Linux-Advocacy Digest #807, Volume #34 Sun, 27 May 01 14:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:21 GMT
Said flatfish+++ in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 15:34:22
>On Sat, 26 May 2001 11:10:09 +0000, "Gary Hallock"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>> I would submit that my understanding, in general, of every experiment
>>> ever performed is superior to yours. How would you refute this point?
>>>
>>
>>Your joking, right? How would you prove this point?
>>
>>Gary
>
>I think he's got you there Gary because it is quite apparent by his
>ramblings that his glue sniffing and LSD experiments circa 1967 are
>coming back to haunt him now.
I was four years old in 1967, and didn't drop acid until I was in high
school. You are the only thing that haunts me, you and the other
trolls.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:22 GMT
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 11:14:10
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> You must have understood me, if you think I was.
>
>No, I did not mistunderstand you.
As I said, you must have understood me.
>> I am a reasonable man, without any preclusions either way.
>
>Alas, it was an 'either/or' question, so you've still failed to answer
>it. Don't worry about it; I know that you can't answer it, because you
>don't know the meaning of the words well enough.
Picking up originality from Pete Goodwin?
"Was that gibberish or mumbo-jumbo?" is an either/or question. What you
posted was the equivalent of "Do you still beat your wife", and is not
an either/or question. Get it?
>> I am getting to you, huh?
>
>Yep, I haven't had this big a laugh in a long time!
Still stinging from the last time I spanked your butt, I'll bet.
Whatever floats your boat.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:23 GMT
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 11:15:14
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> According to *YOU*? Guffaw!
>
>And everyone else reading this ng
Taken a poll, have you?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:24 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001
>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.
Nobody disputes the importance of the application barrier to Microsoft's
monopoly profits.
>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.
Actually, any advantage at all would be sufficient for *some* people to
switch. Some might switch for a one penny decrease in price, because
they don't actually use the thing themselves but are buying it for
others and don't care that its crappier. Some might switch for a tiny
little bit of convenience; whatever's preloaded is fine with them. Some
might switch for technical reasons, as many already have, because Linux
is, in fact, vastly superior (technically superior, much more rationally
designed, and free). It doesn't matter how vastly superior an
alternative might be, if it isn't the monopoly it isn't the monopoly.
>Comments, anyone?
>OK, well, let us be realistic?
>Flames, anyone?
How about some honest discourse. From you for a change. Do you have a
realistic response to my comments?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:25 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 16:26:28
>"Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> : 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.
Code? I thought we were talking about features and innovation, not
code. IE is a web browser. Nothing innovative about bolting the API
into the OS; that's more code-stuff that end users don't care about.
>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 was a knock off of a wordprocesser, then, and Excel a knock off of
a spreadsheet. Outlook was a knock off of Groupwise, and Outlook
Express was a knock off of a bog-common email client.
The WinUI is a knock off of the Mac. Mac was based on developments at
Xerox, but it was not a "knock off" of anything Xerox did. Windows,
however, was clearly a knock off of Mac.
>> : 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?
Real word processor? I thought he was talking about Word. As an expert
in PC wordprocessors, I can assure you that monopoly crapware, not lack
of competence, is the problem here.
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:26 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 17:51:11
>"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <3b0ad984$0$2599$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > 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.
>
>> Wouldn't you classify academic dissertations of 200 pages as serious word
>> processing? C't did a test on word processors beginning this year and Word
>> 2000 (SP1) consistently barfed on that.
>
>C't is a biased MS-bashing rag just like The Register. I have yet to
>see either posted a favorable article of Microsoft.
We are unaware of any reason why they should.
>Somehow, millions of people use Word very efficiently and demand
>even more features from, yet you, all-knowing, all-wise deem it
>crap because you can't seem to figure it out?
They use it. That they use it efficiently is speculative, at best, and
that they demand more features is simply incorrect. It is monopoly
crapware because it is; we don't need omniscience to recognize that,
believe it or not.
>> Hardly a recommendation.
>
>Nope. Bias and FUD, rather.
FUD? That is SO laughable! Tell us about the FUD that C't publishes,
Chad. Please, provide some detailed analysis. That would be SO funny.
;-D
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:27 GMT
Said ~¿~ in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 23 May 2001 12:20:04 GMT;
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9efami$er3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I use Lotus Smart Suite on my Wintel machine, and it only takes up 4MB of
>> memory vs. Word's 14-16MB of memory. That doesn't include the minor
>detail
>> that it (MS Word) dies when I open a 4, heavily graphical document.
>Really
>> great coming from a piece of software at the cost of $1300 per copy.
>
>14 to 16 MB's of memory? You have one of the most F'd up Office
>configurations imaginable, or your normal.dot is 10MB's strong. No, I doubt
>that as I don't think you can code with VBA.
You're supposed to count most of that memory as *Windows*, Matthew.
Don't you know anything? Perhaps you were confused by the caveat that
when discussing Windows memory usage, you're supposed to count it as
Office.
[...]
>Remember, we're not talking about shared modules -just the physical memory
>space of the executable.
>Not virtual memory either.
What makes you think that is what we are doing?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:28 GMT
Said ~¿~ in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 24 May 2001 12:24:15 GMT;
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9ei5rg$hm7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > 14 to 16 MB's of memory? You have one of the most F'd up Office
>> > configurations imaginable, or your normal.dot is 10MB's strong. No, I
>> doubt
>> > that as I don't think you can code with VBA.
>> > Winword, the executable name for Word, is running on right now on this
>pc.
>> > MS Outlook Express, which you love to hate but love to use, as you did
>to
>> > make this post,
>>
>> Get a life "~¿~" , or better know as, Mr "I'm too chicken to use my real
>> name".
>
>I love how you clipped out the relevant part of my post -- the part about
>your assertions of gross memory usage of the MS product vs. the other word
>processors. Typical ad hominem low brow retort.
His response included the relevant part, in my opinion. Yours is the ad
hominem retort, low brow.
>My posts here average one a day. Your average is ???? Who is in need of this
>'life' you speak of?
You don't even know what an ad hominem attack is, do you???
>Trying to divert attention away from the fact that you have once again
>squarely driven your foot in your mouth by making claims you can't back up
>with facts is only surpassed by the way you turn to juvenile attacks when
>caught doing so. Besides, your the type of guy that I have zero fear of.
What was that claim again? That Office uses 14 MB of memory? How has
that been disproved with your ignorant protestations?
BTW, "you are" = "you're", not "your".
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:29 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 24 May 2001 16:58:03
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> If you read my post I said I was testing out Windows 2000 SP2 since Jon had
>> raved on about how great it was going to be, and how fast it is etc etc. I
>> am running now it, this is my second install, the first install fucked up
>> after two days.
>
>ahahahahah - you know, without even asking the details and without a shred
>of proof - I'm perfectly confident in declaring you are full of crap. I
>think we've rolled out over 30,000 installs of SP2 at 18 clients so far and
>not one NOT ONE has "fucked up" - and here comes the great anti-MS zealot
>and, surpise? his is fucked up. you are SO predictable...
Not one that you know of has fucked up. Nobody in their right mind
would believe your claim is true, Jan. Matthew's, meanwhile, is
familiar to many people's real experience with monopoly crapware.
Surprise surprise, the sock puppet has never seen an install fail (oh,
not the SP2 ones anyway.) Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You are SO
transparent...
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:30 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 25 May 2001 00:36:21
[...]
>What's even more hilarious about it, is even The Register (known for fabricating
>news on-demand and editorializing in reports and passing them as facts)
Who besides yourself has ever made this claim? The Register is known
for spanking Microsoft the way I spank trolls; with reasoned and
balanced information.
>has yet to come up with even one concrete example where SP2 has had problems.
Concrete examples are about as hard to come up with as free licenses,
when discussing monopoly crapware. How can you come up with a concrete
example of a failure when trying to diagnose the failure just reveals
more failures?
>The last report I saw, where they were trying their hardest, they could only
>come up with a "few" users having problems "some of the time" with hibernation
>on laptops.
Hibernation on laptops is always a problem. It is much much worse with
monopoly crapware, of course, and you can almost guarantee it will fuck
up routinely.
>I have a crappy Dell PoS laptop and even it hummed along with
>SP2 just fine, including about 20+ hibernations in the past 3-4 days due
>to flight-hopping and such.
Yeah, we know. All it takes to have a computer with Windows that never
fails is be a sock puppet. A little bit of faith goes a long way to
ignoring the routine failures that just about any Windows platform is
going to suffer.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:31 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 24 May 2001 16:59:02
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9ei7m4$j2b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > C't is a biased MS-bashing rag just like The Register. I have yet to
>> > see either posted a favorable article of Microsoft.
>> >
>> > Somehow, millions of people use Word very efficiently and demand
>> > even more features from, yet you, all-knowing, all-wise deem it
>> > crap because you can't seem to figure it out?
>>
>> I wouldn't exactly say the below link is biased in anyway.
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19134.html
>
>I would ... this rag is trash and anything quoted from it is equal to
>trash...
My, oh my. How amusing and compelling your vehemence is.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:32 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 25 May 2001 00:37:41
>"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:3b0d8392$0$56115$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9ei7m4$j2b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > C't is a biased MS-bashing rag just like The Register. I have yet to
>> > > see either posted a favorable article of Microsoft.
>> > >
>> > > Somehow, millions of people use Word very efficiently and demand
>> > > even more features from, yet you, all-knowing, all-wise deem it
>> > > crap because you can't seem to figure it out?
>> >
>> > I wouldn't exactly say the below link is biased in anyway.
>> >
>> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19134.html
>> >
>>
>> I would ... this rag is trash and anything quoted from it is equal to
>> trash...
>
>I would as well. Note at the bottom how they're quick to defend VA
>Linux's obvious death march. Even with MS's best news, they are
>quick to point out any failings or faults of MS in every single
>article.
Perhaps the phrase 'balanced reporting' means nothing to you. Guffaw.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:33 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 23 May 2001
>"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>You know, the GUI require typing too.
>I've no objection to typing, what I consider as the GUI's advantage is that
>it allows you learn via trial & error, which is more natural than reading
>docs.
It leaves you fumbling around like an amateur, you mean, because you
have an aversion to learning anything by reading.
"Trial & error." Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.
>> > > Linux has less than 5% of the desktop market. Why are you Windows guys
>> so
>> > > worried about Linux? Live and let live, use what works for you.
>> >
>> > Um, no, Linux has less than 2%, not 5%, that is Macs.
>>
>> It's still less than 5% isn't it? Or has basic high shool math been
>> redefined in my absence?
>
>Windows has less than 99% of the server market. - is an absolutely true
>statement.
>However, the impression that this gives is that Windows has *close to* 99%
>of the server market.
You fail to grasp the difference, obvious to any reasonable person,
between quibbling pointlessly and having a rational point. You do not
have a rational point, Ayende. Own up to your mistake.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:34 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 16:28:51
>"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "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.
>
>That was their (rather misguided and uneducated) opinion.
As opposed to yours. Yea, we get it.
>Win95
>was hardly a MacOS knock-off.
BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
>There were many new features that
>Apple wouldn't come to know for another 5 years (until MacOS X).
Oh, please, tell us. What features did Win95 have that Mac OS was
missing?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:35 GMT
Said Edward Rosten in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 23 May 2001
>> About the only thing similar to the Mac in Win95 is the recycle bin, but
>> similar technologies had existing on the PC for quite some time, it just
>> wasn't built into the OS.
>
>Technology?!
That's what I though, too. ;-D
>Are you trying to claim that the recycle bin (and its many synonims on
>other platforms) is a _technology_?
>
>The mind boggles. That's almost as bas as Vauxhall claiming that a new
>seating system is a `technology'.
>
>Blech.
Kind of like pretending that Win95 wasn't intentionally a knock-off of
the Mac interface. The number of Macisms adopted once Apple lost their
"look and feel" suite are not startling, but are obvious.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:36 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 17:53:38
>"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9eeno1$q9l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:3b0aa7f7$0$2604$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > "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.
>> >
>> > -c
>>
>> Just because you suddenly become *aware* of an application via MS does not
>> mean it did not exist before.
>
>You mean an antiquated fraction-of-the-features version which could
>loosely be called a similar app? I laugh when you guys talk about
>IE being a knock-off of spyglass. What a joke!
[Not laughing.]
Nobody claimed IE was a knock-off of spyglass. They pointed out that IE
*is* Spyglass. Still is, under all the fancy glitter and API layers.
It's just a web browser, Chad.
Don't you remember? They licensed the browser from Spyglass way back
when, contracting to pay Spyglass a dollar for every copy of IE they
sold. So, of course, they didn't sell any, but gave it away, Spyglass
lost their shirt, and MS bought up the code later, cheap.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:37 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 23 May 2001
>"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > >
>> > > 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.
>> >
>> > Why couldn't you right click?
>> >
>> > Even if you didn't know anything, Control Panel > Add Hardware (also
>lets
>> > you replace drivers).
>> > Or Control Panel > System > Hardware > Device Manager.
>> > Or Start > Programs > Administrative Tools > Computer Management >
>Device
>> > Manager.
>> > Or Right click the desktop > propeties > settings.
>>
>> I'd swear it didn't let me install a new video driver using that last
>> method (it had the braindead-VGA-fresh-from-install driver
>> installed). I'll double-check.
>
>Full way to do this:
>Right click the desktop > propeties > settings > advance > Adapter >
>propeties > Driver > update driver
This explains Craig's confusion, then, and illustrates the failure in
MS's design which makes this more than a lack of familiarity with
Windows. You keep saying "update driver", but he was trying to change,
not update the driver. Yes, you can change the driver through this
method. But that is hardly intuitive "to change the driver pretend to
update but then choose a completely different driver after it cranks and
churns and says 'no update available'."
Silly monopoly crapware.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:26:37 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 15:39:06
>"Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>You should look into XP. There are many sites out there detailing all
>the new UI advancements. Microsoft has spent millions doing UI
>research with several universities and has incorporated some of the
>new design theories of modern UI design. It's no longer just a Mac
>knock-off, it's a completely new and original design with some kick-backs
>to the old day to keep it somewhat recognizable to old-time users.
What did they do, recycle their old press releases, with 'Windows XP'
substituted for "Microsoft Bob"? Guffaw.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
