Linux-Advocacy Digest #247, Volume #34 Sun, 6 May 01 07:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP ("green")
Re: Linux disgusts me ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Apple is doing a good thing ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* ("Paul Dossett")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux books (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux books (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Compaq 1690 Laptop, and Linux (Eugenio Mastroviti)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: where's the linux performance? (Matthew Gardiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 20:26:30 +1000
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d297n$7m9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9d28j3$b60$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > whether they bought it or not, powerpoint is bad even when comparing
> > > to other ms products. why they just don't expand word to turn the
> > > page in landscape and do big fonts i'll never know.
> >
> > to hard for the time pressed ms users ( all my uni lectures are done in
> > power point, using standard templates. no imagination needed.)
> >
> >
> > put it in word and it becomes two hard.
> >
> > and even more bloated. by keeping features down you can help minimise
> bugs.
>
> Have you *seen* Word's feature list?
> The only thing it can't do is to make you coffee, and that is because no
one
> makes a USB coffee-maker.
>
My point too (spelt it right this time.) many features.
ms-word 6.0 is just as useful to me as word 95 and so on.
the only extra feature I like is the underlining of spelling errors.
Probably wouldn't be hard to put a coffee maker on, but that may violate
some gpl on the howto for getting linux to make coffee.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 12:24:01 +0100
>> WTF ? Illegible non anti-aliased fonts that require a magnifying glass
>> to read ? WTF ?
>
> Anti-aliased fonts are available for Linux. As well as 100dpi fonts. Yet
> distros such as SuSE 7.1 and Mandrake 7.2 don't offer these features. I
> can't help wondering why, if it's an obvious feature that is going to
> be missed.
I haven't got antialiased fonts, and I have to say that I don't miss them
a bit.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Apple is doing a good thing
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 12:26:00 +0100
>> > That's why 98/ME will be dead this
>> > year, replaced by Windows XP.
>>
>> In exactly the same way they were replaced by Windows 2000.
>
> They weren't intended to be replaced by Windows 2000.
They were. OK, so MS switched away from this idea as soon (pretty soon)
as it was evident that Win2K was not good enough, but initially, Win2K
was meant to be the great unfork in the road.
> MS will stop selling 9x based OS's after XP is released.
Like they did with Win2K.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 22:27:23 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> You've posted this exact same diatribe in here at least 3 or 4 other times.
> (in fact, it's almost verbatim).
>
> How many more times will you post it?
>
How many times must a person tell you that you are incorrect?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 22:32:52 -0700
What part of "freshmeat" don't you understand?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:33:48 +0200
"green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d38m6$r3r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Probably wouldn't be hard to put a coffee maker on, but that may violate
> some gpl on the howto for getting linux to make coffee.
That is one thing that frighten me about the GPL.
There is already GPLed data, what happen when other things start to get GPL?
------------------------------
From: "Paul Dossett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:35:50 GMT
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:s_5J6.8122$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
> > Yep, but remember its Windos, and networking has always been
> > difficult with that OS.
>
> That explains why I have Windows network up and running and Linux I have
to
> start DHCP manually.
Pete, maybe you can help my friend who is trying to get a Linux box
communicating through a W2k box gateway (running ICS). The Linux box is
working fine, but the Windows machine won't pass packets, and he can't
figure out what's wrong.
> --
> Pete
--
Paul D
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 22:44:33 -0700
> >Wouldn't know a decent Linux app if it bit his ass off.
>
> That's because I have yet to see one.
StarOffice, doesn't exactly set the word on fire in terms of loading
speed, but it gets the job done. XMMS, MP3 player, has NEVER crashed on
me in the 2 years I have been using it. Caitoo Download Manager, another
example of a very useful, and free (with out those annoying ad's)
utility. Corel Photopaint 9, Corel Draw 9, Wordperfect Suite 9, all top
quality applications for Linux.
>
> >To this Wintroll, the world is Winaudio, nothing more.
>
> No. The world is applications I want/need to use and even excluding
> DAW ones, Linux is in the dumps as far as quality/useful applications
> are concerned.
In terms of high end audio, yes, Linux is lacking, however, in terms of
general use, it is more than adequate for Joe or Jane (have to be
politically correct :) ) Computer Enthusiast and University Student. As
for decent, generic applications, I am running Wordperfect Suite 2000
Pro for Linux, Corel Draw 9 and Corel Photopaint. I have recompiled the
wine, and now it is as responsive and stable as a native linux
application. So whats up with graphic studio's sticking with Windows?
>
> You can barely give away that Freshmeat list.
What part of Freshmeat don't you understand?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 22:54:48 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The How-To's are more than enough to keep you busy for several months
> or until you vomit, whichever comes first.
>
> flatfish
>
Remember Flatfish, you read the printouts, not eat them.
Matthew Gardner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:00:36 -0700
> A friend of mine has asked me for reccomendations (etc) for books on
> Linux. I've never really bothered with books much, so I thought I'd ask
> you guys what you found the best.
Title: UNIX Complete
Publisher: SYBEX
Cost: $19.99
Author(s): Peter Dyson, Stan Kelly-Bootle, John Heilborn
Pages: Around 900
Format: Soft Cover
Thats one of the books I have, however, there are "learn linux in 21
days" type books that have specific referencing to Linux are very good,
esp for newbie's, however, if your friend wants a general guide to
Linux/UNIX which can be used on a not only Linux but commerical UNIX's
as well, then UNIX Complete is probably the best book to go for.
I normally read 100 pages before buying a book. Most book stores I have
been to have a chair and table so that you can sit down and browse the
books.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Eugenio Mastroviti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compaq 1690 Laptop, and Linux
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 11:58:00 +0100
mlw wrote:
>
> RedHat Linux 7.1 is finally what I would call Linux that can run on a
> laptop.
>
> I have a compaq 1690, I installed RedHat 7.1 on it, with NO, I repeat NO,
> glitches.
>
> This is the first time I would call installing Linux on a laptop a breeze.
> It even found and properly configured the PCMCIA network card. The
> internal sound system works as well. It found and used the screen, and the
> APM monitor works too.
>
> Then only thing that may not work, and I have not even bothered testing
> it, is the internal modem which I believe is a winmodem. Short of that, a
> snap.
>
> We may quibble and be upset with RedHat, but this was the easiest install
> ever.
Well, I hate to make this a case of "my distribution is bigger than yours",
but I've been running SuSE 6.4 on the company Dell Latitude for the last
year (more or less), and it's lovely.
No glitches, both the PCMCIA cards I use have been recognized immediately
(modem & network card)... lovely
Eugenio
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 13:03:33 +0100
>> > OK, Aaron answre this...
>> >
>> > If homosexuality is such a sead end, how come it keeps cropping up n
>> > many, many formes of life, after hunderds of million years have, by
>> > your argument tried to get rid of it.
>> >
>> > If it's still here, there is probably a very god reason.
>>
>> Because, quite simply, most people who define themselves as homosexual,
>> or heterosexual, do so because of societal pressure, when in fact they
>> are probably bisexual with a preference.
>
> You write like someone who was abused as a child.
>
>
> I think Joseph Sobran sums it up nicely:
>
> The Great "Gay" Racket April 19, 2001
This is horse shit. It is incredibly biased.
Aaron, if you agree with this guy and have read the article through, you
seriously need help. Or you're a common troll.
> Getting in touch with my feelings the other
> day, I realized how I loathe homosexuals.
Well, this isn't a very good start.
> All of them? Of course not.
> Some of them are funny, kind, intelligent, and otherwise pleasant. But
> homosexuals in general, yes. I can't stand them. Especially the ones
Wtf? So he admits there are nice homosexuals, but he hates them all
anyway. Any reason? None yet.
> who are organized under the rubric of "gay rights."
> I guess this makes me "homophobic." So what?
> "Homophobia" is one of those ugly cant-words --
> like "racist" and "sexist" -- that no self- respecting speaker of the
> English language would use. (Try to imagine Abraham Lincoln calling
> someone "homophobic.") It's a verbal badge of groupthink.
In this paragraph, he's trying to prevent people from calling him
homophobic by trying to brand them as sheep if they want to use that
word. Mabey we should settle for `bigot' since he hasn't told us how
we're stupid for using that word.
> Funny how the people who style themselves
> victims always want to bully everyone else.
He seems to be making the claim that all homosexuals (Hs) want to bully
everyone else. He is probably basing this on stuff he has seen on the
news about lobyists and campaigners, failing to realise that most Hs
aren' lobbyists or campaigners.
> "Diversity" now means conformity. It means making
> sensible people afraid to contradict nonsense so obvious as to insult
> their intelligence.
Again, he's using the same technique above to try to prevent people from
thinking he's bigoted simply by telling them they're stup[id to think
that. He has esentially made a statement "Diversity..." and gives no
backup argument, except telling your stupid if you don't agree.
> Normal people find homosexuality, especially
> male homosexuality, repellent.
This is blatantly false. I am a normal person and I do not find
homosexuality in others repellent. The trouble with using an argument
like "everyone agrees that...." is that you may find that not everyone
agreed.
> We're supposed to apologize for that?
No. But, two quetions:
Do you find the idea of homosexuality in others repellent or is it just
the idea of you indulging in homosexual acts you find repellent?
Since they don't force it on to you, how does it affect you?
> Our slang words for the anus, and their use as insults, express our
> disgust with the whole idea of anal sex.
No, I think they express out disgust with shit. Shit is horrible. It is
sticky and it stinks and is generally pretty unpleasant stuff. It is
reasonable to have this view ingraned since earlier in our culture before
proper sanitation, shit was also very good at spreading and harbouring
disease, especially parasites.
> Apart from the personal
> defilement it involves, it's grossly unsanitary.
Personal defilement? If someone wants it to happen, then how is it
defilement?
And also, in this day and age we not have proper sanitation, making this
a non issue. Infact BBQ's are probably statistically more unsanitary,
judging bu most people's capability of hygenically handling raw meat.
And thirdly, some hetrosexual people indulge in anal sex too.
> My own feelings are intensified by personal
> experience. Believe me, when a child you love has been sodomized, it
> takes a lot of the romance out of buggery. What was merely disgusting
> becomes nauseating. You needn't hate the perpetrator -- who, in this
> case as in so many others, had been sodomized as a child himself -- to
> feel utter revulsion at the act, and contempt for those who try to
> endow it with dignity.
Now this is shit through and through. What the hell has this got to do
with homosexuals in general. This guy is trying to lump all homosexuals
with paedophiles. He has given no grounds, apart from bigotry, as to why
all homosexuals should be grouped with paedophiles.
> Will the victim now grow up to sodomize other
> boys? Will he come down with AIDS? Will he, on his wedding night,
> remember this first "sexual" experience?
>
> Another instance of homosexual pedophilia has
> been in the news lately -- or rather, hasn't been in the news. In 1999
> two Arkansas perverts raped, tortured, and murdered a 13-year-old boy;
> that crime has been almost totally ignored by the same news media that
> spent a year bewailing the murder of the homosexual Matthew Shepard.
> Because the boy was a victim rather than a victimizer of homosexuals,
> his story might hurt The Cause. No martyr he!
Now he's specifically on to homosexual paedophillia. Well, yes, it is
bloody discraceful and the perpetrators of any form of peadophillia
should be kept well away from society at large for a long time. But what
has this got to do with ordinary homosexuals? this guy is trying to
incite hatred against homosexuals by trying to make them all seem like
paedophiles.
> The standard "gay" line on pedophilia is that
> most child molesters are heterosexuals. This is sheer propaganda.
Well, I've never heard this line before. Statistically it makes sense
since the majority of people are hetrosexual. On the other hand, it
probably isn't valid to group paedophiles as either homo or hetrosexual.
There is no evidence suggesting that out of any group of homosexuals,
there would be more paedophiles than out of any group of hetrosexuals.
> Homosexuals are only 1 or 2 percent of the general population (despite
> their inflated claims -- also propagandist -- of 10 percent), yet they
> are wildly disproportionate among pedophiles.
Do you have any evidence for this. I personally think is it valid calling
paedophiles either homo or hetrosexual, since there is very little
difference between children.
> What is more important, though, is that most
> heterosexuals are more than willing to punish molesters of little
> girls. They don't make excuses for them or cover up their crimes. They
> recognize
> norms of behavior.
Where the hell did you dredge this nugget up from? Most gays find the act
of paediphillia as disgusting as most hetrosexuals.
> But pedophiles are an integral part of the
> "gay rights" movement.
BS
> Does that movement repudiate
> them? Not at all. On the contrary, the North American Man/Boy Love
> Association is a regular and welcome contingent at "gay pride" marches.
I am not familiar with NAMBLA, so I won't comment.
> In England, organized "gays" agitate for lowering the age of consent
> for sex.
And good on them as well. The age of consent for hetrosexuals was 16 and
the age of consent for homosexuals was much higher. The argument was to
bring the two in to line. This in no way encourages any form of
paedophillia. There is no rgument I've heard for lowering it to below 16
(ie what it is for hetrosexuals).
> This stands to reason. Homosexuality is an
> abandonment not only of the normal, but of any norms.
Ah, pure bigotry shining through at last.
> Once you approve
> of promiscuous anal sex with strangers, how can you draw a line against
> anything? Why not have anal sex with kids, if that's your thing?
More total trollop. Who said homosexuality==promiscuity and
hetrosexuality!=promiscuity. I know promiscuous hetrosexuals. So, once
you approve of promiscuous sex with strangers, how can you draw a line
against anything? Why not have sex with kids if that's your thing?
Obviously this is pure bollocks, through and through.
> And once again, the news media -- which love
> to highlight any "extremists" at conservative events -- refuse to
> report on pedophiles in the movement. It might embarrass The Cause. If
> it's
> "diversity" you want, don't look for it among
> journalists.
> I used to feel sorry for homosexuals. However
> they became that way, it was an inclination I could only pity them for
> being saddled with, since so much of normal life was closed off to
> them. And I understand why parents who find out their sons are
> homosexual want to protect them, even if it means denying that
> homosexuality is a serious disorder. That's natural.
Since when has homosexuality been a disorder?
> But no parent is glad to learn his son is
> "gay"; no parent would wish that condition on a
> child. This is why all the propaganda of "gay pride" rings false.
> Normal people aren't even proud of being normal; they take it for
> granted. But
> "pride" in an abnormality?
There is no pride in abnormality. Most people aren't ashamed to be
normal. Left handed people aren't ashamed to be left handed. So why
should homosexual people (another natural variation) be ashamed at being
homosexual? Gay pride is about removing shame.
> I don't blame anyone for being sick. I blame
> them for telling me that sickness is just another form of health.
In this case it is.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:05:59 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Welcome to the joy of Linux!!!!
>
> Flatfish
>
Ignorance must be bliss for you FlatFish.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
