Linux-Advocacy Digest #693, Volume #34 Tue, 22 May 01 11:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("You've got MALE..
sex organs!")
Re: evolutionary (oh boy) psychology: the short form ("You've got MALE.. sex
organs!")
Re: Can I use GPL? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: RIP the Linux desktop ("~¿~")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Win2000 Annoyances (Zsolt)
Re: Linux on the desktop potential, suggestions needed (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Win2000 Annoyances (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Gregory L. Hansen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <[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: Tue, 22 May 2001 08:10:58 -0600
Aw, suck my dick, you little right wing turd. I'll insult little
phoney fuckheads like you all I want. I've earned my rights to
criticize little bastards like you.
Oh, you're a SOLDIER! So fucking what? Plenty of us have been soldiers,
and I doubt that many have been as much of a sad sack as you. Soldiers
are like any other population - there are some great ones, and there are
some losers - like YOU.
If you are protecting us while we sleep, we aren't very secure
now, are we?
BTW, your sig file sucks and you suck.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "Vallely's Dirt in Boss King's Ditch.." wrote:
> >
> > Aaron's a homophobe,
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> You misspelled "person who finds buggery disgusting"
>
> > in addition to being a pathetic little right
> > wing gunny turd..
>
> Be careful who you insult, asshole
>
> The military people who protect your constitutional rights are "right wing gunny
>assholes"
>
> So are the police who protect you while you sleep.
>
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> > > > >>
> > > > Aaron> Roberto Pavan wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
> > > > >> >> > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Why? Seriously. Why should they demonstrate anything?
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Seeing as it affects you not one whit whether someone chooses to have
>sex with
> > > > >> >> someone of the same gender, why should they have to prove anything to
>you at all
> > > > >> >> regarding this behaviour? Why not go on wearing your tutu and
>playing with your
> > > > >>
> > > > Aaron> If a car that I don't own, and I'm not riding in, crashes, killing
>all aboard,
> > > > Aaron> due to brake failure...
> > > > >>
> > > > Aaron> are you trying to imply that I should be prohibited from commenting
>that
> > > > Aaron> the car was obviously defective in some way...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >> sock while listening to Barry Manilow records and staring at pictures
>of flatulent
> > > > >> >> field mice and leave them the hell alone? Both you and they will be
>ever so much
> > > > >> >> happier...
> > > > >>
> > > > Aaron> Personally, I wish all of these defective people would quit running
>around
> > > > Aaron> demanding that I give them special rights, so that they can indulge
>in
> > > > Aaron> their defective behavior.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Can you name a single right being asked for that heterosexuals
> > > > >> do not either already have,
> > > >
> > > > Yes> The PRIVILEGE of not allowing others to judge their behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> For example, *I* get judged on my behavior all the time. Why should
> > > > Aaron> homosexuals get a special exemption?
> > > >
> > > > Who is asking for such a thing?
> > >
> > > The gay privileges lobby.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >> or would have along with gays should
> > > > >> the proposed item be passed into law?
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> They tried that in my home town just this week.
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> Although public opinion polls showed the special-rights-for-gays
>proposal
> > > > Aaron> to have a slight majority....the ACTUAL VOTING TURNOUT was a
>landslide
> > > > Aaron> defeat for the homsexuals.
> > > >
> > > > Name one of the so-called special rights.
> > > >
> > >
> > > The privilege to NOT bear the consequences of one's behavior.
> > >
> > > > Aaron> Imagine that.
> > > >
> > > > >> I will not hold my breath.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There is nothing "special" about equal rights.
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> Homosexual already HAVE equal rights.
> > > >
> > > > No, they are not allowed to marry the willing adult of their
> > > > choice, and are thus shut out of a large set of rights, privileges
> > > > and responsibilities.
> > >
> > > Any man is allowed to marry any woman whom he so chooses.
> > > Any woman is allowed to marry any man whom she so chooses.
> > >
> > > All gays have these rights, just like anybody else.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Aaron> Any additional laws are Special Privileges.
> > > >
> > > > I have yet to see a single special right or privilege being
> > > > asked for.
> > >
> > > You wish to escape the consequences of your deviancy.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > You have, despite several challenges, failed to come up with
> > > > one.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Big surprise.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Hall
> > > > (Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > Unix Systems Engineer
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey, wimp, virgin, right wing dufus, and Ditto suck ass
> ICQ # 3056642
------------------------------
From: "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.men,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: evolutionary (oh boy) psychology: the short form
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 08:12:13 -0600
Get with it. You can't be a good little right wing bigot if you
can't read the program, Aaron.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> jet wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > jackie wrote:
> > > > amusingly enough if homosexuality is genetic the genes promoting it may
> > > > well be more numerous today because homophobia is so universal. that is
> > > > to say, by forcing men who would prefer the only the company of men to
> > > > marry a beard society has generated more of the very thing that might
> > > ^^^^^
> > > is this a typo?
> >
> > LOL! Aaron you have reached levels of ignorance that are shocking even for
> > you!
> >
> > A beard is a member of the opposite sex a homosexual person gets married to,
> > or has a similar kind of relationship with, in order to look straight.
>
> Well EXCUSE ME for not being up on the latest homosexual slang.......
>
> >
> > J
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Can I use GPL?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:09:53 GMT
On Mon, 21 May 2001 19:10:16 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, source was given for the egcs compiler and some of its tools.
> The Source Navigator has no source code available. At a price yes.
You are mistaken. I downloaded SourceNavigator earlier this year. The
license is installed in /usr/local/snavigator/COPYING (on Linux).
The location of the source code is in README.TXT, which can be found in the
same directory. README.TXT states:
============================8<============================
Thank you for choosing Red Hat Source-Navigator. This README document
outlines some outstanding issues with this release of Source-Navigator.
DISTRIBUTION:
The most current distribution lives at
ftp://sourceware.cygnus.com/pub/sourcenav. The latest source distribution
will be named SourceNavSrcYYYYMMDD.tar.gz, where YYYYMMDD is the date
the distribution was released. Patches will be of the form
SourceNavYYYYMMDDPatchXX.tar.gz, where YYYYMMDD is the date of the src
release it patches, and XX is the patch number.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:11:35 +0100
>>In free space, radio waves travel at *exactly* the speed of light.
>
> Just how many other people here are unaware that Maxwell's equations are
> no more correct in all cases than Newton's are, Bohr's, or Einstein's
> are?
Which cases are they not correct in. They are true under all relativistic
transforms and fit in nicely with quantum mechanics.
> Claiming that light travels at the speed of light *because* you can't
> solve Maxwell's equations any other way is just the kind of gibberish
> you've accused GreyCloud of.
...?
> In fact, IIRC, wasn't it the failure of Maxwell's equations to solve the
> 'black body' problem correctly that caused quantum physics to first be
> considered?
No. That is wrong.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "~¿~" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RIP the Linux desktop
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:18:11 GMT
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > That's what I thought. Why bother when Windows is already there? Ack!
>
> Well yeah, I suppose Windows is better for a desktop system aimed at the
> end user. However, Linux and the other free unices offer, firstly, and
> alternative to Windows. This is ignoring the desktop. Maybe certain
> users don't care about what their desktop looks like? There's a
> psychology involved here, because most Windows users have been
> conditioned to believe that Windows is the ideal desktop, and that we
> really need all those gadgets and conveniences.
I'm always struck with the ubiquity of the claim by 'unix users' that
'windows users' are somehow conditioned into believing something, and that
the connotation is one of brainwashing. I think a definition of 'end user'
would help un-blur this pervasive assertion. If by user you're referring to
the computer using public at large, then recreational use must be considered
a segment. By recreational, I'm referring to the idea of the computer as an
appliance: not a way of life, not as a means to make a living. In this
context, other factors come into play other than the desktop metaphor.
'Windows users' will mention applications and ease of use as prime factors
for their use of windows. Granted, ease of use includes the fact that the
vast majority of computers are purchased configured and ready to go with
windows as the operating system, thereby relieving the user of that chore.
Since this is not a marketing discussion ... The other factors include, but
are not limited to:
* educational software: READ tools! -and - What applications your school
uses to exchange data.
* computer aided learning. This would include distance learning, computer
based training, and so on.
* support for the newest hardware gadgets. Consumers are gadget oriented,
and want them yesterday.
* compatibility with what family and peers are using.
These are but a few examples, but they are important considerations for a
computer consumer in the appliance sense I allude to above. If we're talking
CS major or computer enthusiast, then it's a different ballgame.
>Unix is more terse, and
>is founded on the belief that the quality and underlying infrastructure
> are what's important. I've been using unix for 8 years, so my mind is
> conditioned to the unix philosophy. I personally don't really find
> Windows ME, for example, ia any better, easier, and convenient to use
> than FreeBSD running XFree86 and Window Maker. Is there any reason to
> prefer Windows over the latter setup I just described? No. Our
> subconscious minds are programmed by our environment, and if your
> environment consists of using Windows every day, you have this image of
> what the ideal desktop should be.
Unix was born in a scientific environment. Not everyone wants to play
scientist. I don't have a need \ time to know how my appliances work.
(embedded concepts aside!).
You may not find WinME easier or more convenient to use than FreeBSD running
Xfree, but you're in a distinct minority in the universal set of computer
users. Also, you're taking on an elitist mindset by surmising that windows
users, simply because they see the same image everyday, assume that it is
idyllic.
I proffer that you and your imagined adversary aren't seeing the same thing
in the same way. Some simply see a machine that does their bidding. Some are
passionate about it to the point of excluding this common view from their
reasoning. As with most things, the middle ground is usually the safest (=
> What exactly is a "desktop", anyways? For me a desktop is the machine I
> have sitting on my desk, churning out work. I find unix to be an
> adequate desktop, because, I dunno, I can get all my work done with just
> FreeBSD and Window Maker. Isn't that what counts? Windows and unix are
> simply founded on differing cultures and philosophies. They are both
> the way they are because of a certain mindset, which led to a differing
> philosophy between the two.
Logical. Why the need to convert the masses? I've never quite understood it.
It seems almost religious in nature. Like Frank Zappa sang "just shuttup and
play your guitar"
<no offense intended>
> So, the concept of "desktop" will differ between groups of people.
> Myself, I honestly don't really find one more convenient than the other,
> because I just adapt to the philosophy and way of thinking of the
> operating system I'm using.
>
> Therefore, Linux (or FreeBSD, or any other unix) can't be losing on the
> desktop, because there really isn't any objective definition of what a
> desktop is. It's 100% subjective, so which one is "winning" or "losing"
> depends on your personal concept of a desktop. The fact is that Windows
> is turning over users to BSD and Linux, not the other way around, so it
> is really Windows that is losing on the desktop. If people are leaving
> Windows for unix systems, they must have the concept in their minds that
> unix is a better desktop than Windows.
Something is happening though. The classes for Unix at the local university
where I live are suffering marked declines in enrollment. Some aren't even
making. Dot.com syndrome? I'm not sure, but the numbers don't lie.
> But, if your definition of "desktop" is a Windows-alike, you're still
> wrong, because KDE and GNOME are becoming more accessible to those
> people who have a desktop concept in their minds similar to Windows.
>
> So, it all depends on what particular concept of "desktop" has been
> programmed into your subconscious by your environment, beliefs, and
> philosphies.
I don't think it's really a concept for most people. They purchase a
computer, learn to use it with a return based on time spent, and they move
on about their daily lives. If you're in the industry, it's obviously
different. If so, then learning as much as you can stand, about as much as
you can is the day to day.
I prefer Larry Wall's approach, though. I'm lazy to a fault, don't lack
hubris, well, you get the point.
So much of linux advocacy is either not advocacy in the true sense of the
word, or is tantamount to preaching to the choir. Without your 'wintrolls',
what on earth would you kibitz about?
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[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: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:20:42 +0100
> If
> your assertion is correct, then the majority of 6502 instructions would
> take 3 cycles: fetch instruction, fetch data, execute. This sounds
> corect to me and of course would demolish Erik's point even more.
Indeed. The implied addressing ones take two cycles. These include
TAX, TXA, T??..., NOP, INX, INY, etc
Others take more, for instance
LDA #XX
Takes 3 since it has 2 memory fetches (I'm pretty sure it takes 3)
Zero page ones take more and general memory address ones take more still.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:19:43 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> >>
Aaron> Roberto Pavan wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
>> >> >> > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why? Seriously. Why should they demonstrate anything?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Seeing as it affects you not one whit whether someone chooses to have sex
with
>> >> >> someone of the same gender, why should they have to prove anything to you
at all
>> >> >> regarding this behaviour? Why not go on wearing your tutu and playing
with your
>> >>
Aaron> If a car that I don't own, and I'm not riding in, crashes, killing all
aboard,
Aaron> due to brake failure...
>> >>
Aaron> are you trying to imply that I should be prohibited from commenting that
Aaron> the car was obviously defective in some way...
>> >>
>> >> >> sock while listening to Barry Manilow records and staring at pictures of
flatulent
>> >> >> field mice and leave them the hell alone? Both you and they will be ever
so much
>> >> >> happier...
>> >>
Aaron> Personally, I wish all of these defective people would quit running around
Aaron> demanding that I give them special rights, so that they can indulge in
Aaron> their defective behavior.
>> >>
>> >> Can you name a single right being asked for that heterosexuals
>> >> do not either already have,
>>
Yes> The PRIVILEGE of not allowing others to judge their behavior.
>>
Aaron> For example, *I* get judged on my behavior all the time. Why should
Aaron> homosexuals get a special exemption?
>>
>> Who is asking for such a thing?
Aaron> The gay privileges lobby.
Nobody is asking for a law anything like that.
>> >> or would have along with gays should
>> >> the proposed item be passed into law?
Aaron> They tried that in my home town just this week.
Aaron> Although public opinion polls showed the special-rights-for-gays proposal
Aaron> to have a slight majority....the ACTUAL VOTING TURNOUT was a landslide
Aaron> defeat for the homsexuals.
>> Name one of the so-called special rights.
Aaron> The privilege to NOT bear the consequences of one's behavior.
I note you have failed the challenge to identify a single special
right. That does not surprise me, because all that is being asked
for is equal rights.
Aaron> Imagine that.
>> >> I will not hold my breath.
>> >> There is nothing "special" about equal rights.
Aaron> Homosexual already HAVE equal rights.
>> No, they are not allowed to marry the willing adult of their
>> choice, and are thus shut out of a large set of rights, privileges
>> and responsibilities.
Aaron> Any man is allowed to marry any woman whom he so chooses.
Correct, if she is willing. However homosexuals are not allowed
to marry the willing adult of their choice, and that makes them
second class citizens.
Aaron> Any woman is allowed to marry any man whom she so chooses.
Aaron> All gays have these rights, just like anybody else.
Nope, the rest of us have the right to marry the willing adult
partner of our choice.
Aaron> Any additional laws are Special Privileges.
>> I have yet to see a single special right or privilege being
>> asked for.
Aaron> You wish to escape the consequences of your deviancy.
No, I want all to have equal rights.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[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: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:21:28 +0100
> In any event, eve at its worst, the 6502 was a vastly superior CPU in
> terms of efficiency than the 68000 who's average instruction cycle was
> something like 7-10 cycles (IIRC).
That's what you get for using too much microcode :-)
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 Annoyances
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:29:29 GMT
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 22 May 2001 13:19:32 +1200 presented us
with the
wisdom:
> Just to add
>
> 6) Windows 2000 CLI lacks basic tools that I would normally use on Linux,
> such as, when I am look for, say, the file foo, I go, ls /*/*/*/*foo*
Well, that's a rather limited solution...
Why don't you type: find . -name '*foo*' -print
This would find foo _anywhere_ under the current dir nt just at given depth like your
above command.
Alternatively you could say: ls -Ra | grep foo
Zsolt
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux on the desktop potential, suggestions needed
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:40:17 +0000 (UTC)
(Jeff wrote:
: I'm back to reviewing Linux for our desktops again, it's been a year
: or so since we determined it was not an option in our case but things
: may have changed. Here are my major sticking points that I need
: suggestions on:
<snip!>
Many of your suggestions involve making Linux more similar to Windows
both in compatibility and in functionality. Such suggestions are not
uncommon, but I don't feel that such an approach is desirable.
If one wants to "win over" people from Windows, making Linux just
like Windows isn't going to accomplish that, since people will just
stick with the genuine article.
I feel that Linux should differentiate itself from Windows while
improving itself beyond Windows at the same time. For example,
if we want to get people to stop using Word and its annoying
proprietary formats, let's work on building a word processor
that looks different from Word, functions easier than Word in
every way, uses open file formats and is open source.
In short, I don't want Linux to settle for being a Windows
substitute. I'd rather it was something so much better that
people will *want* to switch rather than be oblivious to the
difference between the two.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 Annoyances
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:46:00 +0000 (UTC)
Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 22 May 2001 13:19:32 +1200 presented
:us with the
: wisdom:
:> Just to add
:>
:> 6) Windows 2000 CLI lacks basic tools that I would normally use on Linux,
:> such as, when I am look for, say, the file foo, I go, ls /*/*/*/*foo*
: Well, that's a rather limited solution...
: Why don't you type: find . -name '*foo*' -print
: This would find foo _anywhere_ under the current dir nt just at given depth like
:your above command.
: Alternatively you could say: ls -Ra | grep foo
Or just use zsh's recursive globbing.
ls **/*foo*
It's occasionally time-consuming, but often quite handy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: 22 May 2001 14:51:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Gregory L. Hansen" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roy Culley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Would one of you physicists like to comment garbage below.
>> >
>> >In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> Radio waves are not light!
>>
>> It's electromagnetic radiation, same as light.
>
>From a certain stance yes, and from another no. At lower frequencies,
>EM waves do not even act like light.... do a smith chart on an antennae
>and then tell me that that is like light waves.
Depends on the context. All I've seen is a snippet of a discussion in
progress, and a request for comment. Are we talking about radio
receivers?
>> >> Radio waves have been measured by the NBS at
>> >> 88%.
>>
>> Dunno what that means. 88% of what?
>>
>> >> The speed of light has never been measured in a vacuum!
>>
>> Sure it has. _Physics Letters_ (12), 260, for one.
>
>Has it been verified and rechecked??
Why don't you look it up in a citation index and find out? I haven't
researched recent speed of light measurements.
>>
>> >> It has been measured, tho, in space that light without quantum packets
>> >> travels instantaneously. Otherwise, the appearance of distant galaxies
>> >> would be totally distorted beyond recognition.
>>
>> No, it hasn't. Laser light bounced from retroreflectors on the Moon takes
>> a number of seconds to make a round trip. And much of that trip is in a
>> good vacuum.
>>
>
>Have you taken into account the earths atmosphere , which varies over a
>considerable distance to the moon?? Not much of that trip is in a hard
>vacuum.
Most of the trip is in a pretty hard vacuum. Radio waves bounced off of
Venus also covered a lot of vacuum distance.
What makes a speed of light measurement in vacuum versus not vacuum so
important?
>> --
>> "'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
>
>hehe... saw that in one of General Electrics black boxes on a
>submarine. Nothing more than a wire inside.
>:-)
Heh! Some pretty complicated technology there!
--
"'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
