Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Mon, Aug 03, 1998 at 08:25:30AM -0400, Mike Barton wrote: > >Just to add my experiences of win95 into the frey, i have also done the > MB > >swap thing and while after a lot of rebooting in managed to recover, on > the > >other hand my bro's machine is almost identical to mine (only minor > >differences lijke graphics card, HD make) failed miserable to survive > the > >same swap, it just shows that if you make any major hardware changes > best to > >reinstall. (apart from the fact that windows is a joke) > .. > Fray is right! Say, did you try an Alpha MB, Z-80 or 6809 maybe? How > well does an Apple PPC MB swap work? Since Linux doesn't survive such > swaps any better than anyone else, what are you writing about to begin > with? I beg to differ...Linux seems to survive equipment swaps much better than most OSes (especially Windows...but not as well as DOS actually ;) (depening on how "tweaked" you have DOS)) The nice thing is very little configuration info is stored on the machine.. it is mostly all detected at startup. I have build a linux system on 1 computer...taken the hard drive out and placed it directly in a second radicly different system and watched it boot and work first time (built ona pentium...placed it on a 386) I have seen windows bomb out totally doing the same thing. As far as a PPC MB swap...MacOS seems to handle such things fine...dunno about linux but I would assume it works. > If this is yet-another herd like MS bash, think about using IRC or > the National Enquirer. Better yet, why not spend your time writing some > software. Linux could use things like Delphi, Access, Excel, DBase, SQL > Server... well you get the picture. mmm there are alwready some SQL servers for linux. As for Access and Excel.. I dunno about Access and Excel..but maybe programs like them (I hate macro viruses...see em all the time at work) -Steve -- /* -- Stephen Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> */ E-mail "Bumper Stickers": "A FREE America or a Drug-Free America: You can't have both!" "honk if you Love Linux" -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
RE: Linus Torvalds interview
>Just to add my experiences of win95 into the frey, i have also done the MB >swap thing and while after a lot of rebooting in managed to recover, on the >other hand my bro's machine is almost identical to mine (only minor >differences lijke graphics card, HD make) failed miserable to survive the >same swap, it just shows that if you make any major hardware changes best to >reinstall. (apart from the fact that windows is a joke) .. Fray is right! Say, did you try an Alpha MB, Z-80 or 6809 maybe? How well does an Apple PPC MB swap work? Since Linux doesn't survive such swaps any better than anyone else, what are you writing about to begin with? If this is yet-another herd like MS bash, think about using IRC or the National Enquirer. Better yet, why not spend your time writing some software. Linux could use things like Delphi, Access, Excel, DBase, SQL Server... well you get the picture. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On 02-Aug-98 Steve Lamb wrote: > My secret is that I do not run Microsoft applications. I find that the > applications are shoddy, poorly written, thought out, implimented and are > often incompatible with themselves in their own versions. > > I run Win95 for games written by other software companies and WinNT for > applications written by other software companies. That combonation proves > quite stable. That may be the best thing written on this topic. I agree with the first paragraph from experience, for the most part. Not being an NT user I can't answer for the second, though the principles supposed to underly NT design do seem to be what Win should have been based on in the first place. This is why Linux needs the good applications ported to it: there is no doubt that a lot of the applications available for DOS/Win3.1/Win95 are excellent, and if you need them then you have to find a way of running them. Best wishes to all, Ted. E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 02-Aug-98 Time: 13:15:38 -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
RE: Linus Torvalds interview
Just to add my experiences of win95 into the frey, i have also done the MB swap thing and while after a lot of rebooting in managed to recover, on the other hand my bro's machine is almost identical to mine (only minor differences lijke graphics card, HD make) failed miserable to survive the same swap, it just shows that if you make any major hardware changes best to reinstall. (apart from the fact that windows is a joke) Mind you i do that about once a month to clear out all the crap that builds up, and keep performance up. on a seperate note, any body tried Beos?? Rick -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Sun, 2 Aug 1998 01:37:43 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Why? I didn't have to update the drivers of Linux. It came up and running. >Win95 on the other hand kept on insisting on rebooting the system for each >"updated driver". Sure you do. It is just called recompiling the kernel. And Windows didn't insist upon it. It *ASKED* you if you wanted to reboot. Since I knew I had replaced the entire machine around the HD (OS) I told it no until it booted up, then I just it down and restarted. Worked just fine. Just because it prompts you for something doesn't mean you have to say "Yes". >Ok, let's talk a concrete example: I loaded "Barney on the farm" for my >daughter (Official MS Win95 game for children). The setup routine got to >the >"Parent's Room" segment of the installation. I was not given a choice >as to >whether or not I wanted IE installed. The setup routine announced >that it was >installing IE (and all necessary support) PERIOD. No 'cancel' >buttons >available! This is because IE offers something that Netscape doesn't. It allows itself to be intergrated into the program in question. Chances are portions of that program allow you (or your daughter, in this case) to go out onto the web. They didn't build a new browser into it, they used the hooks in IE. No, I don't like it either, but there is an explination for it. Same thing happened to me with Quicken98 Deluxe and I promptly bitched about it. My secret is that I do not run Microsoft applications. I find that the applications are shoddy, poorly written, thought out, implimented and are often incompatible with themselves in their own versions. I run Win95 for games written by other software companies and WinNT for applications written by other software companies. That combonation proves quite stable. -- Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus| employer's. They hired me for my ICQ: 5107343 | skills and labor, not my opinions! ---+- -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Sun, Aug 02, 1998 at 01:37:43AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ok, let's talk a concrete example: I loaded "Barney on the farm" for my > daughter (Official MS Win95 game for children). The setup routine got to the > "Parent's Room" segment of the installation. I was not given a choice as to > whether or not I wanted IE installed. The setup routine announced that it was > installing IE (and all necessary support) PERIOD. No 'cancel' buttons > available! I prefer Netscape over IE but here goes this official setup program > installing unwanted software and 'lord knows' whatever other patches. The > unwanted software had nothing to do with the game program and does not have to > be present for the game to run. > It is bullshit like that is why I stopped using WIndows altogether on my personal computer (have to use it at work) and will NEVER run it again (that and distaste for M$ buisness practices...and general low quality) I can understand they migh twant to offer a DEMO (I am sure M$ is willing to kick them a few extra $ to get em to put IE demos on their CDs) but... installin git with no warning? You know...I sometimes wonder how it was I ever became so facinated with Computers before LinuxI thought that bullshit like that was just somethin you have to put up with...not anymore... -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** "All authority is quite degrading." -- Oscar Wilde pgp24HN8WPNlO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Sun, 2 Aug 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ok, let's talk a concrete example: I loaded "Barney on the farm" for my > daughter (Official MS Win95 game for children). The setup routine got to the > "Parent's Room" segment of the installation. I was not given a choice as to > whether or not I wanted IE installed. The setup routine announced that it was > installing IE (and all necessary support) PERIOD. No 'cancel' buttons I like this actually :> I was upgrading a NT4 machine and the upgrade Announced that it needed IE4 before it would do anything, so I was forced to install it even though I had netscape! I ended up downloading something close to 100M to get PPTP on that NT box Incedently it took 5 reboots to get NT4 PPTP capable, I still haven't rebooted my linux machine and it is now pptp capable :> Jason -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
Steve Lamb writes: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 1998 at 12:03:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ever try replacing a Motherboard on a "win95" system? > > Yes. In fact, I swapped machines around the HDs to test a theory of > mine. > > > That "fabulous, great, decent OS" loses it's mind! You see, all > > information about the hardware is kept in the registry files. When the > > Id's of the old MB (in the registry) don't match the new Id's of the new > > MB, all H-LL breaks loose. > > That hell, of course, is that Windows is updating the drivers supplied > by the manufacturer(s) for their motherboard. One reboot is all that is Why? I didn't have to update the drivers of Linux. It came up and running. Win95 on the other hand kept on insisting on rebooting the system for each "updated driver". > needed. I know, like I said, I did it. Swapped a whole machine around the > HDs. One machine had Win95 on it, another had Win95 and WinNT. > > Am I advocating Windows? No. What I am doing is quelling some serious > BULLSHIT here. Not serious BS, just personal experiences. IMHO, if your WinXX machines work ok for you, you probably (I'm guessing here) have the latest patches applied to fix the bad bugs (with or without your knowledge). Everytime you load the latest "MS" product, patches are applied. (Again, my opinion based on experience) Ok, let's talk a concrete example: I loaded "Barney on the farm" for my daughter (Official MS Win95 game for children). The setup routine got to the "Parent's Room" segment of the installation. I was not given a choice as to whether or not I wanted IE installed. The setup routine announced that it was installing IE (and all necessary support) PERIOD. No 'cancel' buttons available! I prefer Netscape over IE but here goes this official setup program installing unwanted software and 'lord knows' whatever other patches. The unwanted software had nothing to do with the game program and does not have to be present for the game to run. Like you, I did some testing as well 8-) -- -= Sent by Debian 1.3 Linux =- Thomas Kocourek KD4CIK @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@westgac3.dragon.com Remove @_@ for correct Email address --... ...-- ... -.. . -.- -.. - -.-. .. -.- -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On 07/31/98 at 10:36 AM, Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Apparently you're doing something wrong. Because this *LINUX* >advocate has a Win95/WinNT machine at home that rivals the uptimes of >my Linux box. I have yet to lose data on that machine because of the >OS, same as my Linux box. In fact, at one time I ran on a single >machine OpenDOS, Win95, WinNT, OS/2 and Linux (Slackware). I had no >problems with any of them. >So, no, I don't think it is right that the OS dies unexpectedly. >My experience is different than yours. Wonder why that is? I don't >think I am gifted with any knowledge that you're not. What software do you run on Win95? I currently maintian 5 Win95 boxes and none of them even come close to my personal uptimes for either OS/2 or Linux (reboots only to switch OS'). George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
My experience also with Windows 95 has been pretty solid. I've had months of uptime with Windows 95 with the only problems being occasional GPF errors that close all open Netscape windows. But other than that it's been pretty rock solid for me as long as I haven't installed library type software or big software installations that play with the registry a lot and dlls. With Windows 98, I haven't had a single GPF error with Netscape, and pretty much everything I've run under it has been rock solid and without incident. Also, I removed my 64MB SDRAM DIMM and put in 16MB EDO for a day so (it's a long story why) and I hate to say it but Windows 98 ran very smooth on my P166mmx with 16mb, faster than my very lean compiled kernel Debian 2.0 with bone stock wmaker, because when I had Netscape mail and a few Navigator windows open there was little to no swapping to disk with Win98 (or the effect was transparent to me) but things were not so smooth with Debian 2.0/Xfree/wmaker. WinNT IS NOT SMOOTH with 16mb at all, and I don't know why this is because it's supposed to be a 'higher performance' OS than 95/98, right? As a matter of fact, NT for me has been less stable than 95/98, as I've had the blue screen of death several times with NT. I should mention though that I've broken 95' very badly by doing things like upgrading from DirectX5 to 5.2. Doing that rendered an image browser the had been working perfectly till then inoperable, and it would not uninstall properly nor reinstall, very strange behavior indeed. But of course, taking 2 hours to reinstall 95' fixes that, or any problem. I now use Debian 99.9% of the time though because it's so much nicer overall. I'm able to get work done much faster and it's much more manageable than 95'/98' and has been 100% reliable for me. Whenever something is screwed up, it always turns out to be my fault with Debian, which I like. Steve Lamb wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 1998 at 12:03:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ever try replacing a Motherboard on a "win95" system? > > Yes. In fact, I swapped machines around the HDs to test a theory of > mine. > > > That "fabulous, great, decent OS" loses it's mind! You see, all > > information about the hardware is kept in the registry files. When the > > Id's of the old MB (in the registry) don't match the new Id's of the new > > MB, all H-LL breaks loose. > > That hell, of course, is that Windows is updating the drivers supplied > by the manufacturer(s) for their motherboard. One reboot is all that is > needed. I know, like I said, I did it. Swapped a whole machine around the > HDs. One machine had Win95 on it, another had Win95 and WinNT. > > Am I advocating Windows? No. What I am doing is quelling some serious > BULLSHIT here. > > > In contrast, Linux boots up without so much as a single hick-up and runs > > fine! > > This is also true since I've does the "swap" of a machine from around a > HD with Linux. > > > You are right, the time is irrelevent, however, where is the "peer" review > > of > > the inner workings of Win95/98? I get extremely irritated when an > > application > > hoses the whole nine yards and I lose hours of labor to the "blue screen of > > death". I've yet to lose anything within Linux. Apparently, the "Win95 > > advocates" think that it is ok for the OS to lock down or freeze. Perhaps > > they > > are numbed by the inability to fix the problem(s). > > Apparently you're doing something wrong. Because this *LINUX* advocate > has a Win95/WinNT machine at home that rivals the uptimes of my Linux box. > I have yet to lose data on that machine because of the OS, same as my Linux > box. In fact, at one time I ran on a single machine OpenDOS, Win95, WinNT, > OS/2 and Linux (Slackware). I had no problems with any of them. > > So, no, I don't think it is right that the OS dies unexpectedly. My > experience is different than yours. Wonder why that is? I don't think I am > gifted with any knowledge that you're not. > > -- > Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my > http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus| employer's. They hired me for my > CC: from news not wanted or appreciated| skills and labor, not my opinions! > ---+- > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Fri, Jul 31, 1998 at 12:03:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ever try replacing a Motherboard on a "win95" system? Yes. In fact, I swapped machines around the HDs to test a theory of mine. > That "fabulous, great, decent OS" loses it's mind! You see, all > information about the hardware is kept in the registry files. When the > Id's of the old MB (in the registry) don't match the new Id's of the new > MB, all H-LL breaks loose. That hell, of course, is that Windows is updating the drivers supplied by the manufacturer(s) for their motherboard. One reboot is all that is needed. I know, like I said, I did it. Swapped a whole machine around the HDs. One machine had Win95 on it, another had Win95 and WinNT. Am I advocating Windows? No. What I am doing is quelling some serious BULLSHIT here. > In contrast, Linux boots up without so much as a single hick-up and runs > fine! This is also true since I've does the "swap" of a machine from around a HD with Linux. > You are right, the time is irrelevent, however, where is the "peer" review of > the inner workings of Win95/98? I get extremely irritated when an application > hoses the whole nine yards and I lose hours of labor to the "blue screen of > death". I've yet to lose anything within Linux. Apparently, the "Win95 > advocates" think that it is ok for the OS to lock down or freeze. Perhaps they > are numbed by the inability to fix the problem(s). Apparently you're doing something wrong. Because this *LINUX* advocate has a Win95/WinNT machine at home that rivals the uptimes of my Linux box. I have yet to lose data on that machine because of the OS, same as my Linux box. In fact, at one time I ran on a single machine OpenDOS, Win95, WinNT, OS/2 and Linux (Slackware). I had no problems with any of them. So, no, I don't think it is right that the OS dies unexpectedly. My experience is different than yours. Wonder why that is? I don't think I am gifted with any knowledge that you're not. -- Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus| employer's. They hired me for my CC: from news not wanted or appreciated| skills and labor, not my opinions! ---+- -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
Please allow me my two cents of experience with Lost95 (if they don't 'Win', they 'lost') C.J.LAWSON writes: > > On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Alexander wrote: > > Well, Windows is a decent OS if you know how to use and configure it right > > (and work around its many bugs). If you can't deal with bugs in an OS you > > don't deserve to be allowed to use a computer, or even own one. Windows > I wonder if you would have the same attitude if you loose vital data on a > computer crash. You sound as if you can predict when the crash is going to > occur (I have seen windoze freeze a few minutes after a systems reset) Ever try replacing a Motherboard on a "win95" system? That "fabulous, great, decent OS" loses it's mind! You see, all information about the hardware is kept in the registry files. When the Id's of the old MB (in the registry) don't match the new Id's of the new MB, all H-LL breaks loose. In contrast, Linux boots up without so much as a single hick-up and runs fine! Why would one want to change the MB? MEMORY! I found that newer memory DIMMs are not recognized properly by the older BIOS'es. Example, a 64Meg DIMM is reported as a 16Meg DIMM or a 128Meg DIMM is reported as a 8Meg DIMM. Upgrading the MB to a newer one fixes the problem! > > > took many years to develop into its present state of glory and bugs alike. > > Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or > > FAT32? I don't think so. > Not that Trovalds took any longer ... I think we are missing the point > here. The length of time one takes to achieve a task is irrelevant > (particularly so when there are standards which have to be met/adhered > to). The fact that I take two weeks to assemble the components of a > computer 'does not' make it better than one assembled in two hours by > default. You are right, the time is irrelevent, however, where is the "peer" review of the inner workings of Win95/98? I get extremely irritated when an application hoses the whole nine yards and I lose hours of labor to the "blue screen of death". I've yet to lose anything within Linux. Apparently, the "Win95 advocates" think that it is ok for the OS to lock down or freeze. Perhaps they are numbed by the inability to fix the problem(s). -- -= Sent by Debian 1.3 Linux =- Thomas Kocourek KD4CIK @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@westgac3.dragon.com Remove @_@ for correct Email address --... ...-- ... -.. . -.- -.. - -.-. .. -.- -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Alexander wrote: > Well, Windows is a decent OS if you know how to use and configure it right > (and work around its many bugs). If you can't deal with bugs in an OS you > don't deserve to be allowed to use a computer, or even own one. Windows I wonder if you would have the same attitude if you loose vital data on a computer crash. You sound as if you can predict when the crash is going to occur (I have seen windoze freeze a few minutes after a systems reset) > took many years to develop into its present state of glory and bugs alike. > Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or > FAT32? I don't think so. Not that Trovalds took any longer ... I think we are missing the point here. The length of time one takes to achieve a task is irrelevant (particularly so when there are standards which have to be met/adhered to). The fact that I take two weeks to assemble the components of a computer 'does not' make it better than one assembled in two hours by default. -- Jonathan Lawson Thermal Processes Unit Department of Applied Energy and Optical Diagnostics School of Mechanical Engineering, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford. UK. email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'They came forth from unholy darknesses ... and were driven back by the rage of Angels' -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Wed, Jul 29, 1998 at 08:06:40AM -0700, Alexander wrote: > Hi... > > Well, Windows is a decent OS if you know how to use and configure it right > (and work around its many bugs). If you can't deal with bugs in an OS you > don't deserve to be allowed to use a computer, or even own one. Windows > took many years to develop into its present state of glory and bugs alike. > Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or > FAT32? I don't think so. I completely fail to follow you here. Windows is so crap of an OS, you won't believe it if it would be told to you unprejudiced. (unfortunately, people are so used to it, that they believe computer *must* crash twice a day). No, I can't deal with bugs in an OS. I want to trust my computer, and I can't trust it when I get blue-screens because I closed an application (or opened one). Random crashes are absolutely unappealing to me. "Windows took many years to develop" I wonder why. Do you know Windows versions prior to 3.1? Do you know the graphical DOS interface in MSDOS 5.0 (I believe it was 5.0). This was the state of Windows a few years ago, when GEOS (do you remember C-64 GEOS) had already released a real multitasking windowing system. I think Windows did not even took 5 minutes to design. Or the design was done by the marketing group. Really, I feel I deserve to be allowed to use a computer (and to own one), and I find Windows completely unbearable. An OS which crashes when I press a key on my Midi Keyboard, or when I give it an angry glance, is not something I think my expensive hardware deserves. And no, it is NOT the fault of the application. An user application is never allowed to crash the multitasking operating system. Thank you, Marcus -- "Rhubarb is no Egyptian god."Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
User interface (was Re: Linus Torvalds interview)
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Alexander wrote: > Hi... Hello! > Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or > FAT32? I don't think so. Speaking of UI check this out. http://www.insanely-great.com/Interface maybe this will convince you that MS took 5 minutes or less to implement their UI. regards. /\ Richard L. Alhama, Technical Support / \--, .o` /=" ,,'' \/ Cyberspace Laoag,ISP ``,,http://www2.cyberspace.com.ph/~keyoz "Overuse of the smiley is a mark of loserhood!" --The Jargon File *'' -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Alexander wrote: > Hi... > > Well, Windows is a decent OS if you know how to use and configure it right > (and work around its many bugs). If you can't deal with bugs in an OS you > don't deserve to be allowed to use a computer, or even own one. Windows > took many years to develop into its present state of glory and bugs alike. > Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or > FAT32? I don't think so. Tell you what... configuring wimp95 is too boooringgg. I configured my wimp95 box for a long time and still I get occasional crashes. M$ likes to hide the inner workings of their OS so you pay them for tech support. I don't know if you get occasional crashes with your wimp95 box but I do. And it still crashes when I need it the most. Now that I have debian GNU/Linux. I don't have to live my computing life rebooting everytime I change settings That's all I can say about this. /\ Richard L. Alhama, Technical Support / \--, .o` /=" ,,'' \/ Cyberspace Laoag,ISP ``,,http://www2.cyberspace.com.ph/~keyoz "Overuse of the smiley is a mark of loserhood!" --The Jargon File *'' -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
Hi... Well, Windows is a decent OS if you know how to use and configure it right (and work around its many bugs). If you can't deal with bugs in an OS you don't deserve to be allowed to use a computer, or even own one. Windows took many years to develop into its present state of glory and bugs alike. Do you think MS took only 5 minutes to design and implement the UI? Or FAT32? I don't think so. Alex On Thu, 23 Jul 1998, Richard L. Alhama wrote: > Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 02:12:44 +0800 (PHT) > From: "Richard L. Alhama" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Adrian Bridgett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: debian-user > Subject: Re: Linus Torvalds interview > Resent-Date: 22 Jul 1998 18:01:52 - > Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; > > On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Adrian Bridgett wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 04:19:17PM -0700, Keith Beattie wrote: > > > fyi, > > > > > > http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html > > > > If that's the one I've seen it is well worth reading. Linux has his head > > Linux the OS or Linus the person? Do you mean that what LT says goes for > the linux community as well? > > > screwed on right (apart from the "I don't think Microsoft is an evil > > company" bit which I completely disagree with ). > > I do agree with him (Linus Torvalds) when he said that M$ only makes > crappy OS's. The apps are great 'cept for Office 97 but not their > compilers. Sheesshh, I hate all those M$ Visual compilers, Visual J++, > Visual anything, Visual anycrap. > > > Adrian > > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett > > Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers > > Debian Linux http://www.debian.org The superior Linux distribution > > > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > > > > > /\ Richard L. Alhama, Technical Support > / \--, > .o` /=" > ,,'' \/ Cyberspace Laoag,ISP > ``,,http://www2.cyberspace.com.ph/~keyoz > "Overuse of the smiley is a mark of loserhood!" --The Jargon File > *'' > > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
Hi... I don't think Microsoft is an evil company, either. I just think they're overpressured to put out software. Communist, tolerant societies like the Linux community simply doesn't put QUITE that much pressure on developers. (although I'm sure it puts plenty of it on all of them...) Alex On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Adrian Bridgett wrote: > Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 18:43:20 +0100 > From: Adrian Bridgett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: debian-user > Subject: Re: Linus Torvalds interview > Resent-Date: 22 Jul 1998 17:47:40 - > Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; > > On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 04:19:17PM -0700, Keith Beattie wrote: > > fyi, > > > > http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html > > If that's the one I've seen it is well worth reading. Linux has his head > screwed on right (apart from the "I don't think Microsoft is an evil > company" bit which I completely disagree with ). > > Adrian > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett > Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers > Debian Linux http://www.debian.org The superior Linux distribution > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Thu, Jul 23, 1998 at 02:12:44AM +0800, Richard L. Alhama wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Adrian Bridgett wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 04:19:17PM -0700, Keith Beattie wrote: > > > fyi, > > > > > > http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html > > > > If that's the one I've seen it is well worth reading. Linux has his head > > Linux the OS or Linus the person? Do you mean that what LT says goes for > the linux community as well? Oops :-) No - but he generally behaves responsibly by avoiding flame-wars (apart from his recent KDE comment where he seemed to mess up on the license issues :-( ) > > screwed on right (apart from the "I don't think Microsoft is an evil > > company" bit which I completely disagree with ). > > I do agree with him (Linus Torvalds) when he said that M$ only makes > crappy OS's. The apps are great 'cept for Office 97 but not their > compilers. Sheesshh, I hate all those M$ Visual compilers, Visual J++, > Visual anything, Visual anycrap. Yeah - at work we check for a environment variable to see if we want to run a program under the debugger (Englishfied code) : #if OS2 #define debug "start /c " debugenv #endif #if UNIX #define debug debugenv " &" #endif #if NT #define debug "echo Crappy Visual C won't let us start a program \ and there's no way I'm going to DDE it" #endif Adrian email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers Debian Linux http://www.debian.org The superior Linux distribution -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Adrian Bridgett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 04:19:17PM -0700, Keith Beattie wrote: > > fyi, > > > > http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html > > If that's the one I've seen it is well worth reading. Linux has his head Linux the OS or Linus the person? Do you mean that what LT says goes for the linux community as well? > screwed on right (apart from the "I don't think Microsoft is an evil > company" bit which I completely disagree with ). I do agree with him (Linus Torvalds) when he said that M$ only makes crappy OS's. The apps are great 'cept for Office 97 but not their compilers. Sheesshh, I hate all those M$ Visual compilers, Visual J++, Visual anything, Visual anycrap. > Adrian > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett > Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers > Debian Linux http://www.debian.org The superior Linux distribution > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > /\ Richard L. Alhama, Technical Support / \--, .o` /=" ,,'' \/ Cyberspace Laoag,ISP ``,,http://www2.cyberspace.com.ph/~keyoz "Overuse of the smiley is a mark of loserhood!" --The Jargon File *'' -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 04:19:17PM -0700, Keith Beattie wrote: > fyi, > > http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html If that's the one I've seen it is well worth reading. Linux has his head screwed on right (apart from the "I don't think Microsoft is an evil company" bit which I completely disagree with ). Adrian email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers Debian Linux http://www.debian.org The superior Linux distribution -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
