Linux-Advocacy Digest #850, Volume #34 Wed, 30 May 01 00:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Opera (Terry Porter)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Sundial Services)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Ray Chason)
Re: Light waves beat radio waves?? (was Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)) (Uncle Al)
Re: Opera (Terry Porter)
Re: OS Shock (Terry Porter)
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers? (Tim
Smith)
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers? (Tim
Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:54:13 +1200
> (I must've missed this one, Stuart, I'm going to reply through you, if
> you don't mind)
>
> Heh, it's amusing when you call someone a rabid zealot, and in your
> calling, you make an ass of yourself doing it.
>
> more like: Windows is really good, it's proven, there are tons of numbers
> for it, you guys just haven't used it and don't understand it.
> Linux isn't great. It's pretty sad, really. It doesn't "sux", it's
> getting better, but it's certainly not grown up like you morons would
> have us believe.
Compared to Commercial UNIX's, then I would accept there is definately a
long way to go, however, in comparison to Windows as a small business
server OS, Linux wins hands down. On the client side, it is rapidly taking
shape, at a consistant pace ensuring ala "love bug" doesn't occur on linux
because of sloppy programming and poor design and implementation.
Personally, I prefer my O2 w/ IRIX, clean consistant interface, great video
facilities, responsive and very stable.
> > > Matthew Gardiners balanced reporting: Although Linux had made big
inroads
> > > into the desktop market, hardware comptibility is one of the number
one
> > > issues on the development radar <------ TRUE balanced reporting.
> > >
> > Big inroads into the desktop market? Where's the stats on that? If
you
> > said server market, you might have a case.
>
> Big inroads = 0.0001% and declining.
Actually, 2% of the desktop market and growing.
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the blue screen of death
Nobody can hear your screams
----
I am the resident BOFH if you don't like it
go rm -rf /home/luser yourself
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 30 May 2001 02:57:11 GMT
On Tue, 29 May 2001 18:12:41 +0100,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >> Got any examples of that?
>> I have, but you'll say you didn't distort my meaning with your cutting,
>> won't ya Pete?
>
> Well, we'll never know until you post examples, now will we? Until you
> do, I shall remain convinced that I'm right and you're lying.
Please add me to the list of COLA posters who are tired of your repeditive
requests for proof following your continued avoidance of proof already
supplied.
>
> --
> ---
> Pete Goodwin
> All your no fly zone are belong to us
> My opinions are my own
--
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] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:02:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GreyCloud
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 21 May 2001 02:01:31 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>
>> > >Windows 9x maybe, but not so Windows 2000.
>> >
>> > Yes, and XP to boot.
>>
>> That's your dogma.
>>
>> > >Can Linux do 3D sound yet? It's built into Windows but not
>> > >so easy on Linux.
>> >
>> > "Can X do N yet?" is not a sign of technological advancement;
>> > that's all just market grind bullshit. You gotta get it
>> > rock-solid industrial-quality, first, THEN you can start
>> > wondering if W2K *might* be somewhere near the technology
>> > standard of Linux.
>>
>> You gotta get Linux desktop up to scratch before it can even
>> compete with Windows (98).
>
>Hahaha... Win98 is far inferior to linux. Linux won't BSOD you to death
>like Win98 can.
That is one measure of superiority. (It happens to be one I approve of.)
However, it is possible that Linux may not be superior in all metrics.
In particular, Linux cannot run all Windows applications -- of course,
even Windows cannot run all Windows applications, depending on how old
said apps are :-). Whether this matters or not to the individual
user, erm, depends on the individual user, and the apps he might run.
Various other metrics might include:
- portability to other processor platforms such as Sparc,
m68k, ARM, Itanium, Alpha, or the mighty S/390. NT might do some
of them, with a lot of work. (Whatever happened to HAL?)
- easy portability to other operating systems such as HP-UX, Solaris,
AIX, Tru64, or SCO Unix. Parts of NT can be ported -- Solaris got
to enjoy the benefits (?) of IE for awhile -- but it's apparently
not all that easy a task.
- network-transparent, if slow, graphics (and local X isn't all that
slow, nowadays, especially with widely available extensions)
- standard UI (Windows wins, here -- although not by much; one must also
note that Motif was here first so Windows may not even have won).
- console text throughput (Linux beats NT fairly easily; try moving
a fast-scrolling text window in Linux and in NT, or compare the number
of lines per minute displayed).
- control -- Linux wins here in limited areas because NT requires
a process to respond to events; if the process hangs, the window "sticks".
Win2k is a little better in that regard, allowing a user to kill
a hanging process by closing its window.
- flexibility -- Toss-up, NT has more tools (DLLs) for developers, but
Linux has the ability to change look-and-feel (not just color or
skin) by changing window managers, from the extremely crude twm to
the ultra-sophisticated window managers available for Gnome and KDE,
and quite a few in between; there's no shortage of DLLs on Linux,
either.
and of course
- a solid foundation based on standards and a 30-year legacy. Some might
reverse this, claiming that Unix is "old technology" -- but then,
so is the internal combustion engine, and we're still using it.
(One also notes that Version 6 and 7 didn't have such things as
dynamic virtual paging and dynamically-loadable libraries. X also
didn't exist when Unix first came out; neither did sockets.
As a side issue: the modern ICE is a far cry from its klunky
predecessors; nobody uses carburetors anymore, for example, or
ignition points, as these have been replaced by fuel injectors
and electronic ignition, at least at the consumer level (diesels
have their own rules).)
I've probably left out a dozen other metrics -- one might be 3D sound,
as Pete G. suggests; since I don't know anything about it (my sound
isn't functional because of resource conflicts at this time), I can't
intelligently comment further.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random observation here
EAC code #191 29d:12h:21m actually running Linux.
This is my other .sig.
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:04:21 +1200
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3b12c815$0$79458$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9etape$vih$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers Balanced Reporting: Windows Rulez, Linux Sux <---- example
of
> > Chads so-called balanced reporting.
> >
> > Matthew Gardiners balanced reporting: Although Linux had made big
inroads
> > into the desktop market, hardware comptibility is one of the number one
> > issues on the development radar <------ TRUE balanced reporting.
> >
> > Notice the difference?
> >
>
> I see the difference. Chad gave an opinion.
> You claim Linux making "big" inroads into the desktop market which is
> complete crap and wishful thinking. Hardware compatibility is being done
in
> order to keep Linux alive, without it it would be dead by the end of the
> year.
>
2% desktop share, and growing, I would say "linux is making big inroads" is
a fact, not a fantasy. Although not at a screaming, break neck speed, it
is making big inroads in that, business that use to dissmiss Linux as a
cult OS, are now using to complete general office tasks. One only needs to
look at the hardware chain in New Zealand that deployed Linux to replace
Windows machines (posted by me approx. 2-3 months ago) because it actually
did what is said, vs. Microsoft's mantra of "works well with others", even
though this doesn't occur in the real world situations. It is also quite
humorous that Telecom New Zealand Xtra (Telecoms Internet service), that
has hooked up with MSN, are still using Solaris as their server OS! even
though they partner up with EDS who are in bed with Microsoft. Their
proxy, supporting up to 370,000 users, runs Linux w/ Squid. I know
companies and people in the US just love wasting money, hence the failure
of Planet Hollywood outside the US, but in most cases, NZ ISP's try to
reduce costs and increase quality, by selecting Linux for their servers.
When a more grunty OS is needed, Solaris, UNIXWare or IRIX is employeed.
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the blue screen of death
Nobody can hear your screams
----
I am the resident BOFH if you don't like it
go rm -rf /home/luser yourself
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:07:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chris Ahlstrom
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 18 May 2001 21:51:16 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> In article <9e1dea$gip$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> > Almost forgot:
>> >
>> > Chad, Jan, Ubertroll, Todd, etc, what do you have to say to this:
>> >
>> > In the real world (ie not benchmarks) Linux is near the top in terms of
>> > price/performance and scalibility. Win2K doesn't put in a single showing.
>>
>> And in the *real* world of desktops, where is Linux, pray tell?
>>
>> Absolutely... nowhere?
>
>Except on my desktop.
I for one have never quite figured out what's so exciting about
the concept of a "desktop", as opposed to a display screen with
icons, windows, buttons, menus, sliders, etc. -- but Linux is
most definitely on mine at home, except for a very very few times
where I have to boot into Win95 (and those times are getting rarer
all the time -- maybe if I get a hankering to play "Wheel of Time"
again, I might consider it -- of course, Win95 is as old as dirt
nowadays... :-) )
At work, I'm split. My main work system is Win2k, which is
satisfactory, but with the usual Windows silliness.
I have an auxiliary system, however, that runs RedHat, and
I've done silly things on it (like built Apache and Tomcat
from source code) more than once.
Silly like a fox... :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random game here
EAC code #191 29d:14h:04m actually running Linux.
Hi. I'm a signature virus.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 06:09:42 +0200
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> - console text throughput (Linux beats NT fairly easily; try moving
> a fast-scrolling text window in Linux and in NT, or compare the number
> of lines per minute displayed).
What are you talking here?
> at least at the consumer level (diesels
> have their own rules).)
I've a diesel, nicest cars that I got to drive.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Opera
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 30 May 2001 03:12:02 GMT
On Tue, 29 May 2001 09:37:48 +0200,
Rabbe Fogelholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>> [ text cut ]
>>
>> I have been using Mozilla lately and that is *so far in front* of Netscape
>> for Linux its not funny, but its still way slower than the text based browsers
>> above.
>
> I typically use a 360 MHz laptop with a fair Internet connection (many
> downloads proceed at 50 Kbyte/s), and I don't experience any speed
> advantage with Mozilla. Does this mean that the Mozilla speed bonus is
> noticeable only on slower machines, or is it a bandwidth issue (Mozilla
> somehow using the given bandwidth in a more clever way)?
Please forgive my ambiguous post Rabbe, I meant that the features of
Mozilla are far in front (imho) of Netscape for Linux.
As far as speed of d/l is concerned, my impression is that they
are similar.
The operation of their GUI's are of similar speed (imho) also.
My machime is a 3 year oldish Cyrix 686/233 over clocked to 300mhz
with 128 megs of ram.
>
> --Rabbe Fogelholm, Ericsson
--
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 **
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:17:23 -0700
From: Sundial Services <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
You certainly write good editorials, Unicat.
In many respects, Microsoft is infected with "IBM Disease," and by that
I am referring to the attitude that Lou Gertsner almost singlehandedly
-cured- IBM of: namely, that "we are the world, or the only world that
matters."
Certainly no one can ignore the fact that Microsoft's systems are
becoming more bloated, and more sluggish, even as they become more and
more proprietary; more and more bundled with (e.g. Office). Furthermore
the strategy of producing a new version every year -and- numbering it
with the current year ... makes it more obvious to even the most
insensitive manager that "maybe we should wait until -next- year." From
that it's not a far leap to, "maybe we should just stick to what we
got."
>unicat wrote:
>
> The following are the editorial opinions of the author- no more
> no less...
>
> While the bloated giant Microsoft is buying favorable publicity
> in News-fluff magazines with promises of big chunks of
> advertising for the X-flop video game, smart firms are realizing
> the truth - Microsoft is in serious trouble.
>
> Not that they don't have loads of cash on hand, they can create
> imaginary cashflow any time they want just by moving their own
> money from one pocket to the other...
>
> But they are not capturing the hearts and minds of the techno-
> savvy, and their standards are going over like the proverbial turd
> in a punchbowl. Active directory, the MS proprietary version of XML,
> and the .net initiative, all are seeing adoption rates down around 1/5th
>
> of the overall market.
>
> But worse, major manufacturers are beginnning to break ranks. IBM will
> spend a billion dollars beefing up Linux this year, and HP is not far
> behind.
>
> Sun, which has done the best of any of the UNIX vendors mostly because
> of their
> steadfast refusal to corrupt their product line with MS pollution, has
> now bought
> a manufacturer of Linux servers to augment its low-end systems.(Sun, by
> the way,
> is roughly the same size as MS, why everyone gets so excited about a
> pipsqueak company like MS is beyond me).
>
> But one development that should have rocked the newsworld is that
> struggling
> UNIX maker SGI is dropping all support for MS Windows based platforms.
>
> This is so illustrative of the real nature of the computer marketplace
> that it bears
> more examination. Two years ago, a troubled SGI fell under the influence
> of MS, and
> was seduced into adding a WNT workstation to its product line. But
> instead of a windfall
> the new systems caused a near collapse of the company. Customers lost
> confidence in
> SGI's core UNIX systems, fearing that they would eventually be phased
> out, sales
> plumetted, and the stock fell from $24 to $2. Finally coming to their
> senses, SGI has excorsized
> the MS demon, refocused on UNIX (and Linux) and is now on the road to
> recovery.
> BTW - their stock is an incredibly undervalued bargain, you could buy
> the whole company for
> less than the value of their assets.
>
> SGI is hardly a market leader, but their realization of the detrimetnal
> effect of supporting
> windows simply reinforces the mass move away from Microsoft being
> carried out more
> surreptitiously by the larger manufacturers.
>
> Microsoft isn't laying still, they are hedging their bets by
> diversifying into hardware. They
> have announced the X-box (how you make money by selling a box that you
> have to subsidize
> by 1/3 of its sales price remains a mystery, but it might explain rumors
> that production levels
> are being held back significantly - bad news for games authors, but hey,
> dance with the devil,
> and you deserve what you get). And of course there is the new Microsoft
> PC, which will attempt
> to do away with all legacy standards(ISA, PCI, parallel ports, serial
> ports, etc.) so that everyone
> is forced to upgrade to it in order to run the new version of Windows
> Xtremely Proprietary.
>
> Or... the hardware makers that MS is betraying MIGHT, just might, decide
> to fight back by investing
> in Linux as an alternative OS..... wait a minute, they're already DOING
> THAT. Maybe PC makers
> aren't as dumb as they look.
>
> Any way, enough MS bashing for now. We'll just close by saying that the
> author will bet anyone reading
> an imaginary nickel that MS stock is down to $10/share by 2003....
--
==================================================================
Sundial Services :: Scottsdale, AZ (USA) :: (480) 946-8259
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP public key available.)
> Fast(!), automatic table-repair with two clicks of the mouse!
> ChimneySweep(R): "Click click, it's fixed!" {tm}
> http://www.sundialservices.com/products/chimneysweep
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:17:20 -0000
unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>While the bloated giant Microsoft is buying favorable publicity
>in News-fluff magazines with promises of big chunks of
>advertising for the X-flop video game, smart firms are realizing
>the truth - Microsoft is in serious trouble.
>
>Not that they don't have loads of cash on hand, they can create
>imaginary cashflow any time they want just by moving their own
>money from one pocket to the other...
>
>But they are not capturing the hearts and minds of the techno-
>savvy, and their standards are going over like the proverbial turd
>in a punchbowl. Active directory, the MS proprietary version of XML,
>and the .net initiative, all are seeing adoption rates down around 1/5th
>of the overall market.
[Newsgroups limited to COLA]
I don't see the end of Microsoft anytime soon. Microsoft may or may
not have broken antitrust laws but it didn't get where it is by being
stupid.
That said, I think the release of Windows XP will be the biggest flop
since Bob. It won't be the end of Microsoft, not by a long shot, but
Microsoft is setting up itself the bomb. The hype coming from
Microsoft and its various mouthpieces is that XP is the greatest
thing since W95, yet I have seen nothing concrete that would make me
want to upgrade. OTOH, Microsoft is offering intrusive registration
schemes and a "secure" PC that secures nothing but the desires of
Hillary Rosen and Jack Valenti (cursed be their names).
Win95 was a quantum leap over Win 3.1. Win98 wasn't such a big deal,
but if you were stuck with Win95A then Win98 at least offered FAT32.
WinXP seems to offer nothing but fluff and spyware, and require scads
of hardware upgrades for the privilege. I for one will stick with
Win98 First Edition. And Linux, of course, long live the Penguin.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Uncle Al <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Light waves beat radio waves?? (was Re: Linux beats Win2K (again))
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:23:10 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
[snip]
> >Radio waves are not the same as light waves.
Gamma rays to military ELF and Project Sanguine, a photon is a photon
and it travels at lightspeed in a vacuum.
> I have a dumb question. My understanding is that radio waves,
> apart from the wavelength (an FM station, for example, has
> a frequency of 88 to 108 Mhz, which translates into a wavelength
> of (very roughly) 10 feet, or 3 m; blue light, by contrast, is
> about 300 nm or so -- 7 orders of magnitude smaller),
Blue cuts off at 400 nm. 300 nm is UV B - germacidal UV.
> or energy,
> or frequency, are more or less identical to light waves. To suggest that
> the speed of travel in vacuo is dependent on either energy, frequency,
> or wavelength (take your pick; they're interdependent) is an
> interesting one;
It is an uninformed one made ridiculous by trivial observation. All
EMF travels at lighspeed in vacuo. If vacuum were a dispersive medium
for photons we would see chromatic aberration over intergalactic
distances and chromatic time delays when supernovae popped. We don't
- neither one. Vacuum isn't a gyrotropic medium for plane-polarized
EMF, either,
http://pancake.uchicago.edu/~carroll/aniso/
http://www.cc.rochester.edu/college/rtc/Borge/analysis.html
http://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/SKA/science/node11.html
nor is there a Faraday effect in vacuum.
[snip]
> So, now my question: what is the relationship between
> frequency/quantum energy/wavelength and wave speed in vacuo,
> expressed as a formula?
A photon travels at lightspeed in a vacuum. It's
energy/frequency/wavelength is irrelevant.
Photon propagation speed through a polarizable medium is in general
less than lightspeed, being careful to differentiate between group and
phase velocities,
http://www.netspace.net.au/~gregegan/APPLETS/20/20.html
Anomalous dispersion in non-linear optical media can slow light to
about 40 mph (Bose-Einstein condensate) or stop it entirely (optically
pumped cesium vapor)
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2001/01.24/01-stoplight.html
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal/
(Toxic URLs! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Opera
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 30 May 2001 03:22:30 GMT
On Tue, 29 May 2001 20:49:22 +0100,
drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2001 13:32:07 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:9eqic8$5n7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>>It just doesn't seem like there is a quality browser for Linux at all.
>
> You can get Opera, which is better than IE and Netscape put together.
>
>
I really have to suggest checking out the latest Mozilla!
I have used Mozilla for a while now, and I'm finding out that its grown
on me, and I miss it when I don't have it!
Compiling it is a bit tedious, as I compile while I do everything else
here.
Here are some interesting stats about compiling Mozilla on my system.
(note binaries are available, its NOT neccessary to compile Mozilla)
Time to compile: around 3 hrs!
Disk usage: 1.4 gigabytes!
That said I still can't get it to work with either Skipstone or
Galeon, which are 'light' frontends to the Gecco rendering engine
:(
--
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: OS Shock
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 30 May 2001 03:30:22 GMT
On Tue, 29 May 2001 12:12:44 +0100,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>> If a coder somewhere, doesnt want to write the app that you 'must have'
>> then you're never going to get it, short of writing it yourself.
>
> Exactly, and that is where people who care about things such as
> usability, LSB and others will really help further the technology.
I'm sure there are or will be Linux coders who willimprove these areas.
>
>> I needed software for the microburner hardware I designed, so I used the
>> free linux tools, and wrote one, then released it under the GPL. This
>> allowed me to finally give something back :)
>>
>> BTW, I'm a hardware designer, who taught himself the fundamentals of
>> programming over the last 3 years.
>
> I must say that I was very impressed by your project (saw the hompage)!
> Well done! It looks very cool.
Thanks, that URL belongs to another Linux user (Jason Nunn), who d/l my
code and circuits from old home page, made up a burner for himself, then
replaced a lot of my original code with his own.
Jason's a CS degree holder, and his code is sooooo much better,thanks Jason!
He also wrote the driver, that allows non root to burn chips thru the parallel
port :)
>
>> The one thing I love best about Linux, is it's community, and that sense
>> of a common bond between coders.
>
> I think the community aspect is the thing that really shines through -
> people helping people. It's very nice and is one of the key reasons that
> I think that Linux will enjoy a growing success. I find all the COLA
> talk of Linux "dying" or being "dead" such a laugh! I can only see it
> growing and getting better each and every year. With a community of
> helpful and skilled users/programmers behind it, long may it be that
> way.
I agree totally :)
--
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] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: 29 May 2001 20:26:05 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:44:18 -0400, Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Instead of a friendly, easy to use, self-archiving, self-threading news
>> reader interface, most OSS projects use mailing lists to connect their
>> community.
>
>Actually, there are various reasons. First, the tightly-knit developers
>want up-to-the minute updates on development, and they like them
>delivered to their inbox. Second, news servers sometimes drop important
>articles. Also, mailing lists typically have a much much higher
>signal-to-noise ratio than usenet newsgroups. And usually there aren't
>any trolls on mailing lists, at least not like there are on usenet.
>Also, usenet NG's are notorious for attracting SPAM.
He didn't say anything about using usenet.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: 29 May 2001 20:32:50 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 29 May 2001 23:34:27 -0000, Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>If the mailing lists are archived at all, they're archived using terrible
>>HTML interfaces that are illogically presented, painful to use and
>>inflexible.
>
> As opposed to news where, after it expires off the news server the only
>option is generally Deja which is archived using a terrible HTML interface
>that is illogically presented, painful to use and inflexible.
Deja archives usenet. He didn't suggest using usenet. He suggested
using news servers. There is a difference.
With a news server, archiving is very simple: don't expire.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
