Linux-Advocacy Digest #926, Volume #34 Sun, 3 Jun 01 03:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows XP Gets Fingered ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Todd")
Re: ease and convenience (*long* and possibly boring;-) ("Todd")
Re: Linux is shit ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Terry Porter)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
(Adam)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) ("Stephen S. Edwards
II")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) ("Stephen S. Edwards
II")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (GreyCloud)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Ray Chason)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows XP Gets Fingered
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 01:55:36 -0400
"." wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Burkhard Wölfel wrote:
> >>
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >> > Although this piece was written in jest, there is an element of
> >> > truth here...
> >> >
> >> > the classic Marxist "Create a problem then offer a solution which
> >> > advances our power-hungry goals" methodology.
> >>
> >> You mean, the marxists create problems and offer a solution afterwards?
> >>
> >> If so, exemplify, please.
>
> > Build up Hitler, so that he can run roughshod over Europe.
> > Then send the Red Army in to "rescue" everyone from Hitler.
>
> > Or the current electricity crisis in California.
>
> > Use price controls and obstruction of power-plant construction to
> > create a shortage of electricity...and now they same people who are
> > responsible for seting up these policies...are now using the resulting
> > crisis as an excuse to confiscate the electric power plants.
>
> > It's the Hegalian dialectic, which can be summarized thus:
>
> > If you make something fucked-up in one hand...and have shit in the
> > other....you can combine them together and give EVERYBODY your
> > fucked-up shit.
>
> You assume that humans at large are intelligent.
Wrong. I assume that those who are "in charge" have enough intelligence
to get themselves put "in charge".
> I make no such assumption
> (having done everything from tech support to unix administration and
> engineering---I find it hard to believe you havent reached the same
> conclusion) and therefore believe utterly that things like hitler, the
> california power crisis, the election of george dubya and the fact that
> Abacus still isnt printing its serial numbers on the CD case but instead
> on the warranty card....are attributable to the severe retardation of the
> human brain.
>
> -----.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 14:00:39 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
IE is far better than *any* browser out there and supports more static
formats, more streaming formats, more plug-ins, more security protocols and
is the most CSS1,2 compliant browser there is. Also, almost all web sites
test their sites with IE first.
Please don't try to even *convince* Windows users that somehow Netscape or
Opera even *compare* to IE, or you will simply lose your credibility.
-Todd
>
> >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: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience (*long* and possibly boring;-)
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 14:04:13 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fbjha$4ir$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9fagp6$6t2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>
> > > The jury is still out here whether XP will really be the continuation
in
> > > our household or not. It all hangs on any silly licensing agreements
> > > that may require an annual license fee. If they want a fee we're
outta
> > > MS camp.
> >
> > Eventually, most software will be written for XP... and MS will be smart
> > enough to add new APIs to XP so that previous versions of Windows can't
> run
> > the new software. This is what they must do to get revenue.
>
> Actually, as far as I understand it, most of the new stuff in XP is just a
> layer on the existing API.
> Win2K can do most to all of what XP does.
You are right *for now*.
But what if MS decides to add additional Win32 APIs to XP?
What if MS decides to offer DirectX 10 to XP, but not to any other of there
OSes?
Eventually, if users wish to run those apps., they will have no choice.
-Todd
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is shit
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 06:05:55 GMT
In ashen ink the dread hand of Terry Porter did inscribe:
> Personally I use a nice second hand IBM 4029 Postscript
> laser printer that cost me $70.
SuSE saw and setup my Epson Stylus 660 without any problems.
--
Microsoft - Just say No.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 06:08:25 GMT
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 13:56:13 +0800,
Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 01:36:51 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:43:57 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)) wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> >>The de-facto Photoshop alternative for Linux would be GIMP. Most
>> >>distros seem to come with it.
>> >
>> > But it's nowhere near as good as PSP
>>
>> The Gimp is also nowhere near as expensive as PSP, in fact
>> its free.
>
> For people actually *doing* graphics work, this is entirely irrelevant. If
> Gimp can't do something, it can't do something.
While you're correct, the GIMPis still a very capable graphics program.
>
> PSP (Paint Shop Pro) only costs 100 bucks... and is almost as fully
> functional as Photoshop.
This is the problem as I see it, Windows *only* costs around $100 -$300,
PSP another hundred, Agent another ??, etc, etc.
Windows cost of ownership is huge, when you factor in any worthwile software.
>
> MS Paint is free too...
Are you comparing MS paint with the Gimp ?
>
> -Todd
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the
dust!
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 01 05:04:35 GMT
In article <15YR6.69109$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>But it would be able to.
>
><sigh>
>You just don't understand.
>
It's my experience that when people find that the whole rest of the world
doesnt understand their POV its usually because theyre wrong...
>-c
>
>
--
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
{ -=Adam Johnson=- }
{ overlord@{I-HATE-SPAM}ihug.co.nz }
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 06:24:45 GMT
In article <9fbp0b$de2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Here's a recent example. You recently posted an artile about sourceforge
> being hacked. You carefully worded the post to make it look like it was
> dus to a vulnerability in apache and/or ssh, where it was nothing of the
> sort.
Now where in that post did I say it was anything of the sort?
This is what I said:
"After all the bleating about IIS, now I see an Apache server has been
hacked. SourceForge uses SSH... hmmm..."
An "apache server". Did I say Apache?
I then went on to post an article that says:
"Gaining control of this SSH server, which provides a Unix command line
interface for remote administration of Web servers, allowed Fluffy Bunny
(in his words) to "sniff my way onto apache.org and SourceForge Web
server and leave all sorts of goodies in the code".
> That is a prime example of you misquoting and snipping to twist the
> original meaning in to something completely different.
I posted the truth. Others, like yourself, then went on to suggest I said
something completely different.
> There's the evidence that you so dearly want, and you gave it to me
> without me even having to search for it.
It's nothing of the sort!
> Now will you concede that what I said is true?
Nope.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 22:57:21 -0700
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
8<SNIP>8
> > What it all comes down to is, "all hardware sucks;
> > all software sucks." Anyone who doesn't understand
> > that, doesn't understand anything.
>
> Oh, now we're exactly on the same wavelength!
> Except that hardware doesn't suck as much <grin>.
Actually, I think it does.
Did you know than an NT application cannot
use more than 2GB of RAM? Do you know why?
Because NT was originally designed around
MIPS. The MIPS chip could support up to
4GB, but applications could only access
up to 2GB of RAM. Why? No idea. Perhaps
it was an IBMism at the time, such as "oh,
nobody will ever need $SPACE".
I think that better quality hardware can
reduce the amount of suckitude a bit, but
not to the extent where it bears a significant
difference from software.
In my experiences, I have seen SGI boxen
crash nearly as nastily as anything else.
Just my opinion.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 23:46:42 -0700
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > My point was, that advertising why OpenSource software
> > is "so wonderful" in this newsgroup is misplaced. If
> > we were that interested in OpenSource software, we
> > likely wouldn't be using WindowsNT at all.
> >
>
> That didn't come across clearly. What came across is that you
> use *no* Open Source (or Free)software and don't want to hear
> about any.
Well, I'd be pretty silly for being an avid NetBSD
user then, wouldn't I. :-)
I just don't want to have a religious agenda pushed
in my face, and while I likely impetuosly attributed
such behavior unto Chris, things were literally that
bad in here just a short while back.
In short, it's likely he took flak for the past
behavior of others. I offer my apologies, Chris,
assuming you might happen upon this thread. My
USENET server is sucking meteors through straws
tonight, and about 17 messages got canned (ie:
deleted to make space).
> If NT users don't want to use Linux (or Solaris or MacOS or
> Plan 9 or BeOS or OS/2) that's fine, but there is a lot of good
> Free/Open software available for Win32 and you shouldn't dismiss
> it ot of hand. It's possible to advocate all of the above OS's,
> as well as some commercial software and some Open/Free. These
> things are not mutually exclusive.
>
> > > In some cases the commercial product is best, in others it's not.
> > > Pick the proper tool for the job and don't be blinded by ideology.
> >
> > I'm not being blinded by anything. I appears to me
> > that you are attempting to change the context of the
> > argument. Stop the semantics, and just hear what I'm
> > saying.
> >
>
> This is COMNA, not alt.I.dont.like.open.source. Your original
> point came across as "if it's not commercial it sucks", and I
> responded to that. If your context is that Open Source isn't
> always The One True Path then I agree with you. If Chris's point
> is that commercial software isn't always The One True Path then
> I agree with him as well. It's horses for courses, and not all
> courses are the same.
I quite agree. Misunderstanding is not uncommon
on USENET I suppose. :-P
> > > It's all so binary for some people, isn't it?
> >
> > It has nothing to do with being binary. It has
> > everything to do with "trolling" a newsgroup with
> > material that is not desired (at least, by me (I
> > can only suspect that others here feel somewhat
> > the same as I do about this)).
>
> Some of us don't feel that way, so please stop trying to be
> the arbiter of what's appropriate on COMNA.
I don't know how long you've been reading COMNA, but
there was a time when this place was literally infested
with ranting anti-Microsoft loons. I can recall that
many of us genuniely tried to reason with them, to no
avail. Some of us stopped trying to reason. :-/
Me and a gentleman by the name of Christopher Smith
spent a good few days trying to reason with someone
who refused to acknowledge that the Titanic was not
made with Linux exclusively. He simply refused to
believe that Digital Domain had many platforms
in heavy use. The memory of that event amuses me
now, but it really boggled my mind back then.
> If Chris was trolling I would agree that it's inappropriate
> (though Chris would hardly be the only offender, either on
> COMNA or COLA). It looked to me like he was advocating the use
> of Open Source software, which is not incompatible with the
> use of a commercial operating system.
I agree. I likely mistook him for one of the typical
Linux zealots that post here regularly. Upon reading
a few more of his posts, he appears much more rational
than he did at first glance.
> On the other hand, you seemed to be saying that Open Source
> should never be used under any circumstances and you didn't
> want to hear about it's existance. This is also not incompatible
> with COMNA, but it strikes me as a very narrow view.
If I really did have that attitude, then I wouldn't
be using NetBSD, or FreeBSD to the extent that I do.
Over the past year, there have been literally dozens of
anti-Microsoft/pro-Linux loonies posting in COMNA, and
it really did get out of control at one point. Some
of the posters from COLA would constantly pull notions
from their rear, and argue them as facts. And in order
to prove them, they would post links to obscure sites
that were obviously biased towards Linux, and run by
'leetboy warez kiddies. It actually got to a point
where discussions in this group were no longer enjoyable.
Have you read any posts from Aaron R. Kulkis? How about
Matt Templeton? Mig? Derek Currie? Mark S. Bilk? Ugh!
And those are just a minute few.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 23:53:38 -0700
"Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fcjin$vv0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> IE is far better than *any* browser out there and supports more static
> formats, more streaming formats, more plug-ins, more security protocols
and
> is the most CSS1,2 compliant browser there is. Also, almost all web sites
> test their sites with IE first.
One thing that I have noticed is that IE does
seem to parse HTML much better than Netscape
does. I've had the worst luck with getting
Netscape to process frames tags, as well as
tables, accurately.
I used to create HTML files by hand, but since
I use IE exclusively now, I just use FP98 for
everything.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[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: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:49:09 -0700
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > In my means, just grabbing or downloading source from the web and just
> > > > compiling the source code.
> > >
> > > In this case, I would agree with daniel, it's likely that xgdb has
> plenty of
> > > #ifdef in it, so it change it code depending on where it is.
> >
> > I think it has to do more with the layers of the X environment. Xlib is
> > pretty raw stuff and there are other top layers. I think that when it
> > compiles if you use the defaults the appropriate widget set is used.
>
> This can be done, to an extent. Some of the widget sets do
> have similar APIs, so that compiling for one or the other
> is not a big problem.
>
> It's not necesssary to sprinkly #ifdefs all over the code,
> though a few here and there might be helpful, if your
> program is getting fancy.
>
> > I
> > had Caldera installed at one time and compiled an old Motif program and
> > it turned out looking like the KDE theme. I'm pretty sure that the
> > theme can be changed, but haven't tried that. I've compiled one example
> > in the back of O'reilleys book under several different WMs and it stayed
> > with the respective WM. There were no ifdefs in that code.
>
> I suspect this example used the Xt/Athena API; this API
> is just about the same as for Motif and some others, and can
> be recompiled for different widget sets fairly easily.
>
> However, this API is not universal. It is exceedingly unpleasant,
> basically, so alternatives have sprung up. It gets more
> difficult to support more widget sets as more different APIs
> turn up.
That would be what I'd expect also. I just like Motif... especially
when going to certain websites that have a selection box... there are no
doubts left as to the large three-D selector box.
I looked back into the O'reilley book... it talked about the X Toolkit
intrinsics.
Commonality to all Xt-based widget sets.
The one program was xshowfont and was compiled thusly:
cc -O -s xshowfonts.c -lXaw -lXt -lXmu -lX11 -o xshowfonts
the includes:
<X11/Intrinsic.h>
<X11/StringDefs.h>
<X11/Xaw/Label.h>
<X11/Xaw/Viewport.h>
Under RedHat 6.0 I noticed that using the Win95 like theme it comes out
looking like Win95. Under Solaris it looks like Motif. Under Kde it
looks like kde... and under fvwm2 it looks like fvwm2. What I noticed
in my old notes was that I would get a few errors pertaining to not
finding a particular function and having to add a compile time library
inclusion like -lXp library, but the program would compile and link and
then run correctly. I tried it under Gnome and it looked like gnome
under RedHat 6.0. There may be some programs that won't work, which I
have encountered , but these were other factors that had to do with
other UNIX system hardware dependencies rather than the Xlibs. The one
that gave me fits was the random number functions... this one program
had so many #ifdef statements for different kinds of srand() functions
that I shelved that project for the time being.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 06:58:05 -0000
"Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It sounds like printers are more applications dependent under Linux than
>under W2k.
This is tangential to the original tro^H^H^Hpost, but most Linux apps
just produce Postscript and let Ghostscript or some such worry about
what kind of printer you have. Two major exceptions are The Gimp and
WordPerfect, which carry their own printer drivers around.
>Anyway, I simply *plug in* my printer, and w2k recognizes, installs, and
>configures the printer automatically. I'm simply ready to print from *any*
>application.
This looks like a simple matter of programming, followed by a not-
quite-so-simple matter of building a database matching ID strings
to Ghostscript drivers (assuming that your printer is PnP compliant,
which of course most newer ones are). My printer driver correctly
identifies my el cheapo Deskjet, but I still have to set up the
print queues myself.
CUPS is an attempt to simplify Linux printing, but not all distros
have adopted it.
This is a specific case of a large missed opportunity (or maybe the
SuSE distribution with its humongous YAST configurator fills it?).
The information on what devices we have, and hence what drivers we
need to set up, is right in front of our noses. Read /proc/pci, now
we know what's on the PCI and AGP buses. Query the USB and PS/2
ports, we have our mouse. Query the monitor, build /etc/X11/XF86Config.
Query the printer, set up /etc/printcap and whatever filters we need.
If the PnP queries can be done through the existing infrastructure
(and at least some of it can), then this can be set up entirely in
scripts and C programming, without any kernel hacking at all. The
trick is in building that database, something that no lone hacker
is likely to be able to do well for want of access to lots of
hardware.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
