Linux-Advocacy Digest #706, Volume #34 Tue, 22 May 01 18:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Terry
Porter)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Terry Porter)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (John Wiltshire)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Terry Porter)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: 22 May 2001 14:55:10 -0600
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3387/1/
>
> I can't say I don't agree.
>
> Some points:
> A> The linux desktop company he's talking about is likely Mandrake.
> B> He agrees with Daniel about users getting computer/OSes/shells not for
> the sake of the computer/OS/Shell, but for the applications that it run.
> C> He seems to agree with me that you can't offer a slightly-less or equal
> product in order to convice people to switch, you need something vastly
> sueprior.
>
> Comments, anyone?
> OK, well, let us be realistic?
> Flames, anyone?
Anyone who uses Linux as a replacement for Windows is asking for
trouble. Use Linux because you like UNIX/Linux, not because you hate
Microsoft; any other motive will result in disapointment (just like
when I use Windows -- it never fails to disapoint me).
I've been running 100% Linux for so long that I can't even figure out
how to do many things inside Windows 2000. It literally took me an
hour to figure out how to change the video driver (I couldn't
right-click on the desktop to do it anymore). I'm sure others have
similar problems going the other way and think that UNIX is
problematic.
In short: Windows 2000 is a horrible desktop *for me* (may it RIP).
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: 22 May 2001 14:56:10 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not to mention new innovation. Everything that was out there for
> Linux was either a rehashed 30-year old app with a new GUI
> front end, or a cheap knock-off of a current Microsoft app.
I seem to remeber smug Apple users saying the same thing about a
certain other OS a few years ago... look what has happened since.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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 21:00:19 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > A pretty silly thing for Digitial Research
> > to do, I'm sure you'll agree.
> >
>
> DR didnt do it, dolt, IBM did.
Pretty weird of DR to let IBM set their
prices. They hadn't done that with CP/M
for other computers.
[snip]
> > So you didn't have to go to MS to get the
> > real DOS.
>
> Duh.
So even if you needed DOS, you didn't need
to cut a deal with MS.
This would seem to perforate part of
your argument...
[snip]
> > > you need to ubderstand the market. window$ "ascendancy" (gee, did that
> > > scare you?) began with winodw$ 3. 1, and 2 were pretty much shunned by
> > > the marketplace.
> >
> > Windows 3 predates Windows 3.11.
>
> Duh. Thats why the ascendance started with 3 not 3.1
You seem to have no explaination for this
ascendance, except to appeal to things that
happened *after* this ascendance.
[snip]
> > > Would we? are you sure Killdal had the same lack of ethics and morals
as
> > > Gates et al? From reports it is doubtful.
> >
> > No, I don't. But I think that had he been
> > successful, the same crowd would have
> > resented it. They might have had to find
> > slightly different excuses, but really that
> > isn't so hard to do.
>
> He might not have necome the arrogant, predatory, anti-competitive peson
> that Gates was. Ther might have been no resentment.
Don't count on it. Envy is a powerful
thing.
[snip]
> > You don't even notice how your
> > argument is circular, do you?
>
> Didnt run window$ apps.
You don't even care that your argument
is circular, do you?
[snip]
> > > There WASNT a market. The Mac, laserwriter and Pagemaker MADE a
market.
> >
> > The installed base of PCs was much larger than
> > the installed base of Macs.
> >
> > Aldus ignored it. Why?
>
> Becasue the Mac produced better graphics. Still does. So Aldus and Apple
> reated a new market.
So you agree; developers will go where the tools
are, if it makes a difference. You just prefer to call
it "creating a new market";
Well, I hate to tell you this, but only in a court of
law does it make a difference whether you call it
"creating a new market" or not.
[snip]
> > > Still is.
> >
> > I'm not so sure. What advantages does the Mac retain
> > today that are relevant for desktop publishing?
>
> Better graphics. Same as then.
How so? They don't look a lot better
to me.
[snip]
> > It wasn't until Windows got good that
> > desktop publishing on the PC could be
> > taken seriously.
>
> When will that be... when will window$ get that good?
It was a gradual processes. You could
argue for either Windows 3.11 or Windows 95,
I think.
Windows 3 didn't have TrueType or
any other outline font support. Of course,
when PageMaker first appeared, nobody
did- but that was academic when Windows 3
came out. IT had to compete with the Mac,
and you could get ATM for the Mac then.
[snip]
> > It's not for nothing that PageMaker was
> > an early adopter of Windows.
>
> They were?
Yes. Mind you, PageMaker for Windows
wasn't terribly useful before Windows 3
came along- not enough memory to work
with, once Windows got its cut.
The perenial problem Windows apps
had back then.
But they did try it.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 20:49:13 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Microsoft's Visual C++ compiler blurs the line between C and C++; WIN32 is
> a completely C-based API, as is COM. ATL is simply a C++ wrapper around
> COM, as MFC is a wrapper around WIN32. I'd like to see some substantiation
> for your claim that devices drivers are written in C++; all the code I've
> looked at in Windows NT (video drivers, IDE device drivers, and soundcard
> drivers) are written in straighforward C. Most designers I know avoid
> using C++ when writing drivers due to the perceived performance problems of
> C++.
Download the DDK from Microsoft's website and take a look at the AC'97
WDM device driver. It's written in C++, using COM interfaces
(IMiniportWavePci and IMiniportWavePciStream for example).
> (I happen to think that it is not only possible but advisable to write
> drivers in C++, but you need to use good coding practices and modern C++
> techniques, which is hard because VC++ 6.0 is so horribly broken...)
"horribly broken" implies broken rather badly. Yet it doesn't seem that
bad to me.
> A good example of lousy Microsoft infrastructure software is MAPI, OLE
> DB/ADO, DirectX until version 7, TAPI, etc. etc. etc. MFC itself, while
> useful, is a horrible Frankenstein's Monster of an API and flouts nearly
> every good C++ coding convention I can think of. There are better APIs out
> there -- Troll's QT, wxWindows, even Gtk+ for WIN32 -- but relatively few
> people use them because Microsoft frowns upon it and makes supporting
> alternate frameworks in VC++ very difficult. (If you doubt me, just try
> doing a GUI-based project using the WTL sometime.)
I'm a Visual C++ MFC expert - I'm also a Delphi VCl expert - VCL is the
far better of the two. I try to code everything I write for GUI's on
Delphi.
MFC is a dumb straightjacket. Unfortunately, because it's written by
Microsoft, it's seen as the thing to write in.
C# is influenced by one of the designers of Delphi, so it will be
interesting to take a look at that when it finally is released.
BTW, Kylix is the Linux version of Delphi. I remember the possibility of
MFC on UNIX... but somehow that never materialised.
> Being a monopoly means that Microsoft can foist whatever junk they want on
> developers and developers have to live with it because
In the case of MFC, I'd agree with. It's an incredibly clutzy
straightjacket to work in. VCL, on the other hand, by Borland, is like a
ray of sunshine after grubbing around in the darkness of the shadow of
the Great Shaitan.
> 3-D sound is mostly of interest to hardcore gamers and audiophiles, who
> form about 2% of computer users. I too find it kind of silly too that so
> much effort is being put into making such a small demographic happy,
> especially in light of the fact that the differences are so small and hard
> to detect. (You'd need an acoustically-sealed room to tell the difference
> in most games, and the roaring fans in your OC'd machines would drown out
> most subtle noises anyhow.)
Small and hard to detect? Blimey! You don't really know what you're
missing!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 May 2001 21:01:54 GMT
On Tue, 22 May 2001 14:09:25 -0400,
JS \\ PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote across many ng's:
> Well after half a day checking out the new XP OS, I have to say IT KICKS
> MANDRAKE ASS!!
You would say that wouldn't you ?
> Internet connection stays when switching users!
This simple thing is worthy of a "!", you need to get out more!
> And get this - Applications
> even stay open and are there (still open) when returning to that user.
Finally caught up to UNIX circa 1972 ..... wow.
> That's just the tip of the iceberg.
One would hope so, as we haven't seen anything new yet.
> Of course the browser still kicks ass,
Exploder 'still kicks ass' Hahahahahahah!
> and copy and paste is still much much better between apps,
Excellent, hows the remote GUI?
Whats your uptimeso far ?
Try 'uptime' from the XP cli, perhaps theyve finally got that working
now?
> as opposed to the
> hit and miss copy/paste support in Linux.
FUD.
> Ohh I could go on and endlessly
You'll need to, in the forlorn hope that *something* about
XPerimental is better than UNIX.
> list how much better XP is than Mandrake.
You haven't succeeded so far.
> Once again the Linux community is
> playing catch up to the industry leader.
You mean the industry criminal?
> Competition at it's finest!
Trollism at it's lamest.
> Thank You.
Anytime.
>
>
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 May 2001 21:05:20 GMT
On Mon, 21 May 2001 23:54:35 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> In article <9eaihp$hfu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>
>> > One of Pete's favourite pastimes is snipping people to distort their
>> > meaning to prove his point.
>>
>> Got any examples of that?
I have, but you'll say you didn't distort my meaning with your cutting,
won't ya Pete?
>>
>> --
>> Pete
>
> BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!
Exactly :)
>
> --
> V
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 22:44:54 +0200
Robert Morelli wrote:
>
> I've been arguing for a while that Linux advocates should not promote
> Linux for the desktop for the near future. The reason is simple, but for
> Linux advocates a bitter pill to swallow: Linux technology is simply
> too primitive and inferior, and the Linux programmers writing desktop
> apps don't have high enough caliber to compete against Windows
> programmers.
>
Well, some of your other claims *may* have a point here and there, but
this is just simply BS.
>Linux programmers writing desktop apps don't have high enough caliber
> to compete against Windows programmers.
Do you have the slightest idea what you are talking about here?
I know several "linux-programmers" (me included) who just simply write
windows-programs all the time, because thats part of their job.
So how come these guys are suddenly inferior to themselves when they
write linux-programs?
Did you even try KDE2? It is not as good as the OS/2 WPS is (that is
*very* difficult to match!), but in my opinion it is a lot better than the
Windows-UI (whatever win-version).
Peter
--
Get the new Windows XP. Now with eXtra Problems included
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 May 2001 21:10:46 GMT
On Tue, 22 May 2001 00:02:12 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>
>> > >I worked on UNIX, OpenVMS before I came to Windows. I understand
>> > >Operating Systems. I've studied them on and off. Guess what I do
>> > >nowadays. I write device drivers. Let me see, what do you need to
>> > >understand in order to write those? Why, the OS of course!
>> >
>> > Well, parts of it, anyway. Not very technologically advanced part, I
>> > would expect, either.
>>
>> Device drivers on Linux are written in C?
Sure, see the device driver for my microprocessor burner in my sig.
>>
>> Device drivers on Windows are written in C++ and make use of COM. Which
>> one is more technologically advanced?
Which one works better ?
>>
>
> I don't know, Pete. C++ still hasn't been standardized yet, and there
> are a few differences between compiler vendors yet. In windows, yes if
> you use MS VC++, but outside of that... a device driver is just a device
> driver... if it accomplishes the job, So what?? Some device drivers are
> written in assembler... others are written in C.
Amen.
>
>
>> > Linux *is* a technology, and it is more advanced than Windows. Windows
>> > isn't a technology, for all its acronyms; its little more than a
>> > marketing scam and some monopoly crapware.
"White Goods Software" is what Windows is. Next years Windows OS will have
the suds saver, or was that the automatic spin cycle?
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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 21:15:24 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > Yes. It's possible there was a port of the
> > Vulcan Database to the Apple II that
> > flopped; I merely have no evidence for
> > it.
>
> I said dBase II. dBAse II ran on the Apple II
I rather doubt it. It would be a from-scratch
rewrite, and it would be crippled by the
limitations of the Apple II.
> > Certainly it was an even worse platform
> > for it than CP/M.
>
> So now were back to CP/M being a lousy platform, even when running
> relational datatbases.
Relational databases? Most of these early
guys were flat-file databases.
[snip]
> > It does not matter who said it; it's still
> > impossible. The IBM PC was the first PC
> > to use the 8088 CPU. There was
> > no version of CP/M that ran on this CPU
> > before MS-DOS came along.
>
> And source code is transferable... even a little... EVERYTHING had to be
> completely re-written?
Assembly source isn't transferable. You don't
believe that either product was written
in a high level language do you?
[snip]
> > Mind you, there *were* development tools
> > for the early PC, and they quickly
> > outstripped what you could do on an
> > 8-bit machine.
>
> It doesnt matter. If there is no one to sell to, no market, the there
> will be no development. Unless you creat a market, or two, like Apple
> has done.
Not so. Every new computer line begins its life with
no users. They only take off when some developer
codes for it *anyway*, and users want to get that
developer's app.
[snip]
> > Softtalk was a magazine of the time, wasn't it?
> >
> > Why would anyone thing its readership was
> > representative of anything in particular?
>
> I just dont believe you. They were computer users. They used computers
> and software. What do you think they represented... Ford dealers?
:D
Actually, the problem I'd expect to see is that they
would not be Ford dealers, or secretaries, or anything
like that. They would be computer enthusiasts.
[snip]
> > What makes you think the SoftCard
> > sold "well" at all?
>
> It did. Do some research. Go to a library, since you cant use google.
If you did the research, you can tell me:
What percentage of Apple II series
computers had SoftCards installed?
> > There was much less reason to put
> > CP/M on an Apple II than there
> > is to put a PC-card in a Mac. The
> > Apple II had more software than
> > CP/M did, back then.
>
> You have no basis to make this claim.
I don't let little things like that stop me. :D
[snip]
> > I said "database" not "fnord". You are allowed to
> > see that word. :D
>
> So, are you saying WP, SS, DB meaningless work, or not?
I'm not saying that. I never said that. That notion
exists only in your fervid little imagination.
[snip]
> > 40 column, all uppercase text was ugly, but
> > it wasn't a big handicap for a spreadsheet.
>
> SO, Apple IIs runnign vivicalc were OK, huh? Not just puny little toys?
> You might want to read up on what people thought about Visical when it
> first came out. Apparently many businessmen were amazed.
Many accountants *were* amazed; it was
very innovative.
Of course you could do better on a PC, but
remember that VisiCalc came out before
the PC existed.
[snip]
> > You might be surprised about that. They
> > were expensive, but they weren't
> > *that* expensive.
>
> sez you.
Says me.
[snip]
> > Sure. But *8-bit* computers were no good
> > at databases; tiny disks and tiny memories
> > are real problems. Databases need to
> > store and work with volumes of data-
> > even for a small office.
>
> You know DBs, dont have to HUGE to be meaningful to a business... just
> in your self-imoortant mind.
No, but 144k is pretty crampt, even for
a small office.
[snpi]
> > > m$ Works was just as integrated as Clarisworks, without the GUI.
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > MS Works *has* a GUI.
> >
>
> MS Works -didnt- when it first came out.
Oh yes, the DOS version. I was thinking of
a later timeframe.
[snip]
> > I guess you can't do it yourself, because you
> > know very little about the other packages
> > available at the time.
>
> I see you sidestepped the question. Still cant work google?
You'd be surprised how little useful information
there is from this early.
[snip]
> > > That just shouw you self-important arrogance.
> >
> > By the way, just what engineers do you know
> > who considered the Apple IIs graphics
> > system a work of "art"?
>
> Only what Ive read in many articles and books, since I didnt know them
> personally.
What articles? What books?
[snip]
> > > You just said bigger offices dont use m$ Office.
> >
> > No, I didn't. What they don't use is
> > SQL Server. :D
>
> No big business offices use SQL?
Some do, some don't. The ones who
are using mainframes aren't doing so in
preference to using MS Office, but in
preference to SQL Server, Oracle, etc.
[snip]
> > It isn't exactly all word processing. In fact, that
> > is kind of peripheral.
>
> ReallY?
Yes.
[snip]
> > > > I had one of those once. Neat little
> > > > toy. So cute. Adorable, really.
> > >
> > > You really are a jerk.
> >
> > What, just for liking the Model 102?
>
> You dissed the 102.
Come on. You aren't going to tell me
those little things outpaced a PC
*too*, are you?
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:18:27 -0400
On Sat, 19 May 2001 18:26:46 +0000, Karel Jansens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All electromagnetic waves travel at the same speed, which is the speed of
>light in a given medium. Radio waves are electromagnetic waves end will
>therefore never be slower than light.
Not true. Most medium exhibit a frequency dependance on the speed of
light. Shine a light through a glass prism and you get a rainbow -
this is because the speed of light is different for the different
wavelengths of light. The only medium which can guarantee all EM
radiation travels at the "speed of light" is a perfect vacuum. Space
is pretty close to this, but not quite, so it is possible that radio
waves may be either advanced or retarded slightly with respect to
light.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
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 21:17:59 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
Aaron> That's funny, we just voted on EXACTLY that kind of ballot proposal
Aaron> on May 15 in my city.
>> Cite. I do not believe you.
Aaron> Royal Oak, Michigan.
That is not a cite, that is a city. Note that an "e" is not the
same as a "y".
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 May 2001 21:19:53 GMT
On Tue, 22 May 2001 20:32:54 +0200,
Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3387/1/
>
> I can't say I don't agree.
>
> Some points:
> A> The linux desktop company he's talking about is likely Mandrake.
> B> He agrees with Daniel about users getting computer/OSes/shells not for
> the sake of the computer/OS/Shell, but for the applications that it run.
This is an old retort, and you can't neatly seperate them imho.
For instance, the OS plays a big part in what aplications you CAN run. If
I want to run GUI apps *remotely*, MS cant help me.
> C> He seems to agree with me that you can't offer a slightly-less or equal
> product in order to convice people to switch, you need something vastly
> superior.
I'd agree with that statement.
The reverse is also true. If you offer a inferior product, people may switch.
Win XP seems to be convincing a few people to switch to Linux already, as
it offers inferior ownership of the OS.
>
> Comments, anyone?
> OK, well, let us be realistic?
> Flames, anyone?
Hahah why flame you, you're quite reasonable :)
>
>
>
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
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 21:18:46 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> "." wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> > Marriage is not defined as "the adult of your choice", marriage
>> > is defined as "the adult OF THE OPPOSITE SEX". Gays are just as
>> > free to participate as non gays.
>>
>> Oh really? And whos definition of marriage is that, exactly?
Aaron> The same one that has been in use for THOUSANDS OF YEARS/
There is no body of civil law that has lasted that long. Around
the world all sorts of marriage laws have existed.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:26:28 -0500
"Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9eej9o$ctu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : > In article <3b0aa7f7$0$2604$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
> : > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : >
> : > > "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : > > news:9ee7sc$f9s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : > >> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3387/1/
> : > >>
> : > >> I can't say I don't agree.
> : > >>
> : > >> Some points:
> : > >> A> The linux desktop company he's talking about is likely Mandrake. B>
> : > >> He agrees with Daniel about users getting computer/OSes/shells not for
> : > >> the sake of the computer/OS/Shell, but for the applications that it
> : > >> run. C> He seems to agree with me that you can't offer a slightly-less
> : > >> or equal product in order to convice people to switch, you need
> : > >> something vastly sueprior.
> : > >
> : > > Not to mention new innovation. Everything that was out there for Linux
> : > > was either a rehashed 30-year old app with a new GUI front end, or a
> : > > cheap knock-off of a current Microsoft app....
> : >
> : > ....Which was a knock-off of the Mac...Which was a knock-off of Xerox
> : > PARC...
>
> : No. Outlook is a knock-off of which Mac app? Which Xerox app?
>
> : Outlook Express?
>
> Don't know this one.
>
> : Internet Explorer is hardly a knock off of any existing application.
>
> spyglass. Learn your history.
Spare me the ignorant condescension when you yourself are clueless.
I'm well aware of Spyglass, thank you very little.
IE consists of very little Spyglass code anymore. IE is 100x what
spyglass is and has very many more features.
A knock-off is something that attempts to, but fails to mimic
the original. Examples of this are Nautilus and Evolution which
are poor immitations of the originals (Win UI and Outlook/Express).
> : Word? Word is far beyond what any other previous word processor
> : was.
>
> No, it was a copy of the mac's teachtext. Even at word 4, there are a few
> features added. MS just kept taking features from other apps and adding them.
> The result was a pile of crap. I can't use word for 2 min w/o getting pissed
> off b/c it auto-does something.
So you're incompetent and can't use a real word processor, so it's crap?
> I don't have time to turn all these off on
> each comp I use, I just want my app to just work.
It does for people who do serious word processing. You're a developer,
so you probably don't need most of the features, but for people creating
real documents with flash and pizzaz, those features save lots of time.
-c
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
