Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On Jul 23, 2007, at 7:42 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. Either you do not drive in Washington State as your email address implies, your you missed that question on the Washington driver's test. Bicycles are required to take the entire lane when the lane is too narrow for a motor vehicle to safely pass in the same lane. Well, thanks for the correction. I learned to drive in Michigan, and no test was required when I moved here. I looked, but couldn't find anything in the WAC, either -- it's pretty vague on bicyclists' rights and responsibilities. If they still publish it, the Washington Bicyclists Manual would be a good place to start for finding citations there. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 25/07/07, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If they still publish it, the Washington Bicyclists Manual would be a good place to start for finding citations there. OK, it's OT, but what possible connection is there between the title [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity? and a bicycle in Washington (wherever that is)? Is it that binary = bicycle, or because Linux users behave like nil/ill trained bicyclists on the (M$) super-highway? I think we should be told! Terence -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 25/07/07, David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bicycles don't contain engine computers running close-source software. ;) Aha! I knew there must be a link! Thanks , David. On 25/07/07 Andrew Sackville-West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That errupted into a brief shower of fire about bikes vs cars and subsequent OT ramblings about all sorts of bicycle related issues. We're now down to maybe 1 or 2 messages a day in the thread and it looked to be dying... until you brought it up again... ;) Sorry about that : ) I read the first few in the thread but missed the metamorphosis into the four wheels bad, two wheels good part. I shall have to pedal harder. Terence -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 25, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Terence wrote: OK, it's OT, but what possible connection is there between the title [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity? and a bicycle in Washington (wherever that is)? Is it that binary = bicycle, or because Linux users behave like nil/ill trained bicyclists on the (M$) super-highway? I think we should be told! Bicycles don't contain engine computers running close-source software. ;) David Brodbeck Information Technology Specialist 3 Computational Linguistics University of Washington
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 10:58:33PM +0100, Terence wrote: On 25/07/07, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If they still publish it, the Washington Bicyclists Manual would be a good place to start for finding citations there. OK, it's OT, but what possible connection is there between the title [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity? and a bicycle in Washington (wherever that is)? Is it that binary = bicycle, or because Linux users behave like nil/ill trained bicyclists on the (M$) super-highway? I think we should be told! you must have missed the beginning of it all.. This is the tail end of what for us is a pretty minor OT thread (good job guys! We kept it under control). Someone, I forget who and it doesn't matter, made some analogy to bicycles going against traffic in what was otherwise an OT, but linux related thread. That errupted into a brief shower of fire about bikes vs cars and subsequent OT ramblings about all sorts of bicycle related issues. We're now down to maybe 1 or 2 messages a day in the thread and it looked to be dying... until you brought it up again... ;) A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On Jul 15, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: A bicycle legally owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've ridden) Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. Either you do not drive in Washington State as your email address implies, your you missed that question on the Washington driver's test. Bicycles are required to take the entire lane when the lane is too narrow for a motor vehicle to safely pass in the same lane. It strikes me that it would really hold up traffic if they were entitled to an entire lane, since passing is not generally allowed on city streets. Cars would end up stuck behind a bicycle going 10-15 mph, unable to legally get by. And unlike cyclists, drivers are not always given a free pass by the police for breaking traffic laws. Cyclists aren't given a free pass, I've got two tickets from 1997 and a speeding ticket from 7th grade to prove it. Turned left against a no left turn sign I didn't see too late on a traffic light in '97, was unaware that children were legally required to slow down for themselves in a school zone back in 7th grade. Bicyclists are still required to use the first safe turnout to allow traffic to pass once there's 5 cars behind them, just like the motorists are. And in my experience as a cyclist and a professional driver, the cyclists are MUCH more likely to follow the slow vehicle shoulder driving law than your average Johnny Motorists. I'd estimate based on what I see driving the I-5 Cascadian corridor that 90% of the slow-moving cyclists use turnouts versus maybe 1% of the slow-moving motorists. Pro-cyclist groups like Critical Mass seem to feel that cyclists have the right to block traffic that has a green light so other cyclists can run a red. This sticks in my craw. If they want to be treated with the same respect as other motorists they shouldn't be able to decide the law doesn't apply to them. Just sayin' it. Or at least they should understand that only California recognizes a 'mob of bicycles' as a single vehicle. Not that anybody, even the motorists, bother to obey the traffic lights in that state. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Steve Lamb wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: Andrew Sackville-West wrote: Its a problem and I don't deny it. There needs to be a solution. dedicated bike lanes are probably the best. Unless you're a dedicated bicyclist in which case you'll really dislike dedicated bike lanes. AKA, the refuse lane since all of the nice debris from the road gets swept into that lane both by the cars passing by and the cars going into and out of the lane. Nice things like broken glass, nails and other tire friendly junk. It depends on the area. Typically, there's a shoulder to the right of the bicycle lane that catches all the crap that doesn't belong in any traffic through lane, such as broken glass, parked cars, motorists and bicycles turning right, etc. What's worse is that motorists who see a bike lane feel absolved from care around the bicyclist since they now have their own lane; nevermind the bicyclist still reserves the right to leave the lane at any time to avoid dangers or debris. Well, just because they get their own lane doesn't absolve anybody (cyclist or motorist) from signaling and checking for lane clearance before merging. Great idea in the mind of the weekend cyclist or the ignorant parent who thinks it helps keep their sproggen out of danger. Horrible for anyone who has to use it for more than a few times a year. Do you ride or are you just making an argument for the sake of it? Oregon and Washington at the very least have well-built and reasonably maintained bicycle lanes and greenways, and provide the proper enforcement. If your jurisdiction doesn't, that's your problem: Go to your town/county/region council/state capitol and fix the problem. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: (When have you ever heard of one being ticketed for a traffic violation?) If I can find where I filed them, I can send you copies of my traffic tickets, all of them to date have been on a bicycle. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On 16 Jul, David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:25 PM, William Pursell wrote: If you make a right turn (assuming you live where they drive on the right hand side of the road) and take out a cyclist that you didn't see passing you on the right in a cycle lane, I hope you get a jail sentence. (Not you personally, but apparently I still have a lot of pent up hostility to all the jokers who've endangered my life on the road.) People who make right turns without a right head check should be sentenced to drive on Minneapolis freeways. Since in many places there buses are allowed to use the right shoulder during rush hour, they will eventually be taken out by a city bus while attempting to exit, thus removing them from the gene pool. ;) Unfortunately, not necessarily before they procreate, so natural selection may not occur. :-) Borrowing from George Carlin, perhaps to set the proper example, they should be strapped to a chair and have their head smashed in with a hammer in front of their children. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
William Pursell wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. As a cyclist, I find the unpredictability of drivers distressing. Cyclists who ignore traffic rules are idiots who give responsible cyclists a bad image. They're not cyclists any more than an unlicensed driver is a motorist. In both cases, they're an idiot with a deadly weapon and should be prosecuted as such. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
Kent West wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16 Jul, Steve Lamb wrote: William Pursell wrote: If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? I can't say I ever recall it being law, but I remember my grandparents teaching me to walk against the flow of traffic, so that you can see the driver and the driver can see you, and I grew up with the concept of doing the same on a bike (I'm unsure if they taught me that, or if I just made the cross-over in my own child's mind); this was back in the 60's. I still see that as being the logical choice in some situations. I also see the logic of going with the flow. Depends on the situation. What is the logic of driving a vehicle against traffic, again? Just because it's not motorized doesn't mean it doesn't need the horizontal clearance or is any more crash compatible in a head-on collision. Even on a bicycle, a rear-ender is considerably more survivable; I've been in both on a bicycle (once head on, went through a taxicab windshield after the moron ran a red left turn signal, another was a rearender by some dork with Californian plates. The head-on knocked me out and I'm damn lucky I more or less walked away from that one with minor injuries. The rear-ender just sat me on the hood. But I'm not one to speak to the issue, as I'm not a rider; when I rode as a kid, it was because it was the only mode of transportation, not because I especially enjoyed riding. As an adult, I'm way too lazy to rely on a bike. (*burp* pass me those chips, would ya?) Look at it this way: Bicycles are lazier than walking! :o) Seriously, though, childhood ignorance is not an excuse. If you can't be bothered to teach your kids how to ride properly, you shouldn't be teaching your kids how to ride at all. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Steve Lamb wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: William Pursell wrote: If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? Probably not, but you should be aware that the practice has been outlawed throughout North America since the 1970s, and in many jurisdictions, even longer than that. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:25 PM, William Pursell wrote: If you make a right turn (assuming you live where they drive on the right hand side of the road) and take out a cyclist that you didn't see passing you on the right in a cycle lane, I hope you get a jail sentence. (Not you personally, but apparently I still have a lot of pent up hostility to all the jokers who've endangered my life on the road.) People who make right turns without a right head check should be sentenced to drive on Minneapolis freeways. Since in many places there buses are allowed to use the right shoulder during rush hour, they will eventually be taken out by a city bus while attempting to exit, thus removing them from the gene pool. ;) Reminds me of working for the Oregon Zoo in 1999. Riding home on the shoulder of the Sunset Freeway into downtown to catch a train out to the 'burbs with my bicycle, I was trailing a Portland Police officer on a bicycle by about a quarter mile. Some douche from California with a particularly acute case of Californian Entitlement Complex decides to cut onto the shoulder without signalling or checking mirrors to drive on the shoulder to the next exit. The Portland Police Bureau bicycle ahead of me rear-ended the Californicator and was immediately pulled over by the (now roadrashed and on foot) bicycle cop. I ended up slowing down to merge with the standstill motor traffic to get around the pulled over moron, so I don't know if that Californidouche got what he had coming or not. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Paul Johnson wrote: If I can find where I filed them, I can send you copies of my traffic tickets, all of them to date have been on a bicycle. I zipped by a police officer doing radar once about ten years ago, doing just over 60kph in a 50kph zone.. He didn't bother me, probably surprised him more than anything else. I do sometimes lament the lack of hills around here to really get up to speed, though I suspect our level terrain is more conductive to my longterm survival prospects. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 23, 2007, at 7:42 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. Either you do not drive in Washington State as your email address implies, your you missed that question on the Washington driver's test. Bicycles are required to take the entire lane when the lane is too narrow for a motor vehicle to safely pass in the same lane. Well, thanks for the correction. I learned to drive in Michigan, and no test was required when I moved here. I looked, but couldn't find anything in the WAC, either -- it's pretty vague on bicyclists' rights and responsibilities. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Am 2007-07-15 20:15:47, schrieb Andrew Sackville-West: On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 04:09:41PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. They swerve suddenly into traffic, ride indiscriminately on either side of the road (or sometimes swerve back and forth between them), run stoplights, and come at you at high speed on crosswalks. If they'd either follow the rules for cars ^ in most jurisdictions I've been in, bikes are required to follow the rules for cars. The problem with that is that *many* car drivers do This is very right and enforced in Germany and since some years in France too (Frenchies do not like this enforcement) not respect those rules with regards to bicycles. A bicycle legally owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've ridden) but cars refuse to respect that and either force their way through in a space that they may not fit into or make a dangerous passing maneuver straddling both lanes. Both of these maneuvers are illegal and very dangerous . Likewise, cyclist get the same turn rotation at stop signs, Right too... are expected to yield when turning left etc etc etc. It is routine for cars to ignore these rules for bicyclists forcing cyclists, by sheer force of mass and speed to yield their legal right-of-way to avoid an accident. Having spent *many* long days on the road as a professional cyclist, I can attest (anecdotally of course) that this is true. Cyclists are expected by motorists to obey the rules of the road, but are not given the return courtesy by motorists. So, the alternative for a strong experienced cyclist is to take control of the situation... using the delay between light changes to get through an intersection; splitting lanes between stopped cars to get to the front of the pack at a stop light (a statistically safer place to be AIUI); utilising sidewalks and crosswalks; to maintain forward momentum when appropriate; or to get out of a messy traffic situation. Which then let the cyclists let run into trouble with pedesrian... (I have seen several GRAVE accident here in Strasbourg) maybe, but probably not. A cyclist in the crosswalk is breaking the law and I've seen cyclists get ticketed for all kinds of moving violations (riding on the sidewalk, in the crosswalk, running lights and stop signs. i even had a friend get a speeding ticket on his bike -- true story). That said, if you'd rolled forward another foot, then you'd have entered a crosswalk without stopping at the stop line that is generally placed *before* the crosswalk, which means you'd have rolled the stop sign -- also a violation. just sayin' it. And now heavy enforced in Strasbourg... :-) The Frenchies are now learning for what this green and red light is... Somehow cars have gotten saddled with the responsibility of watching out for cyclists, while they apparently don't have to follow any rules whatsoever. Cars are indeed saddled with teh responsibility of watching for cyclists, just as they are saddled with the responsibility of watching for motorcyclists, other cars, pedestrians, dogs, etc. It is the responsibility of everyone who uses the motorways to watch for *everyone* else who uses them. It is unfortunate that so many motorists don't actually watch for cyclists and give them the space and respect they are entitled to. If that were the case, then perhaps many cyclists wouldn't feel the need to ignore many of the laws for their own safety. I do not know whether this is right or not, but in German and French cities the Cyclists have there own road and if you do not use it... bad luck! Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 21:19 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 08:29:47AM +0200, Michael Dominok wrote: As for dedicated bicycle lanes, I've been very impressed by the ones in Germany and Austria (usually half of the sidewalk). Well, it depends. If there's enough space and budget and will there might be usable bicycle lanes. But the average bicycle lane (in germany, western part) is a holey, hunchbacked, worn-out and neglected strip of asphalt which looks like it had no maintainance since the romans build it... I'll take that anytime instead of riding through the traffic in Romania. (and I do NOT live in Bucharest, b ...) OK. I believe that. A friend of mine married a Romanian girl and regularly drives down there for holidays. It takes him about 10h to get to the Romanian border and about 20h to get to the place his wifes relatives live. The fun part is that he travels about 3 times the distance he does within Romania to get to the border... 8-) So if Romanias roads are _that_ bad for cars i guess they're a nightmare for cyclists. I've heard stories that cyclists in Münster ride with stretched elbows (very unfortunate for pedestrians walking to close to the bicycle lane). Is that true? Not the last time a when i was there. Would be dangerous for the elbows too. Think of all the lampposts, parked cars or traffic-lights one could hit. Cheers Michael
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
Am Dienstag, den 17.07.2007, 21:43 +0300 schrieb Andrei Popescu: This was, and AFAIK still is, the rule for walking on a road without a sidewalk in Romania. Bicycles have to obey same rules as cars. Nonsense. Cyclists don't have to obey the law. 8-) Riding up one-way-lanes the wrong direction is a cyclists every-day-trip to mekka! As for dedicated bicycle lanes, I've been very impressed by the ones in Germany and Austria (usually half of the sidewalk). Well, it depends. If there's enough space and budget and will there might be usable bicycle lanes. But the average bicycle lane (in germany, western part) is a holey, hunchbacked, worn-out and neglected strip of asphalt which looks like it had no maintainance since the romans build it... ... unless you're living in a city dedicated to encouraging cycling. e.g. Münster, home of Linus Gerdeman, our man (who has been) in yellow. 8-) Cheers Michael
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 08:29:47AM +0200, Michael Dominok wrote: As for dedicated bicycle lanes, I've been very impressed by the ones in Germany and Austria (usually half of the sidewalk). Well, it depends. If there's enough space and budget and will there might be usable bicycle lanes. But the average bicycle lane (in germany, western part) is a holey, hunchbacked, worn-out and neglected strip of asphalt which looks like it had no maintainance since the romans build it... I'll take that anytime instead of riding through the traffic in Romania. (and I do NOT live in Bucharest, b ...) ... unless you're living in a city dedicated to encouraging cycling. e.g. Münster, home of Linus Gerdeman, our man (who has been) in yellow. 8-) I've heard stories that cyclists in Münster ride with stretched elbows (very unfortunate for pedestrians walking to close to the bicycle lane). Is that true? Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? It would seem so. Everywhere that I have lived, bicycles are considered vehicles and must ride with the flow of traffic. Curt- - -- September 11th, 2001 The proudest day for gun control and central planning advocates in American history -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBRpzFdy9Y35yItIgBAQK6Gwf6Ay6HtcTFtF//6VvKrG5uxzkOJAH0vKoS dkucDHuD1pM5ySNpTqg11HZ3gymZXDfr0hli4b5pgRb0+1J1VuAJ6CDDq9pUwxbv v3BYk0ZBV8IHh4aRPZnHsmI0I+2Q1NbTwPP8zctVqvYhFRk1g9k/MC+4dDJQ6G+T F/048SbEx6ek28gPOGPsOC9JGseNZjrAOyprEY02edxSt3vRGsJs5+Ql0bvheJ1+ DrVJaUppj3ch3vywPDti5SRGYrGTWJ2aDfZEaKqXt4c/zXRhAxeceKtpIAoTzeMB mUHmCGAZu3CfiYJR1PsuuSif7muJhmpk/7V4DzwxUl5i3bTlqvHWXg== =PCHY -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 16 Jul, David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:25 PM, William Pursell wrote: If you make a right turn (assuming you live where they drive on the right hand side of the road) and take out a cyclist that you didn't see passing you on the right in a cycle lane, I hope you get a jail sentence. (Not you personally, but apparently I still have a lot of pent up hostility to all the jokers who've endangered my life on the road.) People who make right turns without a right head check should be sentenced to drive on Minneapolis freeways. Since in many places there buses are allowed to use the right shoulder during rush hour, they will eventually be taken out by a city bus while attempting to exit, thus removing them from the gene pool. ;) Unfortunately, not necessarily before they procreate, so natural selection may not occur. :-) -Chris | Christopher Judd, Ph. D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 16 Jul, Steve Lamb wrote: William Pursell wrote: If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? Just out of curiosity, where did you grow up? Everywhere that I've lived (or am aware of relevant law) cyclists are required to go with the traffic flow. -Chris | Christopher Judd, Ph. D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16 Jul, Steve Lamb wrote: William Pursell wrote: If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? I can't say I ever recall it being law, but I remember my grandparents teaching me to walk against the flow of traffic, so that you can see the driver and the driver can see you, and I grew up with the concept of doing the same on a bike (I'm unsure if they taught me that, or if I just made the cross-over in my own child's mind); this was back in the 60's. I still see that as being the logical choice in some situations. I also see the logic of going with the flow. Depends on the situation. But I'm not one to speak to the issue, as I'm not a rider; when I rode as a kid, it was because it was the only mode of transportation, not because I especially enjoyed riding. As an adult, I'm way too lazy to rely on a bike. (*burp* pass me those chips, would ya?) -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
Kent West wrote: I can't say I ever recall it being law, but I remember my grandparents teaching me to walk against the flow of traffic, so that you can see the driver and the driver can see you, and I grew up with the concept of doing the same on a bike (I'm unsure if they taught me that, or if I just made the cross-over in my own child's mind); this was back in the 60's. btw, this was in rural (at the time) Texas (Hood County, Granbury, Acton, Lipan area) -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
Hi All,Here in the UK, cyclists are treated the same as cars, trucks etc on the road and are subject to the same laws.This means they have to ride with the flow of traffic, stop at red lights, give way to pedestrians etc.Mind you, the roads are so dangerous for cyclists most just use the paths (illegal but not enforced :o)Cheers,Ade. Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:15:23 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?] Kent West wrote: I can't say I ever recall it being law, but I remember my grandparents teaching me to walk against the flow of traffic, so that you can see the driver and the driver can see you, and I grew up with the concept of doing the same on a bike (I'm unsure if they taught me that, or if I just made the cross-over in my own child's mind); this was back in the 60's. btw, this was in rural (at the time) Texas (Hood County, Granbury, Acton, Lipan area) -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
Re: OT: Cycling: [was: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?]
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:42:39AM -0500, Kent West wrote: I can't say I ever recall it being law, but I remember my grandparents teaching me to walk against the flow of traffic, so that you can see the driver and the driver can see you, and I grew up with the concept of doing This was, and AFAIK still is, the rule for walking on a road without a sidewalk in Romania. Bicycles have to obey same rules as cars. As for dedicated bicycle lanes, I've been very impressed by the ones in Germany and Austria (usually half of the sidewalk). Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. As a cyclist, I find the unpredictability of drivers distressing. Cyclists who ignore traffic rules are idiots who give responsible cyclists a bad image. Drivers who ignore the rules of the road are homicidal idiots who kill people. I dislike irresponsible cyclists, but irresponsible drivers are far worse. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 16, 2007, at 5:21 AM, William Pursell wrote: David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. As a cyclist, I find the unpredictability of drivers distressing. Cyclists who ignore traffic rules are idiots who give responsible cyclists a bad image. Drivers who ignore the rules of the road are homicidal idiots who kill people. I dislike irresponsible cyclists, but irresponsible drivers are far worse. I agree, but as a responsible driver it bothers me that I would almost certainly get blamed if I accidentally hit a cyclist who was doing something irresponsible and dangerous -- because in the view of cyclists, the evil polluting motorist is always in the wrong; and in the view of the police, cyclists seem to be outside the law. (When have you ever heard of one being ticketed for a traffic violation?)
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
crap. I was going to be done with this, but can't resist. really really last one though ;) On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 09:08:39PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 15, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: A bicycle legally owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've ridden) Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. It strikes me that it would really hold up traffic if they were entitled to an entire lane, since passing is not generally allowed on city streets. Cars would end up stuck behind a bicycle going 10-15 mph, unable to legally get by. Its a problem and I don't deny it. There needs to be a solution. dedicated bike lanes are probably the best. And unlike cyclists, drivers are not always given a free pass by the police for breaking traffic laws. read my other posts on this. cyclists do not alwaysget a free pass, nor do I think they should necessarily get a free pass. There are times when its appropriate and times when its not. I've never seen a cyclist get a free pass when they've cause dthe accident though. I've seen some pretty anti-cyclist police officers and some pro-cyclist police officers. It really depends, just as any other situation does, on the individuals involved. I agree that cars should give bicycles as much space as practical, though, and I often give them an entire lane if traffic allows, and will hang back if there's not enough space to pass safely. That said, if you'd rolled forward another foot, then you'd have entered a crosswalk without stopping at the stop line that is generally placed *before* the crosswalk, which means you'd have rolled the stop sign -- also a violation. just sayin' it. Actually, I *had* stopped before the crosswalk. I was beginning to roll forward again so I could see cross traffic around the hedges when the bicyclist suddenly appeared in front of me. fair enough. And I've already agreed that this particular cyclist sounds like an idiot. i can't address what might have happened had there been a collision, but I think its clear from our exchange about it that there are many factors involved and its not always a simple solution. If I can get through an intersection and onto clear open road where I'm visible and in control of my situation then I will do it, even if it means running a red light. that doesn't mean I blow through a light without looking or without awareness of motorists, but it does mean that you as a motorist may be frustrated by having to wait for a red light while I roll through it. Pro-cyclist groups like Critical Mass seem to feel that cyclists have the right to block traffic that has a green light so other cyclists can run a red. This sticks in my craw. If they want to be treated with the same respect as other motorists they shouldn't be able to decide the law doesn't apply to them. Just sayin' it. Two things here. Critical Mass rides (never been on one) are a form of protest and political action. I don't know if they are properly permitted by authorities or anything like that, but within the context of a political protest, I see no problem with holding up traffic for a bit. In all other circumstances, they should obey the rules appropriately (see my other posts about the application of rules of the road to cyclists and the dangers of strictly following those rules). Obviously we have to agree to disagree about a lot of this. Meanwhile, thanks for a nice little exchange and I'll see you on the road somewhere (usually m/c now-a-days...) A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 16, 2007, at 5:21 AM, William Pursell wrote: David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. As a cyclist, I find the unpredictability of drivers distressing. Cyclists who ignore traffic rules are idiots who give responsible cyclists a bad image. Drivers who ignore the rules of the road are homicidal idiots who kill people. I dislike irresponsible cyclists, but irresponsible drivers are far worse. I agree, but as a responsible driver it bothers me that I would almost certainly get blamed if I accidentally hit a cyclist who was doing something irresponsible and dangerous -- because in the view of cyclists, the evil polluting motorist is always in the wrong; and in the view of the police, cyclists seem to be outside the law. (When have you ever heard of one being ticketed for a traffic violation?) I don't think that is the view of most cyclists. Most cyclists are also drivers, but the converse is not true, and most drivers seem totally unaware of the fact that road they use is populated by non-automobile traffic. Most drivers think nothing of cutting in front of a cyclist to park and then throwing their door open, apparently having never even seen the person they just passed and endangered. Most drivers think nothing of tailgating aggressively, honking at and verbally abusing cyclists, and generally refusing to acknowledge the cyclist's right to use the road. It is probably true that cyclists get away with more minor traffic violations than do drivers, probably because a primary purpose for traffic rules is to prevent people from being killed, and it is usually the cyclist who needs protection. If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, or comes off the sidewalk and rams you, I am certainly not going to blame you, and neither will the police. If you make a right turn (assuming you live where they drive on the right hand side of the road) and take out a cyclist that you didn't see passing you on the right in a cycle lane, I hope you get a jail sentence. (Not you personally, but apparently I still have a lot of pent up hostility to all the jokers who've endangered my life on the road.) I am sorry for going on like this in this forum, since this really doesn't belong here, and I'll (try to) let the thread drop now. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:25 PM, William Pursell wrote: If you make a right turn (assuming you live where they drive on the right hand side of the road) and take out a cyclist that you didn't see passing you on the right in a cycle lane, I hope you get a jail sentence. (Not you personally, but apparently I still have a lot of pent up hostility to all the jokers who've endangered my life on the road.) People who make right turns without a right head check should be sentenced to drive on Minneapolis freeways. Since in many places there buses are allowed to use the right shoulder during rush hour, they will eventually be taken out by a city bus while attempting to exit, thus removing them from the gene pool. ;) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
William Pursell wrote: If a cyclist is riding against the flow of traffic, Am I the only one who grew up where the law was cyclists were to ride against the flow of traffic? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Andrew Sackville-West wrote: Its a problem and I don't deny it. There needs to be a solution. dedicated bike lanes are probably the best. Unless you're a dedicated bicyclist in which case you'll really dislike dedicated bike lanes. AKA, the refuse lane since all of the nice debris from the road gets swept into that lane both by the cars passing by and the cars going into and out of the lane. Nice things like broken glass, nails and other tire friendly junk. What's worse is that motorists who see a bike lane feel absolved from care around the bicyclist since they now have their own lane; nevermind the bicyclist still reserves the right to leave the lane at any time to avoid dangers or debris. Great idea in the mind of the weekend cyclist or the ignorant parent who thinks it helps keep their sproggen out of danger. Horrible for anyone who has to use it for more than a few times a year. Two things here. Critical Mass rides (never been on one) are a form of protest and political action. I don't know if they are properly permitted by authorities or anything like that Just wondering how, exactly, we got to the point where one needs a permit to protest in a country where the right to assemble is constitutionally protected. Hypothetical, no need to really answer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 16, 2007, at 8:25 PM, Steve Lamb wrote: Two things here. Critical Mass rides (never been on one) are a form of protest and political action. I don't know if they are properly permitted by authorities or anything like that Just wondering how, exactly, we got to the point where one needs a permit to protest in a country where the right to assemble is constitutionally protected. Hypothetical, no need to really answer. Well, if you're going to be blocking a street with your protest it seems reasonable. It's a moot point, though, since Critical Mass makes a big deal about *not* requesting any permits for their actions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. They swerve suddenly into traffic, ride indiscriminately on either side of the road (or sometimes swerve back and forth between them), run stoplights, and come at you at high speed on crosswalks. If they'd either follow the rules for cars or follow the rules for pedestrians I'd at least have an idea what they were going to do and could act accordingly. The only cyclist I've ever come close to hitting is a guy who blew through a stop sign doing at least 15 mph, on the crosswalk. There were hedges on both sides of the street, blocking my view of the sidewalk, and I didn't see him until he was just about on top of me. If I'd pulled forward another foot he would have collided with my fender. I'm sure I'd have been the one who got blamed, too, since I was driving a car and he was a defenseless cyclist. Somehow cars have gotten saddled with the responsibility of watching out for cyclists, while they apparently don't have to follow any rules whatsoever. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 04:09:41PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. I have to say that, as a driver, it's the unpredictability of cyclists I find distressing. They swerve suddenly into traffic, ride indiscriminately on either side of the road (or sometimes swerve back and forth between them), run stoplights, and come at you at high speed on crosswalks. If they'd either follow the rules for cars ^ in most jurisdictions I've been in, bikes are required to follow the rules for cars. The problem with that is that *many* car drivers do not respect those rules with regards to bicycles. A bicycle legally owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've ridden) but cars refuse to respect that and either force their way through in a space that they may not fit into or make a dangerous passing maneuver straddling both lanes. Both of these maneuvers are illegal and very dangerous . Likewise, cyclist get the same turn rotation at stop signs, are expected to yield when turning left etc etc etc. It is routine for cars to ignore these rules for bicyclists forcing cyclists, by sheer force of mass and speed to yield their legal right-of-way to avoid an accident. Having spent *many* long days on the road as a professional cyclist, I can attest (anecdotally of course) that this is true. Cyclists are expected by motorists to obey the rules of the road, but are not given the return courtesy by motorists. So, the alternative for a strong experienced cyclist is to take control of the situation... using the delay between light changes to get through an intersection; splitting lanes between stopped cars to get to the front of the pack at a stop light (a statistically safer place to be AIUI); utilising sidewalks and crosswalks; to maintain forward momentum when appropriate; or to get out of a messy traffic situation. Don't get me wrong, there are many irresponsible cyclists who act this way in disregard for the safety of others and themselves, but there are likewise many responsible and safe cyclists who behave this way because it can be safer. that of course requires an alert, strong, skilled rider. I'd at least have an idea what they were going to do and could act accordingly. many motorists, when they know what the cyclist is going to do, will use that knowledge to improve their own position on the road at the expense of the cyclist. Its true. Its happened to me repeatedly. Its happened to my friends repeatedly. The only cyclist I've ever come close to hitting is a guy who blew through a stop sign doing at least 15 mph, on the crosswalk. There were hedges on both sides of the street, blocking my view of the sidewalk, and I didn't see him until he was just about on top of me. If I'd pulled forward another foot he would have collided with my fender. And the cyclist would have deserved it. If there were hedges blocking your view then they were blocking his view as well and that was a dumb move on his part. But that was just one (I'm sure of many) incident where you were aware of the cyclist. There are many many many incidents where a cyclist is forced to make a defensive or even panic maneuver where the motorist doesn't even know what happened. They didn't see the cyclist (weren't looking!) and are not aware that the cyclist just saved his own butt from the motorists irresponsible behavior. I'm sure I'd have been the one who got blamed, too, since I was driving a car and he was a defenseless cyclist. maybe, but probably not. A cyclist in the crosswalk is breaking the law and I've seen cyclists get ticketed for all kinds of moving violations (riding on the sidewalk, in the crosswalk, running lights and stop signs. i even had a friend get a speeding ticket on his bike -- true story). That said, if you'd rolled forward another foot, then you'd have entered a crosswalk without stopping at the stop line that is generally placed *before* the crosswalk, which means you'd have rolled the stop sign -- also a violation. just sayin' it. Somehow cars have gotten saddled with the responsibility of watching out for cyclists, while they apparently don't have to follow any rules whatsoever. Cars are indeed saddled with teh responsibility of watching for cyclists, just as they are saddled with the responsibility of watching for motorcyclists, other cars, pedestrians, dogs, etc. It is the responsibility of everyone who uses the motorways to watch for *everyone* else who uses them. It is unfortunate that so many motorists don't actually watch for cyclists and give them the space and respect they are entitled to. If that were the case, then perhaps many cyclists wouldn't feel the need to ignore many of the laws for their own safety. phew. that was a lot. look. I'm not promoting scofflawrey (is that a word?). But I am
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 07:43:37PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Andrew Sackville-West wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:09:23AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: I disagree: There's some people that really ought not be trusted with bicycles to begin with, like those morons that drive their bicycle against traffic or on the sidewalk... I disagree: riding against the flow or on the sidewalk can be perfectly safe, provided you're experienced and skilled. But that sort of defeats the whole purpose of this thread. Never mind it's illegal in most jurisdictions for good reason: Nobody expects someone driving the wrong way or on a sidewalk. just like noone expects cars driving the wrong way on a one way, but it happens a lot alway look both ways before crossing the street. There's nothing like getting blindsided by some idiot going the wrong way in their SUV. I spent several years as a bicycle messenger in Wash DC and can tell you first hand that the best/safest riders were the aggressive riders who were willing to ride against the flow, on the yellow line, on the sidewalk, or through the parking garage tunnel. Many fewer accidents with those guys than with the calm, almost meek, with the flow riders. Of course, when the bad boys did wreck, it was pretty spectacular... ;) I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. every car that ever hit me while on the road was breaking the law when it happened and... interestingly enough, I *wasn't* breaking the law. But that's just my anecdotal experience. Of course my friend got hit by a car that rolled out of an alley and failed to stop at the sidewalk (legal requirement) before coming to the curb and stopping again (legal requirement). They just rolled right through it all and into my buddy in the right lane. So that's his anecdotal experience. I've been hit by cars u-turning from the parking lane (illegal), cars u-turning in the middle of the block (illegal), cars failing to yield when turning left (illegal), cars failing to yield to traffic in front of them (illegal), cars failing to observe my lane (illegal), cars turning right from the center lane (illegal), you name it. I say hit, but many of these were close calls where I was able to either *quickly* get out of the way, or bounce harmlessly off a quarter panel. A little experience can turn these Accidents into just incidents on the road. That doesn't change the fact that they were caused by cars ignoring the laws of the road to the detriment of cyclists. A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 15, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: A bicycle legally owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've ridden) Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. It strikes me that it would really hold up traffic if they were entitled to an entire lane, since passing is not generally allowed on city streets. Cars would end up stuck behind a bicycle going 10-15 mph, unable to legally get by. And unlike cyclists, drivers are not always given a free pass by the police for breaking traffic laws. I agree that cars should give bicycles as much space as practical, though, and I often give them an entire lane if traffic allows, and will hang back if there's not enough space to pass safely. That said, if you'd rolled forward another foot, then you'd have entered a crosswalk without stopping at the stop line that is generally placed *before* the crosswalk, which means you'd have rolled the stop sign -- also a violation. just sayin' it. Actually, I *had* stopped before the crosswalk. I was beginning to roll forward again so I could see cross traffic around the hedges when the bicyclist suddenly appeared in front of me. If I can get through an intersection and onto clear open road where I'm visible and in control of my situation then I will do it, even if it means running a red light. that doesn't mean I blow through a light without looking or without awareness of motorists, but it does mean that you as a motorist may be frustrated by having to wait for a red light while I roll through it. Pro-cyclist groups like Critical Mass seem to feel that cyclists have the right to block traffic that has a green light so other cyclists can run a red. This sticks in my craw. If they want to be treated with the same respect as other motorists they shouldn't be able to decide the law doesn't apply to them. Just sayin' it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 10:52:58AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Oh, please. Most of this decade's Atari and id's releases hit Linux first, Windows later and MacOS when hell freezes over. More vendors appear to be considering this route from time to time. Nobody's switching from Windows or Linux to MacOS for the games. Nobody? That's kind of absolute. The only thing keeping me from dumping Windows is the games. The best alternative for the games I want to play is MacOS. So, sorry, I blow your nobody out of the water because here's one somebody that would gladly switch if the game develeopers just got on board. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 03:19:02PM -0400, Zach wrote: And if they really care so much about games more likely they can save the money they'd spend on a PC and just buy an Xbox (with it's broken hardware hehe). No, not really. Console gaming is far different than PC Gaming. I've owned consoles for years and outside of 3-4 titles per console that kept my attention for a week or two I am a PC gamer. Only the ignorant consider the two platforms remotely interchangable. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 07/14/07 22:24, Steve C. Lamb wrote: On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 10:52:58AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Oh, please. Most of this decade's Atari and id's releases hit Linux first, Windows later and MacOS when hell freezes over. More vendors appear to be considering this route from time to time. Nobody's switching from Windows or Linux to MacOS for the games. Nobody? That's kind of absolute. The only thing keeping me from dumping You haven't learned by now that Paul deals in absolutes? And weird wrong ones, at that... Windows is the games. The best alternative for the games I want to play is MacOS. So, sorry, I blow your nobody out of the water because here's one somebody that would gladly switch if the game develeopers just got on board. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Andrew Sackville-West wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:09:23AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: I disagree: There's some people that really ought not be trusted with bicycles to begin with, like those morons that drive their bicycle against traffic or on the sidewalk... I disagree: riding against the flow or on the sidewalk can be perfectly safe, provided you're experienced and skilled. But that sort of defeats the whole purpose of this thread. Never mind it's illegal in most jurisdictions for good reason: Nobody expects someone driving the wrong way or on a sidewalk. I spent several years as a bicycle messenger in Wash DC and can tell you first hand that the best/safest riders were the aggressive riders who were willing to ride against the flow, on the yellow line, on the sidewalk, or through the parking garage tunnel. Many fewer accidents with those guys than with the calm, almost meek, with the flow riders. Of course, when the bad boys did wreck, it was pretty spectacular... ;) I've yet to collide with another cyclist who was following the rules. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Paul Johnson wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: Zach wrote: There are millions and millions of MS Windows uers who can't do much beyond checking email, surfing the web and playing games and then millions more who are what I call 'corporate users; they only do certain tasks using involving Office. The typical Linux user tended to be more savvy and educated about the OS though with Ubuntu and similar efforts this is probably degrading. One can argue if this is good or not for Linux. I disagree. Being able to use a system without knowing all the intricacies, nuances is IMHO the sign of maturity of the technology. If someone knows all the inner details, good for them. But that should not be a requirement. Using the automobile analogy, in the old days, the drivers of automobile should know a lot about cars so that they can fix it in case something breaks on their trip to the mall. Now a days, the drivers are not required to know everything under the hood. If the driver knows about it, it's good for them. But it is not a requirement. I disagree. The way some people drive, perhaps it should be just to help weed out those who really have no business on the road with anything more powerful than a bicycle to begin with. Sometimes, the learning curve is not only a good thing, but should be made mandatory. I disagree: There's some people that really ought not be trusted with bicycles to begin with, like those morons that drive their bicycle against traffic or on the sidewalk... -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:09:23AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: I disagree: There's some people that really ought not be trusted with bicycles to begin with, like those morons that drive their bicycle against traffic or on the sidewalk... I disagree: riding against the flow or on the sidewalk can be perfectly safe, provided you're experienced and skilled. But that sort of defeats the whole purpose of this thread. I spent several years as a bicycle messenger in Wash DC and can tell you first hand that the best/safest riders were the aggressive riders who were willing to ride against the flow, on the yellow line, on the sidewalk, or through the parking garage tunnel. Many fewer accidents with those guys than with the calm, almost meek, with the flow riders. Of course, when the bad boys did wreck, it was pretty spectacular... ;) A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 8, 2007, at 10:54 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: I disagree. The way some people drive, perhaps it should be just to help weed out those who really have no business on the road with anything more powerful than a bicycle to begin with. Sometimes, the learning curve is not only a good thing, but should be made mandatory. I'd be with you if I'd ever seen any reason to believe that mechanical ability is correlated with being a good driver. Some of the craziest drivers I've known have been mechanics or tuner type folks. They tend to be interested in what they *can* get the car to do, not what they *should* be doing with it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Ron Johnson wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/technology/12apple.html Electronic Arts and Id announced that they would begin releasing popular games for the Macintosh simultaneously with Windows versions. A Unix that has current, popular, *native* games? You mean, like Linux? Many Windows users will feel it's now safe to move to OS X, and (some) Linux users will be tempted because of the games. Oh, please. Most of this decade's Atari and id's releases hit Linux first, Windows later and MacOS when hell freezes over. More vendors appear to be considering this route from time to time. Nobody's switching from Windows or Linux to MacOS for the games. And in the future, even with the EA announcement, I doubt it will change anything except with the five people who love football so much they absolutely must have the latest Madden game every year... -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On 7/8/07, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And in the future, even with the EA announcement, I doubt it will change anything except with the five people who love football so much they absolutely must have the latest Madden game every year... And if they really care so much about games more likely they can save the money they'd spend on a PC and just buy an Xbox (with it's broken hardware hehe). Zach -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 8, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Zach wrote: On 7/8/07, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And in the future, even with the EA announcement, I doubt it will change anything except with the five people who love football so much they absolutely must have the latest Madden game every year... And if they really care so much about games more likely they can save the money they'd spend on a PC and just buy an Xbox (with it's broken hardware hehe). Zach Are we ignoring the fact that Intel-based Macs can run most Linux apps out of the box? And the rest with the Developer Tools installed? Heck, put wine on there and you can run most Windows apps too. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 02:23:05PM -0500, ArcticFox wrote: Are we ignoring the fact that Intel-based Macs can run most Linux apps out of the box? And the rest with the Developer Tools installed? Heck, put wine on there and you can run most Windows apps too. If by out of the box, you mean after a (usually painless) recompile, then yes. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user: Zach wrote: There are millions and millions of MS Windows uers who can't do much beyond checking email, surfing the web and playing games and then millions more who are what I call 'corporate users; they only do certain tasks using involving Office. The typical Linux user tended to be more savvy and educated about the OS though with Ubuntu and similar efforts this is probably degrading. One can argue if this is good or not for Linux. I disagree. Being able to use a system without knowing all the intricacies, nuances is IMHO the sign of maturity of the technology. If someone knows all the inner details, good for them. But that should not be a requirement. Using the automobile analogy, in the old days, the drivers of automobile should know a lot about cars so that they can fix it in case something breaks on their trip to the mall. Now a days, the drivers are not required to know everything under the hood. If the driver knows about it, it's good for them. But it is not a requirement. I disagree. The way some people drive, perhaps it should be just to help weed out those who really have no business on the road with anything more powerful than a bicycle to begin with. Sometimes, the learning curve is not only a good thing, but should be made mandatory. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/technology/12apple.html Electronic Arts and Id announced that they would begin releasing popular games for the Macintosh simultaneously with Windows versions. A Unix that has current, popular, *native* games? Many Windows users will feel it's now safe to move to OS X, and (some) Linux users will be tempted because of the games. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
I care more about the quality of Linux users than the quantity. There are millions and millions of MS Windows uers who can't do much beyond checking email, surfing the web and playing games and then millions more who are what I call 'corporate users; they only do certain tasks using involving Office. The typical Linux user tended to be more savvy and educated about the OS though with Ubuntu and similar efforts this is probably degrading. One can argue if this is good or not for Linux. Linux can run any MS Windows game using certain software. Zach On 6/12/07, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/technology/12apple.html Electronic Arts and Id announced that they would begin releasing popular games for the Macintosh simultaneously with Windows versions. A Unix that has current, popular, *native* games? Many Windows users will feel it's now safe to move to OS X, and (some) Linux users will be tempted because of the games. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
Zach wrote: There are millions and millions of MS Windows uers who can't do much beyond checking email, surfing the web and playing games and then millions more who are what I call 'corporate users; they only do certain tasks using involving Office. The typical Linux user tended to be more savvy and educated about the OS though with Ubuntu and similar efforts this is probably degrading. One can argue if this is good or not for Linux. I disagree. Being able to use a system without knowing all the intricacies, nuances is IMHO the sign of maturity of the technology. If someone knows all the inner details, good for them. But that should not be a requirement. Using the automobile analogy, in the old days, the drivers of automobile should know a lot about cars so that they can fix it in case something breaks on their trip to the mall. Now a days, the drivers are not required to know everything under the hood. If the driver knows about it, it's good for them. But it is not a requirement. hth raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/ http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
