true then it's not really GPL'd because Federal law
overrides the GPL. So what's your problem? Go ahead, use the code in
your proprietary product, and dare anyone to do anything about it.
>because the GPL has infected the government.
The GPL doesn't "infect", it's just a condition attached to the use of
a free code library contributed by volunteers. Do you object to the
rights of GPL programmers to impose such conditions on the use of
their own intellectual property?
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 21:11:05 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > MS-DOS and DR-DOS were *both* lousy things
> > > to saddle Windows with. I'm not endorsing MS-DOS
> > > over DR-DOS; I'm endorsing Windows with as little
> > > of either as can be managed.
> >
> > Windows COULD NOT run without some DOS underneath. DR-DOS was superior.
> > And Microsoft used it monoply power to push DR-DOS out of the market.
>
> I don't see that DR-DOS was superior as a platform
> for Windows.
>
Of course you dont see it. You dont see anything but your own opinions.
This is a waste of time and bandwidth.
> The real trick was to supercede as much of DOS
> as possible, not to use another DOS.
>
> [snip]
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 13:10:13 -0700
> What "the rhetoric" are you referring to?
>
> >That has been obvious for a long time but I guess it is too much to ask
> >politicians to say what they really mean. There is no such thing as a
> >"level playing field" or "free trade", never has been, probably never
> >will be.
>
> Not in an absolute sense, of course not. These are abstractions,
> metaphors, even. Tariffs and subsidies are used to ensure a level
> playing field (its effects on those outside the playing field are not > of direct
>concern) to allow free trade (within that playing field), as >I've
> said. Sometimes they do that well and sometimes they're used
> counter-productively. Whining about politicians as a handy "them" to
> demonize is just rhetoric.
How is New Zealand exported lamb to America not on a level playing
field? is the US finally, after 10 years realising the damage from
pursuing the strong dollar policy? maybe, instead of giving out
subsidies they should reduce taxes, reduce tarriffs, and actually get
some marketing going to encourage people to buy "US Lamb". It doesn't
exactly take a rocket scientist to sort that one out.
Since 1984, tariffs and subsidies have gradually been removed.
Subsidies went in one foul swoop, and when the farmers complained, the
government said, "tough luck, your free ride has now ended", and they
were re-elected, then they gradually removed tariffs, old, inefficient
businesses close, whilst new, more efficient, niche market businesses
opened.
Very soon, the US will face stiff competition from China, who will be,
in 10 years time, the US's equal. It either the US addresses these
issues now, or get hammered by China later.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
