Linux-Advocacy Digest #877, Volume #34 Thu, 31 May 01 19:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Interconnect")
Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: 31 May 2001 22:13:42 GMT
Pete Goodwin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
: "Peer reviewed"... 8)
: It only works if everything is carefully examined and the results
: reported. Just everyone taking a look see at the code is not enough.
This is just like in science. There _are_ frauds in science, but they
are _eventually_ discovered. If we had closed science then they might
never be discovered or discovered too late--remember lysenko?
: There are problems in Linux install for various distros. Yet if this
: "peer review" process you mention was working, these problems ought to
: disappear.
They do. Linux is getting better all the time.
: Why is it that a Linux upgrade rarely works and is not recommended? How
: did that one escape the "peer review" process you are putting such stock
: in?
Well, apt-get works fine. Thanks for trying. Debian is truly open b/c there's
it's volunteer just like the software itself.
: How is that Samba eventually locks everyone out and has to be restarted
: for it to work? Didn't the "peer review" process catch this one?
How long does this take to happen? Did you fill out a bug report? Have you
found the bugs? Which windows bugs have you discovered and fixed? You seem
to know the rules, if you aren't going to play then install windows and let
everything 'just work' and forget about us. We don't mean to harm you.
We'll do our thing and you can do yours.
: > Windows is just monopoly crapware.
: That's just your dogma.
Well, there should be no bugs in windows b/c of regression testing. It's a
fact that MS has put billions into windows. It's finally getting better after
how many years?
: How is Windows monopoly crapware?
Not enough choices. For example the desktop is mediocre and it's more
difficult to replace this. Do you know how to change windows desktop?
I would like to get black box on windows kernel. How to do this? Can I
do this in one click? Or can I do
apt-get install blackbox (?)
Please help.
Also, word automatically saves in a format that not only can other word
processors open, but other versions of word can't open. This is crap.
I have seen windows lovers cry over stuff like this.
: As for advanced kernel design, I thought the idea of having to do a
: kernel rebuild was rather old fashioned now, yet it's still there in
: Linux.
I agree about this one. Linux is not the greatest. It's really awesome
for the price and it has a great community which is one of the main
reasons I still use it instead of beos. I like beos better, but I don't like:
1) less support 2) can't get a full screen term, windows mode hurts my eyes.
: before EMI decided it wanted to focus on music and not research.
Ever hear the song called emi? It's pretty good. OT, I know, but I love
that song.
: We base our technology on science. Go take a look at the white papers on
I hope so. I don't know many people who don't base their tech on science,
but then again, how would I know.
good day,
Fred
------------------------------
From: Rick <[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: Thu, 31 May 2001 18:23:25 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> [snip]
> > > Well, free-as-in-beer software is $0.
> > > I realize that there are other sorts of
> > > free, of course.
> >
> > Do you? Even Stallman has said people should be able to sell software.
>
> Sure. However, that's not what he does- his
> still is $0. Free-as-in-beer, just download it.
>
So, what? The FSF doesnt charge, but hey dont have any problem with
people that do charge for software.
> [snip]
> > > Yes, of course. But this implies that I can't
> > > use GPLed anything.
> >
> > Why do you want to use GPL code in direct opposition to the wants of the
> > authors and copyright holders/ What is the difference betwenn that and
> > jsut lifting code from micro$oft, except it would almost assuredly be
> > better code?
>
> There is no difference, except that MS does not usually
> give its product away. Usually.
>
OK.. at one time they DID give IE away. Why dont you see what happens
if you "crip" (did that scare you too) - read STEAL- micro$oft's code
and see where that gets you.
> [snip]
> > So? What about % increase of Open and/or Free Software adopters?
>
> I don't know what you mean by this. "Adopters"?
> Does that mean companies putting out pro-Linux
> press releases?
>
Stupid? Ignorant? Lying? I think lying. Open and/or Free Software
adopters. Pople that adopt Open and/or Free Software, like IBM, Dell,
some foreign countries. The EU has just said they think peopl should
stay away from proprietary software and adopt Open and/or Free software.
> > That is increasing hugely. and, BTW, tell IBM how bad Linux is.
>
> I needn't bother; they know all about it- and they know
> how popular it is.
>
And they are adopting it for use.
> [snip]
> > > But even if I did, it would still be more choice
> > > than the GPL gives you.
> >
> > Are you stupid, ignorant, or lying? The GPL doesnt force you to pay for
> > any software you dont want. It doesnt force you to use it.
>
> Nobody does either of these things outside of your
> imagination.
>
Stupid? Ignorant? Lying? I think lying.
> > It DOES give
> > you an alternative other Open/Free licenses and an alternatice to
> > micro$oft.
>
> It gives me a license I can crib for my own code, yes,
> but that can be said of MS's EULA.
>
Go steal m$ code, instead of stealing from altruistic people.
> [snip]
> > > The "Open Software definition of Open Software"?
> > >
> >
> > There are other licenses that fall under the Open Software (the
> > institution)
>
> The *institution*?
>
yeah.. go look it up lazy butt.
> > definition of Open Software (the software license). Dolt.
>
> Some of them actually let you do what you like
> with the code, too.
>
So go use one of them. Apple does.
> [snip]
> > > > You really are that stupid, arent you? You just cant stand that there
> > > > are altruistic people out there that write apps and dont want those
> app
> > > > proprietized. Who are you to tell people what license to publish their
> > > > code under?
> > >
> > > Well, of course there are people like that;
> > > that has nothing to do with the GPL.
> >
> > Except that most of them publish under the GPL.
>
> People who want to control what their code is
> used for use the GPL- or a conventional
> proprietary licensing system.
>
Stupid? Ignorant? Lying? I think lying. People that want to make sure
EVERYONE has access to the code.
> The thing that makes the GPL different is that
> it ensures the product has to be free-as-in-beer
> at the level of the source code.
>
This Im not sure of. I dont kow if you can charge for a GPL app and not
provide the source code for free in some manner.
> I do not really see this as altruism.
>
You're blind.
altruism: unselfish concern for the welfare of others.
> [snip]
> > > That doesn't make the GNOME libs ready
> > > for prime time either. :(
> >
> > So/ They seem to gaining in popularity. And what do you think all these
> > people that are adopting Linux are using for GUIs?
>
> KDE is more mature, as I understand it. But there reallky
> isn't *any* GUI library for Linux that rises
> to the level of the commercial desktop stuff.
>
When did "good enough" start failing to satisfy you m$ sockpuppets.
> Not yet, anyway.
>
> > > KDE isn't GNU stuff. As I recall Richard Stallman
> > > at one point took great exception to the licensing
> > > terms for the widget set they use.
> >
> > Go look at the QT license - NOW. Then complain.
>
> I've no particular beef witht he QT license
> per se; I only point out that these guys are not
> all a single monolithic institution.
>
who said they were? Ive been saying Open/Free Software. You are the one
stuck on the FSF, GNU and the GPL.
> [snip]
> > > The one that looks like this:
> > >
> > > command --option: argument --other-option
> > >
> > > Instead of this:
> > >
> > > command -oargument -o
> >
> > So, every shell, except those that are copyrighted by FSF use
> > command -oargument -o? Every one?
>
> No, not at all. DEC's VMS uses
> COMMAND /OPTION ARGUMENT /OTHER_OPTION
>
> And MS-DOS copied that, so that's
> what NT uses too.
>
> But the double-dash notation is compatible
> with Unix-like pathnames, so there's something
> to be said for it.
>
So, say something for it.
> [snip]
> > > This isn't finished, according to its
> > > FAQ.
> >
> > So? Neither is m$ Office, or you wouldnt have updates.
>
> Come now, you know better than this.
>
Dont tell me what I think.
> > > > Im not sure if KOffice is GPL, and it is still in beta.
> > >
> > > That would be a problem.
> >
> > name them.
>
> I think you'll find that many potential
> customers are surprisingly averse to using
> code that is avowedly unfinished. They do
> not want to be your beta testers.
>
tell that to m$ customers.
> That's the problem.
>
It's your problem.
> > > > AbiWord (word processor)is GPLed as is Gnumeric (spreadsheet).
> > >
> > > This are bits of GNOME, and don't appear to be
> > > any more finished than the rest of it.
> >
> > how is AbiWord "bits of GNOME"? How is gnumeric not finished?
>
> They don't seem to have hit version 1.0 yet, basically-
> they have not yet reached the point where their
> creators are prepared to declare them done.
>
Again...how is AbiWord "bits of GNOME"? And i asked you how abiword was
unfinished. You didnt tell me... what is unfinished? what is left out?
Do some research lazy butt.
> That's the same problem as with KOffice.
>
> > > > Im sure there are some DB's that are GPLed.
> > >
> > > None that I know of. Some *are* free
> > > though.
> >
> > Read further.
>
> I think you know of no finished, GPLed
> database- you are hoping that I will
> stumble upon one, and make your case for you.
>
Stupid? Ignorant? Lying? I think lying.
Read further.
> [snip]
> > > > GNU SQL (relational DB system),
> > >
> > > Definitely not ready for prime time this.
> >
> > Why not? Explain.
>
> It's not just that it's not finished; from
> what I can tell on the web, there seems
> to be very little progress being made on it.
>
>From what you can tell on the web? Did you look at it? Look at release
notes? Change logs? Anything?
> [snip]
> > > > Electric, (electrical CAD),
> > >
> > > Hmmm. CAD is a desktop application?
> > > I dunno; maybe, but historically it has
> > > tended not to be treated that way.
> >
> > Thats the best you can do to diss this app? If tis done on a desktop, it
> > must be a desktop app. BTW, is AutoCAD a desktop app? Hmmm?
>
> That's interesting. You realize that nearly all
> computers work "on a desktop"- at least in
> the sense that your terminal or keypunch or
> whatever sits on that particular item of
> furniture.
>
So? define the differneces in computers that sit on a desk.
> [snip]
> > > The "GNU GPL"? Is there some *other* GPL out
> > > there that I don't know about?
> >
> > Learn to research, jerk:
> > From the GNU FAQ:
> >
> > "What does "GPL" stand for?
> > "GPL" stands for "General Public License". The most widespread
> > such license is the GNU General Public License, or GNU GPL for short.
> > This can be further shortened to "GPL", when it is understood that the
> > GNU GPL is the one intended. "
>
> This seems to suggest the answer is "no", as
> I suspected.
>
Read jerk:
"The most widespread such license is the GNU General Public License,"
Which indicates there ARE others, or the comment wouldnt include "-most-
widespread".
> [snip] Dishonest context removal.
> > > Applications like StarOffice need to use the
> > > native widget set. The problem with Unix is
> > > that there's isn't one.
> >
> > Answer the damn question:
> > Why should a non-window$ OS use window$ control sets? its not window$.
>
> That is irrelevant to StarOffice, which is not an
> OS. A non-windows OS should use *some*
> control set, though, rather then leaving it to
> apps to roll their own, as StarOffice does.
>
So? You said it has a problem becasue it doesnt use window$ control
sets. So, Why should a non-window$ OS or app use window$ control sets?
its not window$.
> > And there are several widget sets. Apps for those sets use those sets.
>
> But apparently not StarOffice.
>
> > With window$, you have only one choice.
>
> Not so- you can still roll your own, just as
> you do on Unix. You can roll your own widgets
> and distribute them as a "widget set".
>
> Nobody will use them, because to do so
> is to abandon one of the advantages Windows
> has to offer.
>
> > LiNux users view this as good.
>
> A rationalization;
I see. You say you can "roll your own widgets" for window$ and thats OK.
But its a rationalization fo Linux.
> if they wanted choices they'd
> want *themes*,
Did you just say there are no themes for Linux?
> as offered by products for
> the Macintosh, OS and Windows. These themes
> can substitute other widgets for the standard
> ones the OS provides universally.
>
> On Unix you have no choice; you get the
> widgets the programmer felt like using.
>
> > For some reason, you m$ view it as threatening.
>
> Not threatening; it's a clear advantage for Windows.
>
> [snip]
> > > > It was writtne to be monolithic. It was. That has become a liability,
> so
> > > > it is being changed.
> > >
> > > Indeed. I think Office is way ahead of them
> > > there.
> >
> > maybe. Maybe not.
>
> I do not see how there's any question on this one.
>
Thats becasue you only see you view and cannot see others.
> [snip]
> > > What Unix has not got is a consistant
> > > user interface. It has lots of choices.. for
> > > developers.
> >
> > it has lots of choices .. for users, too.
>
> No. Users have no choice- they get
> the widgets developers want.
>
Then window$ users get no choices. At least Linuyx users can choose
between widget sets, and use those. They can choose to use GNOME and
GNOME apps or KDE and KDE apps or use nither environment and use both
sets of apps, like I do.
> For other desktop OSes, there are 3rd
> party tools that let you substitute other
> widgets for the standard ones. Even OS/2
> and AmigaDOS can handle this.
>
> Unix can't, because it has no standard
> widgets to substitute anything for.
>
> Unix offers the *least* user interface
> choice of any major OS now on the
> desktop.
>
Stupid? Ignorant? Lying? I think lying.
> [snip]
> > window$ is NOT an "Office" environment. And so what if SO duplicates
> > Windows Explorer functionality? There is no WE for Unix, and if there
> > was, that would just be more choice.
>
> There isn't. There should be, though, and it's an advantage
> for Windows that it *does* have this.
>
It is? How?
> [snip]
> > > > how is SO unstable?
> > >
> > > Bloody thing goes berzerk whenever
> > > I use anything 3d.
> >
> > You're using it on window$, arent you?
>
> Yes.
>
I knew it. Im sure you dont see the connection.
> [snip]
> > > > Im suprised SO has OLE.
> > >
> > > Why?
> >
> > becasue OLE is m$ stuff.
>
> Not everybody is a virulent MS-hater,
> you know.
>
Too bad.
> [snip]
> > > > Post a note on one of the GNOME lists. You can proably converse quite
> > > > readily with the actual developer.
> > >
> > > How would he know what StarOffice will do?
> >
> > How would a Star Office developer know aht Star Office will do? How will
> > a GNOME developer know what GNOME will do?
>
> I was asking about the former; you told me to post
> a note on one of the GNOME lists to find out of
> StarOffice will support Bonobo.
>
Nobody mentioned Bonobo. You said OLE.
> I don't see how they'd know.
>
Too bad.
> [snip]
> > > My *main* complaint is that it is a monolithic mass
> > > with poor integration to anything outside of itself.
> >
> > So what? It was intended to run as an environment. Open Office is being
> > developed to be more component centered.
>
> I'm glad they realized that the had made a mistake.
>
They didnt. It was fince whenit was developed. Times and people's tastes
change, so Open Office is changing.
> But bear in mind that MS will not stand still, either.
>
It will if it doesnt perceive any competiton at all. That's M4's MO.
> > > My *other* complaint is tha it needs better debugging.
> >
> > If you are such a great programmer... go help.
>
> :D
>
Look, its a grinning idiot.
> > > If it has anything to recommend it over MS Office,
> > > then I do not see what.
> > >
> > > [snip]
> >
> > 1. You are blind.
>
> Well, that would explain it. :D
>
> > 2. It is NOT micro$oft.
>
> ... which may cause some people to
> distrust it- those who don't understand
> this whole "open source" thing, I mean.
>
> > 3. ... a bunch.
>
> Er... what?
>
> I fail to see even one advantage, outside
> of the price tag; no doubt this is due to
> my own blindness.
>
> So please, fill me in: What did I miss?
No. Evrything.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 08:37:42 +1000
Mart van de Wege <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <s1tR6.4618$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> <several very good points by Erik snipped>
> >
> >> 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.
> >
> > No, XP is a vast improvement whether or not you administer it well.
> > Administering it well gives even greater improvement.
> >
> > Like Windows 98, most people will probably not notice most of the
> > changes because they're under the covers, but when they go back to 9x
> > after having used XP for a while, it will become painfully obvious how
> > different they are. I mean really, do most people really notice the
> > difference between kernel 2.2 and 2.4? Does that mean nothing changed?
> > Of course not.
> >
> >> Thoughts anyone?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Very good points Erik. You do see however that I left one open; I am
> primarily concerned with the *perception* in the public's eye that XP
> will not be much of an improvement. Yes, it is better under the covers,
> I'll grant you that, but as you said yourself: most people will probably
> not notice. I think MS is going to have a hard sell on this one, at least
> in their retail channel.
> Thanks for your input,
I don't think the perpetual licenceing(sp?) scheme is going to go down well
with consumers.
Time will tell.
> Mart
>
> --
> Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
> Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
> For that icy feel when you start to swerve
> John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 18:31:41 -0400
chrisv wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >Hope that helps.
> >>
> >> It didn't. Your anal, literal interpretation of what I wrote just
> >> made you look like an idiot bent on ignoring my point.
> >
> >Are you saying that I should interpret your words in some way
> >other than what you wrote?
> >
> >Do what you say. Say what you mean. One thing leads to another.
>
> Sorry, but there's many non-literal forms of effective communication.
> Morons who simply pretend not to understand are not helpful.
Translation: I, chrisv, am unable to communicate in a clear, effective manner.
>
> Hope that helps.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
