Linux-Advocacy Digest #959, Volume #34 Mon, 4 Jun 01 15:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux on Itanium (Michael Vester)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Stephen Cornell)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Stephen Fuld")
Re: Kernel comparisions ("Chad Myers")
Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie. (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications ("MadHatter")
Re: Opera (drsquare)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: (drsquare)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: UI Importance (Woofbert)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux on Itanium
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 11:40:24 -0700
2 + 2 wrote:
>
> "Intel has teamed with Linux vendors to bring the open source OS to the new
> chip. And those vendors are eager to raise Linux to a high-performance
> platform. "We now have a chance to offer Linux as a first-class operating
> system across the whole spectrum, from embedded applications to the
> enterprise," said Michael Tiemann, chief technical officer at Red Hat. Intel
> was one of the first equity investors in Red Hat in 1998.
> http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2768445,00.html
>
> Intel knows a mass market when they see one.
>
> 2 + 2
I thought the Itanium was delayed so that Microsoft could have time to
kludge something together to run on it. Shouldn't we be seeing some
Microsoft marketing speak proclaiming the virtues of losedos whatever on
the Itanium? Is there a version of losedos ready to run on the Itanium?
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: Stephen Cornell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: 04 Jun 2001 19:15:57 +0100
drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> It's not my fault it doesn't even have any facilities for setting up
> printers. Linux will never catch up with Windows at this rate. All you
> have to do in Windows is open Control Panel and give it the drivers
> disk. On Linux, you....... what? Nothing there for installing
> printers.
Rubbish. It's even called `control-panel' in Red Hat Linux. And you
don't have to supply a driver disk. Always assuming your printer is
supported by Ghostscript - and, if not, blame the printer manufacturer
for not writing a driver.
On the other hand, if I want to print to a postscript file in Windows,...
--
Stephen Cornell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel/fax +44-1223-336644
University of Cambridge, Zoology Department, Downing Street, CAMBRIDGE CB2 3EJ
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:16:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Joseph T. Adams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 11 May 2001 19:39:58 GMT
<9dhf6e$khr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>: news:9dgeto$5kv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>
>:> : "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>:> : news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>:> :>
>:> :>
>:> :> Jan Johanson wrote:
>:> :>
>:> :> > Is there really any doubt that W2K rox the house?
>:> :>
>:> :> Yes, because unix systems stay up longer. Remember the "awesome" MTTF
>:> :> that Windows 2000 exhibits? LOL.
>:>
>:> : Yes, I do. And W2K stays up every bit as long as unix systems.I know you
>:> : won't admit it or can't imagine it but that's your problem not ours.
>:>
>:>
>:> Linux and UNIX systems are capable of uptimes considerably longer than
>:> the total time W2K has existed.
>
>: Win2K is capable of that too, what is your point?
>
>
>W2K is capable of uptimes considerably longer than it has existed?
>
>And you know that, *how* ???????
>
>Dude, logic is obviously NOT your strong point.
One can try to compute an estimated MTTF (MTBF?) for Windows by observing
a number of nodes. For example, if one has a 100-server webfarm,
identically configured and perfectly load-balanced, and one has
a node failure every 18 days on average [*], then one can compute that
the MTBF of Windows is 1800 days.
Whether this is actually achievable or not is not clear to me personally.
There's also the issue that nodes shouldn't fail until we get somewhat
close to the MTBF, which renders this not all that useful as a
measurement (since W2k, as you point out, hasn't been out that long).
>
>
>Joe
[*] a node failure would not bring down the webfarm in this scenario.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 35d:16h:28m actually running Linux.
The US gov't spends about $54,000/second. I wish I could.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen Fuld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:18:21 GMT
"Peter da Silva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ffoi5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The IBM restore CD asked if a few questions about "Large Hard Disk
> > support or not... format the hard disk or not"... the applications disk
> > was a separate CD. This was an OEM CD of windows which contained IBMs
> > proprietary drivers. Some very nice software was included called
> > verisafe that notices when system files are changed by accident by other
> > software installations. Once I had installed AT&T internet disk and
> > found that it had changed a lot of things very deeply and I didn't like
> > that... all I did was click on verisafe and restored to a previous state
> > in a couple of seconds. It cleared out all references to AT&T.
>
> That's impressive, I must admit. I have mixed feelings about it, though:
> it's nice that such a tool exists (and I'll have to look for it, see if
> it's available unbundled), but it's sad it *has* to exist.
>
> Hm. Google is being less than informative. Do you have any idea who the
> original publisher of this software is?
I think such a feature is supposed to be standard in Windows ME. It allows
you to "go back" to the state at a previous time. I don't know if that
feature is part of Win2K, but I guess it is a part of XP. I don't know how
well it works.
I believe there is a commercial package that does this IIRC called "goback".
Note that even in Win98, you can revert the registry, though it is not
trivial to do it, but that is not equivalent of getting rid of all
references (i.e. it doesn't delete the files).
I am not a Windows guru. I've just had to do this a couple of times :-(.
--
- Stephen Fuld
>
> --
> `-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
> 'U` "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
> --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Kernel comparisions
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 13:21:55 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fgi9n$ltn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
>
>
> > What "monolithic model"? With Linux, one has (at least) four choices.
>
> See here for the detials
> news:9fg8sl$92b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > [1] Raw, unadorned I/O: open(), read(), lseek(), etc.
> > [2] FILE * : fopen(), fgets()/fread(), fseek(), etc.
> > [3] iostream : fstream.open(), istream >>, getline(istream &), etc.
> > [4] mmap (disk files, partitions, and devices only), the ability to
> > read/write a file by associating it with a virtual address
> > memory range.
> >
> > Granted, any C++ implementation will have [2] and [3]; many
> > implementations include a variant of [1] as well since [2] and [3]
> > depend on it. [4] is available on a lot of systems, including
> > VMS (where I first encountered it). I'll have to dig for it to
> > see where it is on NT, though -- but it's probably in there, too;
> > it's too useful not to be. :-) [4]'s use is admittedly specialized,
> > since it wasn't available prior to the mid-1980's or so, when Unix
> > systems started using virtual paging rather than the limited
> > segmentation architecture prevalent on the PDP 11/xx. However,
> > at least one OO database depended on it for its implementation.
>
> What is mmap, exactly?
> You can access partitions & harddisks directly in NT (given that you've the
> permissions) using \Devide\PhysicalDisk# or something like that.
>
> > These are not always available on other operating systems;
> > DOS, in particular, requires one to do some peculiar calls to do
> > raw disk reads (but it *can* do them); NT and Win2k don't do symbolic
> > links,
>
> They can.
> It's called repharsed point.
> Mainly used for mounting stuff.
reparse points, and those are hard links, not symbolic.
-c
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Subject: Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie.
Date: 4 Jun 2001 20:32:10 +0100
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:06:51 +0200, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>><http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney>
>Okay, you are getting confused here.
>Yes, you are allowed to sell GPL software.
>But you are also forced to make the software avialable at no charge to
>anyone who ask for it.
>
Note that you can withold any amount of data like pictures, tables, sounds,
etc, etc, even data that is very much needed to run the program (in a
meaningful manner).
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] · There will always be survivors - Robert A. Heinlein · []
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: 4 Jun 2001 18:32:25 GMT
: I tried downloading GNOME, but there were about 50-100 different
: dependencies I needed as well, and I just couldn't be bothered.
apt-get install gnome
------------------------------
From: "MadHatter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 19:34:20 +0100
here here!
"Jörg Knebel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please get a clue and then give us a real operating system.
>
> Do you like to wait for over? ;-) SCNR
>
> Cheers
> Jörg
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:38 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 08:57:11 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >It was great until it crashed.
>>
>> Mine's NEVER crashed, and I use it all the time. Netscape and IE crash
>> every few days. And they're slower and less powerful than Opera.
>
>Opera seems to show a blank rectangle for streaming media, and as for
>handling of cookies, what's with the most complex dialog box for
>accepting/rejecting them?
What are you on about? I have cookies either completely turned on or
off. And if I wanted streaming media I'd switch on the telly.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:39 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:49:41 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 04 Jun 2001 03:28:45 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>>>On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:12:35 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I would try mandrake or redhat, but as I've put so much effort into
>> downloading/installing debian, I don't want to lose all that. Unless I
>Debian's fine. dpkg tells you exactly what you need to know, and
>anyway, is not the tool to use. You should be using "apt-get". THAT's
>the package manager. Dpkg is the low-level installer/uninstaller.
what's the difference? Does apt-get give you a clear list of what's
missing?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:40 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:52:52 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Those are all personal choices, except fo Telnet & SSH, which is a little
>> >like cheating, in this case, since you are openning a *CLI* session on
>> >another computer.
>>
>> Yeah, but there's nothing stopping you from opening a telnet client in
>> a GUI.
>I believe that 9x has this, btw.
>Quite nice, too.
The ones of win95 or 98 aren't. They don't even do colours.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:41 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 13:07:26 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >And I like CMD's filename completion betterthan I like bash.
>>
>> What's the difference?
>
>Couldn't get Bash's to work :-D
Ah well.
>Suppose I want all the files which deal with networking, on the CLI, I
>would've to do a lot of typing.
>On the GUI, I can hunt them with the mouse and pressed ctrl.
>
>What do you think is more efficent?
It depends on which deal with networking, and how you name your files.
>> That doesn't make sense. If you were using a CLI, then CMD or whatever
>> would ALREADY be there, always, otherwise you're not in a CLI. If
>> you're in a GUI, there's no guarentee that explorer will be there at
>> all.
>But I'm *not* using CLI normally, so CMD won't be usually open (unless I do
>some adminstraton) on my computer.
>However, if I'm using the GUI, I usually have Explorer window running. (And
>if not, I can invoke it in two keystrokes, with near-instantous response.
>For comparison, Explorer come up faster than the start menu)
Yes, but if you were using a CLI, you'd have the CLI there! Using that
sort of argument, I could include opening the GUI!
>> Well, I don't think too many people will be too eager to upgrade to
>> that in a hurry.
>
>What is the benefits that WinXP gives people compare to older versions?
>I wouldn't list them, but I would say that they are greater than 95>98
>benefits, much greater if you are moving from 9x.
>The most popular OS at the moment is Win98.
>
>I think that the same will happen to XP.
Nah, most people won't know of/understand the benefits.
>Then again, the one reason that I don't like XP is the activation.
>But public press got Intel to get rid of CPU-ID, let's see if they can move
>MS.
Nah, they're grip is too strong. I just hope they find a way of
cracking it to teach those bastards a lesson.
>> >So, you admit that the CLI is not fit to be used by the average user on
>the
>> >desktop.
>> >The CLI can be very powerful, but it require much more than GUI does.
>> Such as learning some commands.
>No, such as *memorizing* commands.
>This is *bad*, the GUI allow you to *recall*.
>There is a difference in the amount of effort involved.
Memorizing? How difficult is it too remember things like "cd" and
"rm"? If you find that difficult to do, then you should consider
selling your computer and taking up flower arranging.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:42 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 13:09:47 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >What you suggest is technically very difficult.
>> >And even if it was possible, would I *really* want to use a program that
>I'd
>> >to fix its UI first?
>>
>> I wouldn't want a program whose UI I could't customise. Imagine mutt
>> without all its customisations...
>
>mutt?
>
>The difference is that if I need to change the UI in order to use the
>program, I wouldn't want to use it.
Even if you want to change it but you can't?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:42 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 11:39:59 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> Vim is just vi but with queer annoying features added. I can't seem to
>> find a copy of the classic vi anywhere.
>
>Vim is just vi with a /lot/ of features added. And gvim is
>the GUI version which supports mouse stuff. And both also
>have been ported to Windows. Yay, no more paying for a decent
>Windows vi editor (bye-bye CodeWright).
>
>Vim has a "classic" mode, by the way. You can also compile it
>to remove some of the features you might not like.
But it won't be the same!
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:43 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 16:03:25 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9fg0bg$s2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On /content/ ? how does this work? and why couldn't you do it in the CLI?
>
>You can set explorer to show thumbnails, instead of just generic icon.
I remember getting explorer to do that. It took about 30 seconds to
show each page, and then the picture was too small to see. It helps to
actually know what's in your own files. Anyway, this would only work
with pictures.
>> > So, you admit that the CLI is not fit to be used by the average user on
>> > the desktop. The CLI can be very powerful, but it require much more than
>> > GUI does.
>>
>>
>> I disagree. It depends on what the user wants to do, really.
>
>
>Naturally, and most (not all, but a very large precentage) of the desktop
>stuff can be done more easily on the GUI.
Define "desktop" stuff, the term is so vague.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:44 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:59:22 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "drsquare"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 16:07:21 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> (flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>
>>>What does Linux need for the desktop?
>>>
>>>Some users would be nice :)
>>
>> And a non-shit GUI. You need to go delving into configuration files just
>> to stop it scrolling around everywhere when you move the mouse to the
>> side of the screen.
>
>Look fool, quit complaining. You chose to use Debian which is a distro
>for the hard core only. If you want a easier one, use RedHat. It even has
>a control panel and a good tool for setting up printers and X.
That would mean downloading another 100MB+ of files, which I am just
not prepared to do.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:45 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 10:01:58 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "drsquare"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>PSP (Paint Shop Pro) only costs 100 bucks... and is almost as fully
>>>functional as Photoshop.
>>
>> It costs 100 'bucks' less if you crack it.
>
>Some us have morals and know that stealing is wrong.
Yeah, and some of us get PSP for free.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:46 +0100
On 04 Jun 2001 09:03:56 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)) wrote:
>On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:10:43 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > Do you mean GCC?
>>>
>>> Opps, yes I do mean Gcc.
>>
>> In this case, there is a whole slew of free compilers for Windows.
>
>This is a good thing, in 1996 when I was using Windows, I don't recall
>having a single decent C compiler, and even tried using a freeware
>compilier called 'pacific' and man did it suck.
Yeah, but it fits on a floppy!
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:46 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:57:22 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesse F. Hughes)) wrote:
>"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Oh, but it isn't a crime if he isn't convicted. Please see
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: RIP the Linux
>desktop) for details.
>
>(I'm not sure whether or not it's morally wrong if no one knows about
>his deed, but at least he's not a criminal.)
It's not morally wrong if I wasn't going to buy it anyway. My
downloading a crack doesn't harm anyone.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:50:47 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 10:33:36 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>>>to get matching corners as well.
>>>>
>>>> Nah, the ` makes the whole thing look assymetrical. My version is
>>>> obviously FAR superior :->
>>>
>>>??
>>>I guess that's a difference in fonts.
>>>
>>>On 9x15 they are just reflections of ona another.
>>>
>>>:-/
>>
>> Well, I'm using fixedsys, and the ' is straight up, whereas the ` is
>> bent to the left.
>
>X has always had better fixed with fonts than windows :-) Shame about the
>scalable fonts, tho.
I wouldn't be so sure. Fonts in X tend to look all jagged and hard on
the eyes.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: 4 Jun 2001 18:52:08 GMT
Stuart Fox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: "kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:9fbnku$42j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > Philip Neves wrote:
: >
: >
: > Try this
: > http://www.linuxprinting.org/show_printer.cgi?recnum=464242
: >
: > In general if you have prnting problems go to linuxprinting.org
: >
: > That printer is listed as working perfectly so just follow the
: instructions
: > on that page.
: Come on now, the printing system is so broken it requires it's own web site?
: You're joking right?
: I don't see a www.windowsprinting.org, or a www.macintoshprinting.org.
: And they say Linux is ready for home desktop use?
Where did you get driver for your printer? Maybe it came on a cd which came
with the printer. Did you get linux driver on cd? If not then call the
company and ask for one. Does MS write all printer drivers? If not then
don't ask Linus to do this.
fred
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: 4 Jun 2001 18:53:24 GMT
Ray Chason ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >It sounds like printers are more applications dependent under Linux than
: >under W2k.
Sounds much like a mac which windows users constantly diss. Maybe an iMac
would be best for the poster.
Fred
------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:54:20 GMT
In article <9fgimv$9gg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Jensen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : In article <GLCS6.8040$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John
> : Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : > You are taking this a different way than I meant. I was making a
> : > simpler
> : > comment, that we shouldn't worry about developers developing crazy
> : > UIs.
> : > If those crazy UIs don't [serve] a purpose, no one will use them.
> : >
> : > I think customizable (or 'deeply themed') interfaces are good, but as
> : > you
> : > say they are difficult to achieve.
>
> : It depends on the nature of the customizability.
>
> : If customizability means making the thing look like some control panel
> : on Deep Space Nine or a highly intelligent slime mold, then forget it
> : ... I for one don't care what it looks like if the basic gestures used
> : to interact with it are all wrong.
>
> If someone likes slime-mold interfaces, who are we to deny them?
You're missing the point...
For one thing, you can't have a slime-mold interface on a CLI.
For another, I don't care how pretty (or attractivelyugly) the slime
mold interface is, if the mouse gestures are badly set up and the
command-key equivalents are stupid, then the UI is still a bad one.
Anyone who thinks that eye-candy alone makes an UI good is an idiot.
--
Woofbert: Chief Rocket Surgeon, Infernosoft
email <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
web http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: 4 Jun 2001 18:57:49 GMT
flatfish+++ ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 02:19:39 GMT, somebody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> stands accused of saying:
: >
: >> I prefer to pay more and get a
: >>nice postscript device and all of these problems go away.
: >
: >...hmm, but what about all that stuff about lower TCO w/ Linux?
: It's lost amongst the endless hours trying to make Linux work and you
: can multiply that by 10 fold if you are trying to integrate a Linux
: box into a Windows environment.
I run a network off a linux box which makes apple printers available for the
pcs on the network. It also allows sharing b/w apples and windows machines.
I know little about pcs, but they did not share with apples and vice versa
before I installed linux router. Also, they couldn't use windows printer.
The linux box has been up for 19 days so far w/o troubles. There is a win 95
machine that nobody can get up on the network. Someone brought in a laptop,
a mac. He plugged it into network and it just worked. I think he had Dave
which IMHO, costs more than the full linux distro which did everything.
Someone else brought in a win 2k machine. Could not get it on the network.
I booted a linux machine (win 95 dual boot) and it found network.
Fred
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:59:17 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Les Mikesell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 23 May 2001 05:03:58 GMT
<2xHO6.4760$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9ecnuh$8j5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:ZSkO6.3712$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>> > How do you diagnose things that might involve concurrent thread
>> > operations? I've never needed to do that under unix.
>>
>> You debug, of course.
>>
>> You never need to do that on Unix because it has lousy thread support.
>
>It would be more accurate to say that it has such efficient process support
>that you seldom have to deal with the problems peculiar to threads.
Apart from memory corruption, the risk of using the wrong routine (and
putting the entire process to sleep, as opposed to the one thread), and
internal scheduling problems, what problems are peculiar to threads? :-)
(Mind you, those are bad enough...)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random question here
EAC code #191 35d:16h:30m actually running Linux.
Microsoft. Just when you thought you were safe.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
