Linux-Advocacy Digest #875, Volume #34 Thu, 31 May 01 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft Helps Turn Britain's E-Government Vision Into Reality (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Copying levy [WAS Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file?] (Brian V. Smith)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Nigel
Feltham)
Re: Time to bitc__ again ("Sentinel")
Re: ease and convenience (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free (drsquare)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (drsquare)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (drsquare)
Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks: (drsquare)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
(drsquare)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Chronos Tachyon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Helps Turn Britain's E-Government Vision Into Reality
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 19:58:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> http://www.microsoft.com/PressPass/press/2001/Mar01/03-27BritainPR.asp
>
> Funny that we didn't hear people like Jan Johanson and Chad Myers tooting
> their horns in here about this rollout. It does appear to be one of the
> first MS rollouts based on .NET, and especially Jan is always ready to
> remind us how great MS is.
> Could it possibly be that this rollout had the effect of locking out a
> segment of the UK population from communicating electronically with their
> government? See also:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19239.html
>
> So, aside from being a monopolist, MS is actually being anti-democratic.
> Welcome to the MS future people.
"You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because
you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are
using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out
which browsers are supported and which settings to use.
Supported Browsers
We have made the Government Gateway compatible with as many browsers as
possible, on both PCs and Macintoshes. However, because we need to
maintain maximum security on this web site, we cannot support
older versions of browsers. To use the Government Gateway, you must have:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later
with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later
or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later
OR an Apple Macintosh with Mac OS version 7.5 or later
with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 5.0 or later
or Netscape Navigator version 4.xx or later
a working Internet connection
the 128-bit security add-in, for your version of the browser
Please note that you cannot currently use Netscape 6 to access the
Government Gateway, due to issues with the support for digital
certificates in this new version. You can find out which version of the
browser version you are currently using, by clicking on Help, then
About…, in the menu bar of your browser. The name and version number of
your browser is displayed."
That was with Opera 5. It would appear that Netscape in an earlier form
is supported but not Netscape 6.0
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 07:58:35 +1200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ome.com...
> On Thu, 24 May 2001 05:52:55 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Actually I exagerated a bit. The technology is only 30 years old.
> >
> >No, it isn't.
> >NTFS is ten to fifteen years old, not thirty.
> >
> >
>
> Look up the word technology. NTFS isn't ground breaking work. Mainframes
has
> such technology 30 years ago.
Gee, if it's such old technology, why did it take Linux until 2000 to get a
journalling file system? Are you saying Linux is just catching up to the
1970's?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian V. Smith)
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.misc,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Copying levy [WAS Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file?]
Date: 31 May 2001 20:17:35 GMT
In article <LuuR6.242965$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Alan Murrell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> > How do they actually apply this levy? I mean, how do they know Mr Joe
|> > Blow is making copies of linda ronstadt or ugly kid joe?
|>
|> It gets applied directly at the time of purchase.
I think he means at the other end - who gets how much from the levy?
Which artists? How do they apportion it?
|> > Where does the levy taxes exactly go?
|>
|> Who knows? :-)
That's for sure :-) And, I think that was his first question.
--
===============================================================
Brian V. Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www-epb.lbl.gov/BVSmith
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
I don't speak for LBL; they don't pay me enough for that.
Check out the xfig site at http://www-epb.lbl.gov/xfig
To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, the
glass is half empty. To the engineer, the glass is too small
for a decent safety factor.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:40:33 -0400
> Bully for you. And how many other people on your block have the
> technical expertise to do all this?
>
> I'll tell you a secret. Most of them don't, most of them don't CARE.
> Windows XP caters to them.
>
That's a good line - Win2k is for those who don't CARE.
Of course those who do care about things like stability, security and
configureability with any sense will choose Unix / Linux every time.
------------------------------
From: "Sentinel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Time to bitc__ again
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,linux.redhat
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:16:13 GMT
In article <3b158484$0$25513$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Gazzard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well Sentinel, to some extent i agree with you..... I was actually
> putting my point of view accross, which (although not clearly defined
> with an IMHO) is infact my opinion, you should have learnt by now that
> we linux users are a very opinionated bunch, and will argue over that
> for what its worth (which isnt much).
All the OS's do that. I remember back in my OS/2 days, we used to
barbecue anyone that was vaguely a Redmonite...hehehe
>
> I bow at your feet for refraining to bag my opinions, you have great
> will power. and for that reason, i now do somomly swear to from this day
> forward, to only bag Microsoft and its associated crapness.
Now THAT is something we call ALL agree on..:)
>
> But as i said, each man to his opinions, im still going to say: Mandrake
> is crap, but as you know that is my opinion not the gerneral concensus,
> (actually i should re-write that: IMHO Mandrake is
> crap....there....thats better.)
>
No problem. Like I always say. Use what works best for ya.
--
Sentinel
Kill da munge to reply by email.
Registered Linux User #209449 - Machine Registration #97328
Remember, the only stupid question is the one you DIDN'T ask.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:14 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 17:17:33 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Paste the Windows help for 'ping' here Todd ?
>OK, but there are about 15 pages... i'm only pasting the first one. I juse
>typed 'ping' in the index and got about 10 responses with lots of
>documentation.
>
>Here is the first page...
That's funny, when I type 'ping', nothing shows up.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:15 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 17:19:55 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[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.
>But many posts here say that Opera is causing a lot of crashes under
>Linux...
Well, I wouldn't really know as I've hardly used it under Linux. It
looks worse than the Windows version, the menus take it half the
screen, and there's a big advert thing at the top.
>IE under w2k has never crashed for me... and even NetScape 6.1 is pretty
>stable under w2k.
Well, I'm merely a home user and so I only have 98.
>Only tried opera once and didn't like the GUI format nor the adverts.
The Windows version doesn't appear to have adverts and the GUI format
is great. It's the linux version you want to steer clear of. Not that
it matters for me, as I have a winmodem :-(
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:17 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 07:48:30 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9f2k08$njt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>I let what I need to do drive my OS choice, I don't let my OS choice drive
>what I can do. There is no phobia amongst windows users ("wintrols") about
>paying for a browser, just that the best browser you can get for Windows
>happens to be free.
I thought you had to pay for Opera?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:18 +0100
On 31 May 2001 01:47:21 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>Let's see what happens if Microsoft ever starts charging for IE!
I wouldn't pay for that pile of shite if they paid me to.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:19 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:54:06 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)) wrote:
>On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:31:41 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Do the cracks work on the Linux version?
>> >I have no idea. I paid for mine.
>> Why?
>Why do you care?
Just curious.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:19 +0100
On 31 May 2001 01:50:24 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:54:06 GMT,
>>> Why?
>Because Linux users have some moral discipline regarding stealing
>thats why.
Yeah, like you've never ripped off any software before...
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:21 +0100
On 31 May 2001 01:40:00 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:31:39 +0100,
>> Sorry, but I can't justify giving 1.4 gigabytes to a browser,
>> especially as all my linux partitions add up to about 1G.
>Opps, I should have pointed out that the 1.4gigs are temporary
>while compiling, as Mozilla has everything and the kitchen sink!
>
>Once its installed, you can delete all the source etc.
>
>However you need that much space to compile it. Using a
>precompiled binary alleviates the 1.4gigs free hdd
>requirement.
I might have a look then, when I get a modem.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:22 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 18:17:13 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Grzegorz Borek wrote:
>> 1. This isn't a good comparison because robbing banks is malevolent to
>> the other _not consenting_ for that members of society. Homosexualism
>> isn't, so this does not apply.
>Ask the people who pick up Hepatitis from food contaminated
>by gay restaurant workers.
Please explain how this is relevant.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:23 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 18:18:03 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Does a bank robber have a victim? Yes.
>So do gays.
>
>Or are you unaware of the numerous people who get Hepatitis from
>gay restaurant employees
That's interesing. I trust you have evidence that Hepatitis can only
be transmitted through homosexuals, otherwise you wouldn't have made
that statement.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:24 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 20:02:47 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Vallely's Dirt in Boss King's Ditch.." wrote:
>> ANOTHER goddam fantasy! Kulkis, you are truly an idiot.
>Spot the denial.
I can't see one. I can only see him stating some facts.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:25 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 20:04:08 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> LOL! What assinine propaganda! There aren't "numerous people" who
>> get hpatitis from gay restaurant employees. It's just you're stupid
>> hatred again.
>Fag gets Hepatitis from anal sex.
>Fag contaminates food with Hepatitis.
>Hepatitis infects customer
Straight person gets Hepatitis from sex.
Straight person contaminates food with Hepatitis.
Hepatitis infects customer
I take it then you are also against heterosexuality. Unless of course
you can prove that Hepatitus can only be transmitted through
homosexual sex.
>> What a stupid asshole you are.
>No..the stupid asshole is the one getting reamed by some fag's penis.
Like you dad's.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:26 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 20:32:24 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Kulkis gets hepatitis from shooting up after sex with $5 whore.
>Spot the false premise.
Oh yes, Kulkis can only afford $.50 slave children whores.
>> Kulkis contaminates burgers with hepatitis
>> Hepatitis infects gay customer.
>>
>> Obviously we should throw your sorry ass into jail for spreading
>> hepatitis.
>
>Since the basis of your argument is false, everything thereafter
>is void and without meaning.
Nope, his argument makes perfect sense whatever the basis of the
argument.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:27 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 14:17:21 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> If they're going to go to the trouble of +x'ing t, then they'll
>> probably have a good idea of what it's about. Windows makes it easy
>> for users to naively open a virus thinking it's a picture or
>> something.
>And we come back to my original point, it's user intelligence/experience.
>
>It's simply that people who Unix typically have more computer experience,
>it's not the OS, it's the user.
>
>Thank you for proving my point yet again.
As people with more experience on either OS will not open any virii,
we can exclude them from the situation. As we are now dealing only
with inexperienced people, the level of experience is constant on both
OSes, so the factor of experience can be ommitted. Therefore, we are
only dealing with OSes. For inexperienced people, using Unix they will
not be able to open a virus, on Windows it will be piss easy to open a
virus.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:28 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 07:56:07 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Which will cost them how much? They'll have to fork out for: NT, a
>> bigger hard disk probably, more RAM, a faster processor just to make
>> it all work. Or, they could just get linux, spending absolutely
>> NOTHING.
>I read somewhere that Linux is free for those whose time is worth nothing.
>
>Of course if they fork out for NT, they'll still be able to run the majority
>of their apps, they won't have to learn to use a completely different OS -
>ie the GUI will still look the same (roughly), and apps will still
>functionthe same.
Presuming they are already used to Windows.
>Or they could just get Linux and struggle to find a decent web browser,
There are plenty of web browsers available: Opera, Netscape, lynx,
Mozilla. The only extra one for Windows is the laughably awful IE.
> have
>to download a new Office suite,
Which they would have to do on Windows.
>be unable to play many games, and basically
>drop their productivity,
Please explain how being unable to play many games will cause a lack
in productivity.
>which is after all what using computers is all
>about.
What, playing games?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:28 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 19:40:17 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Somebody's been feeding you some pabulum... you'll find all that and
>> more in any linux distribution.
>Last distribution I used was Slackware 7.1. Didn't have an Office suite
I didn't realise Windows did.
>included, had a crap web browser (Nutscrape).
If you think that's crap, then you must HATE the browser that comes
with Windows.
>Games were shit, and I don't
>see many commercial games for Linux on the shelves.
Oh sorry, I thought we were judging OSes on the ability to get serious
work done on them. The only decent game that comes with Windows is
Freecell, and you can run that under Wine.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:30 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 04:49:31 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Or they could just get Linux and struggle to find a decent web browser,
>> Thats true at the moment, but not for much longer. Mozilla is shaping up
>> to be a very useful browser.
>Mozilla is shaping out to be a very useful browser for two or three years
>now, isn't it?
Looks like we'll just have to stick with the amazing Opera.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:32 +0100
On 31 May 2001 05:14:39 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>> The way you do it now makes it hard to seperate what you says and what you
>> reply to.
>Why does it make it hard ?
It just does.
>My newsreader (Slrn) shows no such spaces in your reply to me, but your
>lines are easy to see due to to an ">" being inserted by my newsreader
>and each posters followups are colored differently.
It's still difficult to read.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:34 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 20:19:46 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >killfiling is conceding defeat.
>>
>> Defeat in what?
>
>in the debate.
Debating how much of an idiot you are?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:35 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 12:24:15 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <RsdR6.4508$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>4. Here comes the first hitch: On 9x installing an app was just a matter
>of clicking setup and follow the wizards. On XP, you will have to log in
>as administrator just to install software. So MS breaks the paradigm of
>'just sit down and work' by requiring its users to now manage at least
>two user-IDs per computer (admin and regular user).
Oh come on, it's not THAT difficult to remember two passwords.
>5. Of course, we all know that most consumers just will run XP as admin
>to avoid the hassle, thereby bringing back all the original problems of
>9x (see point 1 above).
>
>Effectively, XP is only an improvement if you administer it well, thus
>increasing it's complexity, otherwise it will appear no different to 9x,
>and creating the perception in people that its launch *was* all hype.
>
>Thoughts anyone?
Well, at least it will give people the choice of running everything as
an administrator or as a restricted user. 9x didn't give you that
choice.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:37 +0100
On 31 May 2001 14:37:45 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shun Yan Cheung)) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Bernd Paysan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Ah, and BTW: Installing Linux with current distribution doesn't even
>>give the slightest kick of "hacker achievement" as it did in Slackware's
>>time.
>Yeah, they have made it too darn easy to install Linux now...
>For that matter, even Solaris installation has become too easy...
>I used to dread OS upgrades, now I just pop in a CD and let it rip...
Is it any easier than downloading it?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks:
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:39 +0100
On Wed, 30 May 2001 23:36:21 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>I believe you missed the point. When ever anyone points out that Aaron
>>>is anti-social and rude, he always says its OK because its a free
>>>country and he is (in essense) free to be an arsehole.
>> This would never happen under the Nazis.
>Are you trying to end the thread?
No, why would you think that?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:02:41 +0100
On Thu, 31 May 2001 10:31:46 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> Did the geniuses who wrote X consider Trackballs of varying designs when
>> they chose the 'middle button' cut & paste?? Probably not, because it's
>> very unwieldy for me and my Logitech trackball.
>Did the geniuses who made your track ball build it with X in mind??
>
>Bearing in mind X was there first, the trackball makers seem to be at
>fault.
Never mind that you can press the left and right buttons at the same
tiem for the same effect...
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:04:31 GMT
On Thu 31 May 2001 02:51, Pete Goodwin wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
[Snip]
>> With Linux if an app hangs and its window is unusable, one can easily
>> find the process and kill it.
>
> How do you do that? How can you tell what process is unusable and
> corresponds to a window (if you're not familiar with that app)?
>
Using xkill. Most window managers map Ctrl+Alt+Esc to run xkill, which
gives you a skull-and-bones cursor that lets you blow any arbitrary X app
out of the water, no additional skill required. Much easier than the
Windows (either 9x or 2K) alternatives.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
