Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Sat, May 06, 2000 at 11:36:57PM +0200, Viktor Rosenfeld wrote: Pat Mahoney wrote: So I offered her to install GNU/Linux on her machine and set it up for every tasks she wants to do. Can I ask why you want her to run GNU/Linux? (I mean, not that I don't want her running it...) Well to quote you: I'd rather see everyone running free software. Plus, I truly believe, that she wouldn't run into that many problems, resulting in her calling me less often. Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoy talking to my sister even if it's only over the phone. What I don't like, is having to troubleshoot Windows again and again. Especially if it's over the phone. I hear ya' I am always afraid to recommend linux to people who are not into computers, but still use their computers often. I think I'm afraid that, no matter what system they use, they will encounter many problems and frustrations. If they use linux, then, they will start to hate it and blame it just as much as they would have done to windows. Wait a second: Are you saying, non-techies shouldn't use Linux, so Linux won't get a bad reputation? That's hypocrisy. Instead, we (as in the developers of free software) should value the experiences of users that are just that: users. That's the only way, we can find out how to develop truly powerful UIs, since we can't afford those usability labs. That's not what I'm saying. I said I feel reluctant, I didn't say I don't do it. I'd rather explain the free software situation to someone and let them decide for themeselves if they agree or not and if they want to boycott proprietary software. You are right that the casual user helps improve interfaces. Is she saying that she knows how Windows works and how to fix things and she wants the same in Linux? Or is she saying if she installed Linux she would all of a sudden have an interest in knowing these things? [don't take that the wrong way, I'm having trouble wording this.] No, she doesn't know how Windows works. Nevertheless, she enjoys launching Tweak UI from the control panel, selecting the Paranoia tab, unselecting Play audio/data CD automatically and than she asks me, why her favorite audio CD won't play automatically play when loaded into the CD tray. The example is off the top of my head and exagerated, but you do get the idea, don't you? Sigh... Sometimes I wish that no one had ever tried to make computers easy. I mean, a computer is a complex thing, why try to hide the complexity so that when it breaks (if only it would never break...) no one knows what to do. The book In the Begining was the Command Line (can't rember the author) uses an analogy to H.G. Wells' The Time Machine where in the future, the human race has split in two into Morlocks and Eloi. I'm not very familiar with the book, but the Morlocks do all the work and make everything while the Eloi sit around and eat fruit. Hopefully, things will never come to this. Why not? It's like this right now. A few month ago, a water pipe leaked in my kitchen's wall? Now, did I tear down the wall and fixed the leak myself? Hell, no! I called the block's maintenance office and had them send a plumber. Same with computers. Of course, I don't recommend calling tech support when the CDs don't play automatically, but than again: Why does the average user, that only want's to surf the web, edit text, and play games have to buy a machine as complex and powerful as a PC. It's not like that right now; I don't call the plumber to turn the faucet off. They have to have a complex PC because money loving corporations have created the need through advertising and through the technology rat race. When the industry came up with the idea of set-top boxes, that let you surf the web on the TV, I didn't like it at first, because, it hided the PCs complexity, thus watering down its strength. But, that's because I like to play around with the computer and change the settings and see what happens. If I hose my root partition while doing so? No problem, I knew in the first place, that what I was doing is risky and I know how to fix it. But the everage user doesn't. Why then, does he have the power to screw up his entire system, and unnecessarily so? So the set-top box for the TV is a perfect idea for the user, that just want's to surf the web in his living room. Just like the gaming console is the perfect idea for the 10-year-old, who only want's to play games and doesn't care a bit about programming and stuff. Wow, this thread has surely changed it's topic quite a few times. :) Yeah, like what exactly are we discussing anymore? I think I don't have a point anymore. I'm ready to end this thread. MfG Viktor -- Viktor Rosenfeld E-Mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] HertzSCHLAG: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~rosenfel/hs/ -- Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] linux: the choice
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Thu, 4 May 2000, James Ravan wrote: Based on my experience with Debian Linux to date, I also take a simplistic view. Windows has worked with all the hardware changes I have made to my machine since I bought it this past January. Linux can be simple too... try to move a harddisk between two different hardware systems; you'd only need to have two floppies with suitable support for the hd controllers to make the disk boots. I have also been trying to install Debian on this machine for days. I cannot get Debian installed. The installation process simply, stubbornly hangs. If I can't get it installed, I don't care how robust it might be after installation. I CAN'T GET THAT FAR. Experience counts. Problem is, if you had gone that far, then on the second (third, etc.) install, everything would be a bit easier. So, the aha! stage needs to be experienced. I have installed Suse on my laptop, and that was a breeze. I have installed Corel Linux on this machine, and although it was not a breeze, at least it installed. And, quite honestly, it only took about two hours of fiddling over two days to get Corel Linux up. It took me about a week to install Debian on a SparcClassic; but most of the time was spent on downloading the floppy images (done via a 33.6 modem shared with 7 other web users). The installation itself (excluding X, but networking set) took about a day (I had to figure out the wonder of dselect before I got accustomed to apt-get.) Oki
Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Steve Then why keep bringing it up? I just find it amusing Steve that the selling point of a unix-like system is that it is Steve modular and flexible so the first thing most people point Steve to is a Microsoft-esque monolith application. Yeah, that Steve works, great. I don't mean to add fuel to the fire, but I have to ask. As a newcomer (and devout anti-zealot ;), it seems to me that Emacs is frequently mischaracterized as just a text editor, just as Mozilla is mislabelled just a browser. In both cases, they do that, but they're also (primarily?) application development and deployment platforms. Emacs seems to be a virtual lisp machine, and it's often used as such. So why is the argument portayed as vi-the-text-editor vs. emacs-the-text-editor? To me, arguing over vi vs. emacs is like arguing over C the language and Java the libraries + runtime environment + kitchen sink. I don't mean to be inflammatory, but I'm curious. Am I off-base, is there a historical reason for this apparent mislabelling? Thanks. -- Believe nothing, no matter where you read it | Andrej Marjan or who has said it, not even if I have said | [EMAIL PROTECTED] it, unless it agrees with your own reason and | your own common sense. --buddha | --+---
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Pat Mahoney wrote: So I offered her to install GNU/Linux on her machine and set it up for every tasks she wants to do. Can I ask why you want her to run GNU/Linux? (I mean, not that I don't want her running it...) Well to quote you: I'd rather see everyone running free software. Plus, I truly believe, that she wouldn't run into that many problems, resulting in her calling me less often. Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoy talking to my sister even if it's only over the phone. What I don't like, is having to troubleshoot Windows again and again. Especially if it's over the phone. I am always afraid to recommend linux to people who are not into computers, but still use their computers often. I think I'm afraid that, no matter what system they use, they will encounter many problems and frustrations. If they use linux, then, they will start to hate it and blame it just as much as they would have done to windows. Wait a second: Are you saying, non-techies shouldn't use Linux, so Linux won't get a bad reputation? That's hypocrisy. Instead, we (as in the developers of free software) should value the experiences of users that are just that: users. That's the only way, we can find out how to develop truly powerful UIs, since we can't afford those usability labs. Is she saying that she knows how Windows works and how to fix things and she wants the same in Linux? Or is she saying if she installed Linux she would all of a sudden have an interest in knowing these things? [don't take that the wrong way, I'm having trouble wording this.] No, she doesn't know how Windows works. Nevertheless, she enjoys launching Tweak UI from the control panel, selecting the Paranoia tab, unselecting Play audio/data CD automatically and than she asks me, why her favorite audio CD won't play automatically play when loaded into the CD tray. The example is off the top of my head and exagerated, but you do get the idea, don't you? Sigh... Sometimes I wish that no one had ever tried to make computers easy. I mean, a computer is a complex thing, why try to hide the complexity so that when it breaks (if only it would never break...) no one knows what to do. The book In the Begining was the Command Line (can't rember the author) uses an analogy to H.G. Wells' The Time Machine where in the future, the human race has split in two into Morlocks and Eloi. I'm not very familiar with the book, but the Morlocks do all the work and make everything while the Eloi sit around and eat fruit. Hopefully, things will never come to this. Why not? It's like this right now. A few month ago, a water pipe leaked in my kitchen's wall? Now, did I tear down the wall and fixed the leak myself? Hell, no! I called the block's maintenance office and had them send a plumber. Same with computers. Of course, I don't recommend calling tech support when the CDs don't play automatically, but than again: Why does the average user, that only want's to surf the web, edit text, and play games have to buy a machine as complex and powerful as a PC. When the industry came up with the idea of set-top boxes, that let you surf the web on the TV, I didn't like it at first, because, it hided the PCs complexity, thus watering down its strength. But, that's because I like to play around with the computer and change the settings and see what happens. If I hose my root partition while doing so? No problem, I knew in the first place, that what I was doing is risky and I know how to fix it. But the everage user doesn't. Why then, does he have the power to screw up his entire system, and unnecessarily so? So the set-top box for the TV is a perfect idea for the user, that just want's to surf the web in his living room. Just like the gaming console is the perfect idea for the 10-year-old, who only want's to play games and doesn't care a bit about programming and stuff. Wow, this thread has surely changed it's topic quite a few times. :) MfG Viktor -- Viktor Rosenfeld E-Mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] HertzSCHLAG:http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~rosenfel/hs/
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
At 12:31 PM 5/4/00 +0800, Corey Popelier wrote: I take an extremely simplistic view. I'd use Windows more if it didn't crash 20 times a day. That's why I use Linux. Simple. Based on my experience with Debian Linux to date, I also take a simplistic view. Windows has worked with all the hardware changes I have made to my machine since I bought it this past January. I have also been trying to install Debian on this machine for days. I cannot get Debian installed. The installation process simply, stubbornly hangs. If I can't get it installed, I don't care how robust it might be after installation. I CAN'T GET THAT FAR. I have installed Suse on my laptop, and that was a breeze. I have installed Corel Linux on this machine, and although it was not a breeze, at least it installed. And, quite honestly, it only took about two hours of fiddling over two days to get Corel Linux up. Compared with my current experience with Debian, I should just suffer Corel Linux, without a sound card (that works under Windows), and an ethernet card (that works under Windows) and be done. VERY frustratedly, -jim
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news
software:
Richard == Richard Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Richard Win hasn't required an autoexec.bat since '95. -- My
Richard other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
I think you need it in order to setup the environment (compilers
seem to require this) and/or load doskey.
That's dos and specific software not windows. You can
do that all with batchfiles anyway.{Strange you've got
to use it for the first install on a CD, much decent
software, etc...} I imagine that if you run only win
'95 {Ms} specific software that you can actually get
away with it.
At any rate... this is a Debian list. :}
--
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software [further OT]
James Ravan wrote: At 12:31 PM 5/4/00 +0800, Corey Popelier wrote: I take an extremely simplistic view. I'd use Windows more if it didn't crash 20 times a day. That's why I use Linux. Simple. Based on my experience with Debian Linux to date, I also take a simplistic view. Windows has worked with all the hardware changes I have made to my machine since I bought it this past January. I have also been trying to install Debian on this machine for days. I cannot get Debian installed. The installation process simply, stubbornly hangs. If I can't get it installed, I don't care how robust it might be after installation. I CAN'T GET THAT FAR. I have installed Suse on my laptop, and that was a breeze. I have installed Corel Linux on this machine, and although it was not a breeze, at least it installed. And, quite honestly, it only took about two hours of fiddling over two days to get Corel Linux up. Compared with my current experience with Debian, I should just suffer Corel Linux, without a sound card (that works under Windows), and an ethernet card (that works under Windows) and be done. VERY frustratedly, James, you are doing several things wrong here. First of all, if I were you I'd either order an official Debian CD set from some place like Cheapbytes (yes, they are *very* cheap), or, if you have lots of time and bandwidth, download the base floppy images from the Debian site, then let dselect or apt download the other packages from there. There seem to be a lot of problems with people using the CDs in the backs of these books. If I'm wrong about this one, I apologize, I'm just saying I've seen lots of complaints on this list. In fact, that's probably why your earlier question was apparently ignored; folks are tired of dealing with these broken CDs. Try this: http://www.cheapbytes.com I just noticed that Debian is not in their Mondo pack like it used to be. That's too bad; that's how I got my Debian CD originally. Once I tried that, I never even broke out Suse, Caldera, or Slackware (already had RedHat, which I later uninstalled). :-) Second, if you have a question for this list, don't piggyback it to an ongoing thread, like you've done twice now. Just put it out there so it will be a new thread. People tend to ignore you otherwise, because you're just off-topic for the thread. Third, don't criticize Debian for something Sams puts out. You got your Corel Linux from Corel, you got your Windows from Microsoft, you probably got your Suse from Suse, but you're criticizing Debian because something in the back of a Sams book doesn't work? More than a little unfair, dude. But I grant that it is a problem that lots of folks don't know how to get an Official Debian distro that works. Basically, www.debian.org does not get you there: you are led into a maze of Release Notes and Installation Instructions, without any clear instructions about where to get the dang thing. Maybe there needs to be a www.debian.com that does not have any compunctions about linking to CheapBytes, et al. Hmmm, that's already taken by www.debian.org. Still a commercial or commercially-oriented arm that wants to sell pure Debian (i.e., not Corel or Stormix) - I wonder...
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Let me reply to myself here. This kinda came off wrong. On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 10:15:37PM -0500, Pat Mahoney wrote: Linux[1] is much more difficult (to learn anyway) yet much more powerful than, say, windows. The Windows philosophy is: don't think, everything should be easy. With linux, you must think. The windows philosophy seems to rub off onto the rest of one's life (or maybe it's the other way around). Some people don't like to think, and windows encourages this. Linux, on the other hand, makes and encourages you to think. Hopefully, this will rub off onto the rest of your life and make you a better person. Yes, Linux can make you a better person. For me, Linux makes me think. For others, windows may make them think. For still others, something else (not computer related) may make them think. If linux makes you think, good. If windows makes you think, good. If something else makes you think, good. If nothing makes you think, then I you truly have my sympathy. So, linux can make you a better person by encouraging thought; windows can too; almost anything else can too. When I think of windows users, however, I think of two of my friends talking about Aol Instant Messanger: first friend: Hey, you should download AIM. second friend: But I have Hotmail [or something, I'm not 100% sure] Messanger [and I don't use it]. I have to figure out how to uninstall that first. me: you can have them both installed at once. second friend: I don't know. I'm gonna try to uninstall it. But not everyone's like that. My point is that you shouldn't go through life with your head under the sand. For me, maybe, linux has helped me learn some stuff which hopefully rubs off into other facets of my life [some might say, based on these posts, that linux (or something anyway) has turned me into a complete idiot, but I think it has helped]. Windows may help some others (but of course, I'd rather see everyone running free software). -- Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Pat == Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Pat For me, Linux makes me think. For others, windows may make Pat them think. For still others, something else (not computer Pat related) may make them think. If linux makes you think, Pat good. If windows makes you think, good. If something else Pat makes you think, good. If nothing makes you think, then I you Pat truly have my sympathy. For me, the problem with Windows is you have to think when thinking should not be required. Take for instance, autoexec.bat. I know a Windows computer, that whenever it starts, it flashes up with the message Bad command or filename for a few seconds until it goes away. However, it doesn't give the important information: what command cannot be found? what line is it on? So, instead of going directly to the bad line (like you would for any Unix based interpreter), you have to do a lot of fiddling just to find out which line is bad. I have had similar problems for out of environment space errors (I never remember or can find how to change it, although it seems to be fixed now) and programs that automatically add lines like: PATH %PATH;c:\newprogram which fails when %PATH% contains a directory with spaces (trial and error suggests that correct quoting helps). Perhaps Windows 2000 won't require autoexec.bat, I will believe it when I see it. However, I encounter similar problems throughout Windows (especially device drivers). So, the way I see it, with Windows you always need to be thinking There is a bug in this program. It won't say why it is crashing. What is the best work around?. With Unix, you get more descriptive feedback of what the program is doing (eg look at the output of dpkg), and I have never had problems with a device driver suddenly going broken, requiring a complete re-installation of the OS. You don't have to try and second guess what the computer might be trying to do. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
I take an extremely simplistic view. I'd use Windows more if it didn't crash 20 times a day. That's why I use Linux. Simple. Cheers, Corey Popelier http://members.dingoblue.net.au/~pancreas Work Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 4 May 2000, Brian May wrote: Pat == Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Pat For me, Linux makes me think. For others, windows may make Pat them think. For still others, something else (not computer Pat related) may make them think. If linux makes you think, Pat good. If windows makes you think, good. If something else Pat makes you think, good. If nothing makes you think, then I you Pat truly have my sympathy. For me, the problem with Windows is you have to think when thinking should not be required. Take for instance, autoexec.bat. I know a Windows computer, that whenever it starts, it flashes up with the message Bad command or filename for a few seconds until it goes away. However, it doesn't give the important information: what command cannot be found? what line is it on? So, instead of going directly to the bad line (like you would for any Unix based interpreter), you have to do a lot of fiddling just to find out which line is bad. I have had similar problems for out of environment space errors (I never remember or can find how to change it, although it seems to be fixed now) and programs that automatically add lines like: PATH %PATH;c:\newprogram which fails when %PATH% contains a directory with spaces (trial and error suggests that correct quoting helps). Perhaps Windows 2000 won't require autoexec.bat, I will believe it when I see it. However, I encounter similar problems throughout Windows (especially device drivers). So, the way I see it, with Windows you always need to be thinking There is a bug in this program. It won't say why it is crashing. What is the best work around?. With Unix, you get more descriptive feedback of what the program is doing (eg look at the output of dpkg), and I have never had problems with a device driver suddenly going broken, requiring a complete re-installation of the OS. You don't have to try and second guess what the computer might be trying to do. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Hello all there, On Wed, 3 May 2000, Steve Lamb wrote: For me it isn't a GUI/CLI mindset it is simply the ability to do what needs to be done. Windows doesn't let me do that in most cases. The standard 'nix utilities provide a lot of automation for mundane tasks. I've been following this thread for some time, and this is exactly the mail I've always been waiting for, because IMHO that's exactly the point about the whole discussion. The first time I had contact with Unix in general was in my soil physics lecture at university. We've been calculating some models on water and solute flux in soils on IBM RS/6000 machines with AIX, and as none of us two students in the course had any knowledge about Unix, the Prof gave us a short introduction. One thing I kept specially in mind: We had to remove a directory, so the prof said (in german, I'm translating into English): Just enter rm -rf directory/. rm means remove, r means recursive and f means force: Do it and don't ask stupid questions (the computer, not us students). So we entered it and the computer did it and didn't ask stupid questions. Being at that time used to the windoze way of doing things, where you often have to struggle some kind of fight with your computer to get things done, I've at once been fascinated by the way you tell the computer in clear precise language, what he has to do, and he does it. We have been doing other fancy (for me at that time) things on the computers, so this course could actually be seen as a turning point in my attitude towards computers and OSes. So a short time later I switched to Linux on my computer at home (doing it quite radically, not that kind of dual-boot stuff;-). So to focus on the main point again: It really isn't the GUI/CLI-matter. I like GUIs. But sometimes things can be done much faster, easier and more precise on the command line. And this being able to choose the way to do things and being able to do things that have to be done (And you don't have that in windoze) is one of the main advantages of UNIX/Linux. Regards, Daniel P.S.: Some might perhaps consider this mail much too long, or much too far off topic for this list, but sorry: I just had to get this off my chest.
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Pat == Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pat For me, Linux makes me think. For others, windows may make
Pat them think. For still others, something else (not computer
Pat related) may make them think. If linux makes you think,
Pat good. If windows makes you think, good. If something else
Pat makes you think, good. If nothing makes you think, then I you
Pat truly have my sympathy.
For me, the problem with Windows is you have to think when thinking
should not be required. Take for instance, autoexec.bat.
I know a Windows computer, that whenever it starts, it flashes up
with the message Bad command or filename for a few seconds until
it goes away. However, it doesn't give the important information:
what command cannot be found? what line is it on?
Not that I actually want to come to the defense of Winanything...
Turn echoing on.
Perhaps Windows 2000 won't require autoexec.bat, I will believe it
when I see it. However, I encounter similar problems throughout
Windows (especially device drivers).
Win hasn't required an autoexec.bat since '95.
--
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Thu, 04 May 2000, Brian May wrote: For me, the problem with Windows is you have to think when thinking should not be required. Take for instance, autoexec.bat. I know a Windows computer, that whenever it starts, it flashes up with the message Bad command or filename for a few seconds until it goes away. However, it doesn't give the important information: what command cannot be found? what line is it on? So, instead of going directly to the bad line (like you would for any Unix based interpreter), you have to do a lot of fiddling just to find out which line is bad. The problem is that win9x doesn't have the old ms-dos help.com (they probably thought that it would be too low-level for the real win user). You would have found all the answers there. In the Bad command or filename case you have to do command /y /c autoexec.bat which will step you through the batch file. I have had similar problems for out of environment space errors (I never remember or can find how to change it, although it seems to be fixed now) and programs that automatically add lines like: PATH %PATH;c:\newprogram which fails when %PATH% contains a directory with spaces (trial and error suggests that correct quoting helps). The environment size can be specified using the shell= command and the /e: switch in config.sys. In mine looks like this: SHELL=C:\COMMAND.COM /E:1024 /P for a 1k environment size (the default is 256 bytes). Perhaps Windows 2000 won't require autoexec.bat, I will believe it when I see it. However, I encounter similar problems throughout Windows (especially device drivers). That's because they are dos drivers, and for microsoft dos is dead (judging from the lack of documentation and support). So, the way I see it, with Windows you always need to be thinking There is a bug in this program. It won't say why it is crashing. What is the best work around?. With Unix, you get more descriptive feedback of what the program is doing (eg look at the output of dpkg), and I have never had problems with a device driver suddenly going broken, requiring a complete re-installation of the OS. You don't have to try and second guess what the computer might be trying to do. Oh yes, I agree that that one of the greatest problems of windows is that it tries to do everything in the background, hidden from the user, you can't see what's going on, and if there is a problem you can't solve it because you don't know what's happened. But all this has a very good reason. The windows philosophy is: Don't think, we will do everything for you, you will be able to use your computer without knowing anything about it. That's because windows is targeted to the don't-know-much-about-computers users (and this is a very large community), and wants to give them a power-user feeling. That's why the only problem-solving method on windows is reinstall everything. Any other method would require the user to think. (I don't say these users are stupid, they just don't know much about computers).
Re: Mail/news software
On Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 05:05:38PM +0200, Kovacs Istvan wrote: The ideal software would be able to handle both mail and news in an integrated manner, place incoming and outgoing messages into folders YARN, when used in combination with a SOUP package handler, is much like that (except for the GUI/multi-window part), but I haven't seen a Linux version. I know I used a Linux version of YARN about two or three years ago, look around. I know it was a handly lightweight packet reader! -- Jonathan Markevich [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich Go ahead, capitalize the T on technology, deify it if it will make you feel less responsible -- but it puts you in with the neutered, brother, in with the eunuchs keeping the harem of our stolen Earth for the numb and joyless hardons of human sultans, human elite with no right at all to be where they are -- -- Thomas Pynchon, _Gravity's Rainbow_
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 09:17:30PM -0700, Eric G . Miller wrote: I feel compelled to respond... On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 10:15:37PM -0500, Pat Mahoney wrote: Linux[1] is much more difficult (to learn anyway) yet much more powerful than, say, windows. The Windows philosophy is: don't think, everything should be easy. With linux, you must think. The windows philosophy seems to rub off onto the rest of one's life (or maybe it's the other way around). Some people don't like to think, and windows encourages this. I strongly disagree with this characterization. The difference between Windows and Linux has nothing to do with whether people like to think. I think perfectly well while I'm at work in front of a NT box. The windows approach tries to give you a helping hand to get things done. Unfortunately, it often can't get out of it's own way and becomes more *difficult* to use. If you apply yourself to Windows, you can learn how to do a great many complex tasks. Unixes in general have this CLI True. I guess my free software bias got the best of me. I'd like to see everyone using free software. But, on linux, I can use CLI or GUI for many things. Unfortunately, not everything, and especially not most sysadmin stuff is availible as a gui. I think this freedom of choice is very important and I don't see Windows 9x or NT giving this, although I have zero experience with NT. But I do know that to kill a runaway process in Win95 you have to Ctrl-Alt-Delete, wait for the little window to pop up (forgot what it's called), and click on it and tell Windows to close the program. Typing 'kill' seems so much simpler. The point, I guess, is the same as yours: both CLI and GUI have pros and cons. I like my linux box where both are often available. (you say that further down too.) heritage and the idea of breaking down software into reusable chunks that can be piped together (COM/ActiveX addresses the same idea in a different way). CLI programs are quite useful at times, but just as often such programs are too damn complicated for their own good. Sure you can run it from a shell script, but first you have to figure out 500 switches and all of their arguments. The interface should be appropriate to the task at hand. There are things to like and dislike about any computer system. This difference with Linux is the end user can exert some direct influence on how the system evolves. This, is the key difference. Linux, on the other hand, makes and encourages you to think. Hopefully, this will rub off onto the rest of your life and make you a better person. Yes, Linux can make you a better person. Unfortunately, laziness and non-thinkers are not going anywhere. That's why kde and gnome and the like are important. If you don't want to think, you don't have to. But if you do, there's always the command line, waiting, beckoning. Kde and gnome will allow those people to use free software and still not get too frustrated. I admit to being like this. I don't have time to learn how to get latex to print a custom header for my picky english teacher when it's 1:00 a.m. and an essay's due tommorrow. I just want to fire up a gui/wsiwig and click on headers footers. After using both GUI wordprocessors and LaTeX for some time, I'm riding the fence on this one. A well designed GUI can make it easy to perform complex tasks. The big benefit of TeX/LaTeX is it's nice typesetting and structure (not to mention math) and it's portability. How you going to read that Word file in ten years? There is nothing inherently better or worse about GUI's vs. CLI. It's a matter of choosing the right tool, and providing an appropriate interface. The king of all designs is that which can do both (such as through shared libs). We see alot of that with things like mpg123/xmms. Kind of a best of both worlds approach. Make it possible to run from a CLI (or shell script), but present a pleasant GUI interface for day-to-day ease of use. From an end user's perspective, it doesn't have a lot to do with thinking vs. not thinking, it has to do with getting the job done. But I have chosen to use linux; I like the free software attitude, and I want to be encouraged to think. The most fun I ever had was when my brother and I fdisk'ed our windows partition and mke2fs'ed it. Then we broke the windows install CD so that no one else would ever install it from that CD. [1] When I say linux, I mean Debian, GNU, latex etc., etc. -- ¶ One·should·only·use·the·ASCII·characterset·when·compos » ing·email·messages. -- Dare to be naive. -- R. Buckminster Fuller
Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Tuesday, May 02, 2000, 9:10:53 PM, Pat wrote: important and I don't see Windows 9x or NT giving this, although I have zero experience with NT. But I do know that to kill a runaway process in Win95 you have to Ctrl-Alt-Delete, wait for the little window to pop up (forgot what it's called), and click on it and tell Windows to close the program. Typing 'kill' seems so much simpler. The point, I guess, is the same as yours: both CLI and GUI have pros and cons. I like my linux box where both are often available. (you say that further down too.) Not to mention that the little window only shows registered processes, not all processes. It requires explorer to be running to be able to work and often times it is a component of explorer that is hanging. It also hopes that the queue is not jammed, which often it is. So a lot of times you get a blue screen saying the system is busy, hit return to wait or CAD to reboot. I dunno, but a kill off my WYSE terminal on the serial port seems a lot easier because it has a lot /less/ on it to go wrong, actually works and lets me kill all processes, not just registered ones. For me it isn't a GUI/CLI mindset it is simply the ability to do what needs to be done. Windows doesn't let me do that in most cases. The standard 'nix utilities provide a lot of automation for mundane tasks. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: Mail/news software
Richard Lyon wrote: -Original Message- From: Steve Lamb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 30 April 2000 10:11 PM To: Kovacs Istvan Cc: Debian User List Subject: Re: Mail/news software I don't like the Netscape browser on either Win98 or Linux. It's clunky and seems to crash with a greater regularity than Internet Explorer. // i don't know what clunky means in terms of browser standards, but netscape 4.7 (from http://www.netscape.net) hasn't crashed in any of my laptops nor my desktop, all running dlinux.. i highly recommend it. ...totally unbiased, bentley taylor. // -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- Bentley Taylor __ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mail/news software
-Original Message- From: Phillip Deackes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 30 April 2000 11:13 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Mail/news software I am very sorry if I offend, but I find emacs/xemacs about the most off-putting thing in Linux. Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp. Nedit is a good editor for people use to Microsoft style editors. I don't know if there are any debs for the latest version, but it is pretty simple to compile yourself. I recently converted after using emacs for 8 years. It is great for writing code. Regards ...
RE: Mail/news software
-Original Message- From: Phillip Deackes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 30 April 2000 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Mail/news software I disagree and am continually posting info about an excellent email app called Ishmail. It was a commercial offerring but the source code has now been released. It is available on www.ishmail.com Thanks for the information. Does it have news reader capability? Regards ...
RE: Mail/news software
-Original Message- From: Steve Lamb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 30 April 2000 10:11 PM To: Kovacs Istvan Cc: Debian User List Subject: Re: Mail/news software I'll now let people try to prove me wrong but so far I have not seen a beast which comes close to the usability of Windows applications. Sure, they have the power to do some impressive stuff, but they don't have the interface to match. I agree. Over the years I have tried various linux mail/news readers and web browsers. Unfortunately, while they may be very powerful I still honestly prefer to use Outlook and Internet Explorer. The day I find suitable replacements Win98 is off this machine. I check the freshmeat site every few days in hope. Each now and again I do consider writing my own mail/new reader for linux. It really a matter of getting enough time and motivation. I don't like the Netscape browser on either Win98 or Linux. It's clunky and seems to crash with a greater regularity than Internet Explorer. So I use Win98 for the internet and Debian for work. Regards ...
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Linux[1] is much more difficult (to learn anyway) yet much more powerful than, say, windows. The Windows philosophy is: don't think, everything should be easy. With linux, you must think. The windows philosophy seems to rub off onto the rest of one's life (or maybe it's the other way around). Some people don't like to think, and windows encourages this. Linux, on the other hand, makes and encourages you to think. Hopefully, this will rub off onto the rest of your life and make you a better person. Yes, Linux can make you a better person. Unfortunately, laziness and non-thinkers are not going anywhere. That's why kde and gnome and the like are important. If you don't want to think, you don't have to. But if you do, there's always the command line, waiting, beckoning. Kde and gnome will allow those people to use free software and still not get too frustrated. I admit to being like this. I don't have time to learn how to get latex to print a custom header for my picky english teacher when it's 1:00 a.m. and an essay's due tommorrow. I just want to fire up a gui/wsiwig and click on headers footers. But I have chosen to use linux; I like the free software attitude, and I want to be encouraged to think. The most fun I ever had was when my brother and I fdisk'ed our windows partition and mke2fs'ed it. Then we broke the windows install CD so that no one else would ever install it from that CD. [1] When I say linux, I mean Debian, GNU, latex etc., etc. On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 07:13:06PM +0200, Kovacs Istvan wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:35:31 -0400, Rob Lilley wrote: Different Strokes for different folks. Emacs - Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp smile. Emacs and Linux/Unix for that matter is not for everybody - its there because of and for the growing few that want to learn to swim upstream against the current. [...] There is a romance behind all of this wonderful esoteric stuff - let's face it, those in the world of windows will never reach out and touch the actual kernel of it all. I disagree with you: Linux is nice because it works, and not because it's esoteric. That's exactly the reason why I chose OS/2 five years ago, and why I'm switching to Linux now. As Linux matures, there'll be less and less need to improve the kernel and the core services of the OS, and more effort will be spent on the UI, including popular applications, which means that more and more people will find the system useful. Most of them won't want to 'touch the actual kernel of it all', what they'll want is a usable system. Emacs, vi, development tools are fine for developers (I also decided to learn Emacs and vi -- not at the wizard level, but to be able to use them when needed), and it's reasonable not to expect the masses to use them, but it's not the same case with Linux (I hope :-) Kofa -- Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
I feel compelled to respond... On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 10:15:37PM -0500, Pat Mahoney wrote: Linux[1] is much more difficult (to learn anyway) yet much more powerful than, say, windows. The Windows philosophy is: don't think, everything should be easy. With linux, you must think. The windows philosophy seems to rub off onto the rest of one's life (or maybe it's the other way around). Some people don't like to think, and windows encourages this. I strongly disagree with this characterization. The difference between Windows and Linux has nothing to do with whether people like to think. I think perfectly well while I'm at work in front of a NT box. The windows approach tries to give you a helping hand to get things done. Unfortunately, it often can't get out of it's own way and becomes more *difficult* to use. If you apply yourself to Windows, you can learn how to do a great many complex tasks. Unixes in general have this CLI heritage and the idea of breaking down software into reusable chunks that can be piped together (COM/ActiveX addresses the same idea in a different way). CLI programs are quite useful at times, but just as often such programs are too damn complicated for their own good. Sure you can run it from a shell script, but first you have to figure out 500 switches and all of their arguments. The interface should be appropriate to the task at hand. There are things to like and dislike about any computer system. This difference with Linux is the end user can exert some direct influence on how the system evolves. This, is the key difference. Linux, on the other hand, makes and encourages you to think. Hopefully, this will rub off onto the rest of your life and make you a better person. Yes, Linux can make you a better person. Unfortunately, laziness and non-thinkers are not going anywhere. That's why kde and gnome and the like are important. If you don't want to think, you don't have to. But if you do, there's always the command line, waiting, beckoning. Kde and gnome will allow those people to use free software and still not get too frustrated. I admit to being like this. I don't have time to learn how to get latex to print a custom header for my picky english teacher when it's 1:00 a.m. and an essay's due tommorrow. I just want to fire up a gui/wsiwig and click on headers footers. After using both GUI wordprocessors and LaTeX for some time, I'm riding the fence on this one. A well designed GUI can make it easy to perform complex tasks. The big benefit of TeX/LaTeX is it's nice typesetting and structure (not to mention math) and it's portability. How you going to read that Word file in ten years? There is nothing inherently better or worse about GUI's vs. CLI. It's a matter of choosing the right tool, and providing an appropriate interface. The king of all designs is that which can do both (such as through shared libs). We see alot of that with things like mpg123/xmms. Kind of a best of both worlds approach. Make it possible to run from a CLI (or shell script), but present a pleasant GUI interface for day-to-day ease of use. From an end user's perspective, it doesn't have a lot to do with thinking vs. not thinking, it has to do with getting the job done. But I have chosen to use linux; I like the free software attitude, and I want to be encouraged to think. The most fun I ever had was when my brother and I fdisk'ed our windows partition and mke2fs'ed it. Then we broke the windows install CD so that no one else would ever install it from that CD. [1] When I say linux, I mean Debian, GNU, latex etc., etc. -- ¶ One·should·only·use·the·ASCII·characterset·when·compos » ing·email·messages.
Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Graeme Mathieson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Re: Re[2]:
Emacs
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[ snipped ... ]
Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs to run
is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because
at
least it /IS/ an OS and not an editor that is a wannabe script
interpreter
and OS rolled into one.
Has anybody ever tried to graft emacs directly on top of oskit?
_Then_ you
would have your operating system. :)
It would be a great OS period. Perfect for laptops, PDA's,
writers, programmers, etc...
I'd like to a graphical version though... sort of a cross
between Oberon and emacs. Run w3 in a frame, gnus in another,
mail could update in a little sliding window at the bottom
of the screen... maybe you could just use it as a desktop
and run applets in floating windows above it.
Object oriented... document centric... run it on
the Mach kernel...
--
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Monday, May 01, 2000, 11:59:24 AM, Richard wrote:
Emacs is far more useful than that... It's still the best
mailer/newsreader/text based office program in existence.
That is highly debated, esp. for people who prefer not to have
huge
I've had several debates featuring this very subject.
Some very long and drawn out and heated.
bloated pigs in memory, don't want to learn a speech impediment on top
of
other languages and actually prefer to have separate, specific
programs for
their individual tasks. Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs
to run
is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because
at
least it /IS/ an OS and not an editor that is a wannabe script
interpreter and
OS rolled into one.
This one... several times. It's no longer interesting.
{and never really was all that valid.}
If you don't like emacs... don't run it. If you don't
want to add anything to the thread... I'm sure you've
got a killfile somewhere nearby.
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
And this one is running, what? Amiga?
Windows... DV {for a while yet}
--
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
{3d, animation, sound, stills, text, fiddling with X,
learning scheme, emacs, tcl/TK, etc, etc...}
Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Hi, Richard Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Graeme Mathieson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Re: Re[2]: Emacs Has anybody ever tried to graft emacs directly on top of oskit? _Then_ you would have your operating system. :) It would be a great OS period. Perfect for laptops, PDA's, writers, programmers, etc... I was kidding. See the smilie? You scare me. :-P -- Graeme. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Life's not fair, I reply. But the root password helps. - BOFH
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Pat Mahoney wrote: Linux[1] is much more difficult (to learn anyway) yet much more powerful than, say, windows. The Windows philosophy is: don't think, everything should be easy. With linux, you must think. The windows philosophy seems to rub off onto the rest of one's life (or maybe it's the other way around). Some people don't like to think, and windows encourages this. I´ve been having *strong* arguments with my sister about that issue. My sister is using her computer only for her business studies, which includes tasks like word processing, spread sheets, and browsing the web for information. Whenever her Windows machine breaks, she calls me for help. Often her Windows machine breaks, because she changed some settings in the control panel, and forgot where it was. So I offered her to install GNU/Linux on her machine and set it up for every tasks she wants to do. She wants a desktop? KDE. Word processing? Lyx. Web/E-Mail/News? Netscape. If she runs into a problem, she can give me a call. If, however, she makes some changes with root priviledges (say editing /etc/inittab), she´s on her own. Well, she periodically declines that offer, stating, that If I´m going to install Linux on my machine, I want to know how it works and be able to fix things myself. Yet she will say, that she doesn´t have an interest in system adminstration and programming or whatsoever. So, I answer something like: Well, you have a drivers license and a car. Yet, when the engine breaks down, you won´t look under the hood yourself, you take the car to a mechanic instead. She´ll answer: But, if I want to change the seat pads, I´ll do it myself. And I´ll go: Yeah, you can change the background color in KDE. So, my question is: Why does GNU/Linux have to imply think-philosophy? For my sister the Don´t think, everything should be easy-philosophy would be much better. And it´s perfectly doable, with software that is available today. She´s gonna call me anyhow, when she has problems. With GNU/Linux it just wouldn´t happen that often however. MfG Viktor -- Viktor Rosenfeld E-Mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] HertzSCHLAG: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~rosenfel/hs/
Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Monday, May 01, 2000, 10:55:47 PM, Richard wrote: I've had several debates featuring this very subject. Some very long and drawn out and heated. Then why keep bringing it up? I just find it amusing that the selling point of a unix-like system is that it is modular and flexible so the first thing most people point to is a Microsoft-esque monolith application. Yeah, that works, great. This one... several times. It's no longer interesting. Makes it no less true. If you don't like emacs... don't run it. If you don't want to add anything to the thread... I'm sure you've got a killfile somewhere nearby. I am adding to the thread. I'm adding a bit of truth to the religious dogma. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 10:19:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: Monday, May 01, 2000, 10:55:47 PM, Richard wrote: I've had several debates featuring this very subject. Some very long and drawn out and heated. Then why keep bringing it up? I just find it amusing that the selling point of a unix-like system is that it is modular and flexible so the first thing most people point to is a Microsoft-esque monolith application. Yeah, that works, great. emacs is modular. Or maybe you just don't bother to learn about things you don't like? This one... several times. It's no longer interesting. Makes it no less true. Makes it more boring, though. If you don't like emacs... don't run it. If you don't want to add anything to the thread... I'm sure you've got a killfile somewhere nearby. I am adding to the thread. I'm adding a bit of truth to the religious dogma. BS. You are adding *your opinion* which might not necessarily be the truth. Don't confuse the two things, they are not the same. Cheers, Chris goes to put on asbestos underwear...
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
May I suggest that only people like myself, who have faced this dilemma in extremis, be allowed to add to this thread. Having used and valued both Vi and Emacs, I truly had my 'Faith' put to the test, when I had to chose between them while installing Debian on a box with only 814Mb HDD space. It was wrenching. I cannot say, however, that I would go back and change the choice I had to make. If no one else has _had_ to make this choice, then please let this thread die here. It just keeps bringing up sad memories I'd rather leave buried with a great text editor. montefin
Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Different Strokes for different folks. Emacs - Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp smile. Emacs and Linux/Unix for that matter is not for everybody - its there because of and for the growing few that want to learn to swim upstream against the current. I first heard about this strange thing called Emacs in Clifford Stoll's book, The Cuckoo's Egg In fact, that book was responsible for getting me interested in the world beyond DOS. I vowed when I finished the book that someday I would learn about Emacs and Unix. There is a romance behind all of this wonderful esoteric stuff - let's face it, those in the world of windows will never reach out and touch the actual kernel of it all. Rob This ps -eafg command bothers me, he said. I can't say why, but it just doesn't taste right. Maybe its just paranoia, but I'm sure that I've seen that combination before. -- from The Cuckoo's Egg -Original Message- From: Johann Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-user@lists.debian.org debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Sunday, April 30, 2000 11:30 AM Subject: Re: Mail/news software On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:13:19PM +0100, Phillip Deackes wrote: I am very sorry if I offend, but I find emacs/xemacs about the most off-putting thing in Linux. Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp. That is not always the case. I tried out vi and emacs when I started as a Linux newbie and did not like vi. I could not immediately understand it's logic. I could however immediately start using emacs. It has an easy and very good tutorial for newbies and after 5 years I am still learning and enjoying new features. Johann -- J.H. Spies, Hugenotestraat 29, Posbus 80, Franschhoek, 7690, South Africa Tel/Faks 021-876-2337 Sel/Cell 082-255-2388 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it. But whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it. Luke 9:24 -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Mail/news software
On 30-Apr-00 Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Phillip Deackes wrote: I disagree and am continually posting info about an excellent email app called Ishmail. It was a commercial offerring but the source code has now been released. It is available on www.ishmail.com I looked at this a while back (and debianized it in the process.) It's nice if you like that kind of thing but not my cup of tea. I can send you my .deb if you like but I've no interest in officially maintaining it. -- Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] But does it handle USENET postings? The original poster was asking for a package which would handles USENET, as well as e-mail, and I am interested in this, as well. From what I could see on the ishmail pages (granted, I was in a hurry and did not read all of it), I could find no indication that this was also useable as a newsreader. Did I miss something? Marc Shapiro http://www.bigfoot.com/~m_shapiro/ -- Linux IS user-friendly. It is just picky about who its friends are.
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 19:35:31 -0400, Rob Lilley wrote: Different Strokes for different folks. Emacs - Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp smile. Emacs and Linux/Unix for that matter is not for everybody - its there because of and for the growing few that want to learn to swim upstream against the current. [...] There is a romance behind all of this wonderful esoteric stuff - let's face it, those in the world of windows will never reach out and touch the actual kernel of it all. I disagree with you: Linux is nice because it works, and not because it's esoteric. That's exactly the reason why I chose OS/2 five years ago, and why I'm switching to Linux now. As Linux matures, there'll be less and less need to improve the kernel and the core services of the OS, and more effort will be spent on the UI, including popular applications, which means that more and more people will find the system useful. Most of them won't want to 'touch the actual kernel of it all', what they'll want is a usable system. Emacs, vi, development tools are fine for developers (I also decided to learn Emacs and vi -- not at the wizard level, but to be able to use them when needed), and it's reasonable not to expect the masses to use them, but it's not the same case with Linux (I hope :-) Kofa Homepage at http://www.math.bme.hu/~kofa - For PGP public key: send mail with the subject PGP Public Key Request or finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Kovacs Istvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(snip)
Emacs, vi, development tools are fine for developers (I also decided
to
learn Emacs and vi -- not at the wizard level, but to be able to use
them when needed), and it's reasonable not to expect the masses to use
them, but it's not the same case with Linux (I hope :-)
Emacs is far more useful than that... It's still the best
mailer/newsreader/text based office program in existence.
--
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Monday, May 01, 2000, 11:59:24 AM, Richard wrote:
Emacs is far more useful than that... It's still the best
mailer/newsreader/text based office program in existence.
That is highly debated, esp. for people who prefer not to have huge
bloated pigs in memory, don't want to learn a speech impediment on top of
other languages and actually prefer to have separate, specific programs for
their individual tasks. Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs to run
is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because at
least it /IS/ an OS and not an editor that is a wannabe script interpreter and
OS rolled into one.
My other computer's running Debian. {www.debian.org}
And this one is running, what? Amiga?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software
Hi, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [ snipped ... ] Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs to run is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because at least it /IS/ an OS and not an editor that is a wannabe script interpreter and OS rolled into one. Has anybody ever tried to graft emacs directly on top of oskit? _Then_ you would have your operating system. :) To keep this post slightly on-topic, you'll notice that my X-Newsreader: header says I'm using Gnus. That and mailcrypt does covers all my mail and news needs better than any other tool I've found so far. Still it has some niggles though. -- Graeme. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Life's not fair, I reply. But the root password helps. - BOFH
Re: Mail/news software
Christophe == Christophe TROESTLER [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christophe On Sat, 29 Apr 2000, Kovacs Istvan Christophe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What mail and news software do you recommend? The ideal software would be able to handle both mail and news in an integrated manner, place incoming and outgoing messages into folders automatically using header info, integrate with PGP/GPG, handle UU/MIME attachments, thread messages, fetch using POP3 and send via SMTP, would have a GUI that allows multiple windows to be open for composing and reading mail/articles, and would be easy to use and free of charge. Christophe Mew http://www.mew.org/ has all that (plus much Christophe more, particularly important for me is the ablility to Christophe manage several identities with associated headers, Christophe signature,...). But I won't hide that it is still Christophe under heavy development and _some_ of the more Christophe advanced features are still implemented rather Christophe crudely. Do you know how Mew compares with Gnus? -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mail/news software
I've looked at most of what is available and the closest thing to Yarn is the Tin news reader, they're almost identical. For email the best thing I've found is Mutt. Mutt can be configured with what I call 'tin style cursor keys' so I can go back and forth between readers without getting confused. I believe they both have everything you want except maybe GPG, but the newer versions may have it. I don't see much need for the GUI multiple windows thing, but you can run either one of the readers in multiple windows (xterms). If you ever find anything that works like Yarn or Tin and does both email and news let me know. :-) On Apr 29, 2000, Kovacs Istvan wrote: Hello! What mail and news software do you recommend? The ideal software would be able to handle both mail and news in an integrated manner, place incoming and outgoing messages into folders automatically using header info, integrate with PGP/GPG, handle UU/MIME attachments, thread messages, fetch using POP3 and send via SMTP, would have a GUI that allows multiple windows to be open for composing and reading mail/articles, and would be easy to use and free of charge. YARN, when used in combination with a SOUP package handler, is much like that (except for the GUI/multi-window part), but I haven't seen a Linux version. TIA, Kofa Homepage at http://www.math.bme.hu/~kofa - For PGP public key: send mail with the subject PGP Public Key Request or finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Mail/news software
On Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 05:05:38PM +0200, Kovacs Istvan wrote: What mail and news software do you recommend? Wel. The ideal software would be able to handle both mail and news in an integrated manner, place incoming and outgoing messages into folders automatically using header info, integrate with PGP/GPG, handle UU/MIME attachments, thread messages, fetch using POP3 and send via SMTP, would have a GUI that allows multiple windows to be open for composing and reading mail/articles, and would be easy to use and free of charge. Given your description and the fact that you sent with PMMail/2 I can say, with authority, nothing. There is not a thing out there that will suit what you describe nor what you're currently using, at least when it comes to mail. News apps on the unix side are fine but Mail apps, while powerful as backends, aren't worth a damn otherwise. I'll now let people try to prove me wrong but so far I have not seen a beast which comes close to the usability of Windows applications. Sure, they have the power to do some impressive stuff, but they don't have the interface to match. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: Mail/news software
On Sat, 29 Apr 2000, Kovacs Istvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What mail and news software do you recommend? The ideal software would be able to handle both mail and news in an integrated manner, place incoming and outgoing messages into folders automatically using header info, integrate with PGP/GPG, handle UU/MIME attachments, thread messages, fetch using POP3 and send via SMTP, would have a GUI that allows multiple windows to be open for composing and reading mail/articles, and would be easy to use and free of charge. Mew http://www.mew.org/ has all that (plus much more, particularly important for me is the ablility to manage several identities with associated headers, signature,...). But I won't hide that it is still under heavy development and _some_ of the more advanced features are still implemented rather crudely. ChriS
Re: Mail/news software
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given your description and the fact that you sent with PMMail/2 I can say, with authority, nothing. There is not a thing out there that will suit what you describe nor what you're currently using, at least when it comes to mail. News apps on the unix side are fine but Mail apps, while powerful as backends, aren't worth a damn otherwise. I'll now let people try to prove me wrong but so far I have not seen a beast which comes close to the usability of Windows applications. Sure, they have the power to do some impressive stuff, but they don't have the interface to match. I disagree and am continually posting info about an excellent email app called Ishmail. It was a commercial offerring but the source code has now been released. It is available on www.ishmail.com Ishmail is the best GUI email client I have used on any platform. The interface is very nice, but if you try it, do some configuration first - the default setup is not as pretty as it could be. I prefer the buttons at the bottom of the windows rather than at the sides. Which buttons show and where they are positioned is also configurable. I like the graphic representation of your folders in the top window. I like the way new messages in a folder is shown graphically too. I like the way it handles UNIX file-type mailfolders as well as MH directory-type folders. It handles MIME attachments well and has a wealth of configuration options. You can set it up so that it gives you a different identity for certain messages too. I use it to view mail which I have already collected using fetchmail/exim. It injects new mail directly to the MTA. It can also be used in a more traditional Windows style where it will fetch mail from POP/IMAP severs. I could go on, and on and on - I have tried a multitude of email apps and always come back to Ishmail. All it needs now if for someone to take on board the source code and maintain it properly. -- Phillip Deackes Using Storm Linux 2000
Re: Mail/news software
Christophe TROESTLER [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mew http://www.mew.org/ has all that (plus much more, particularly important for me is the ablility to manage several identities with associated headers, signature,...). I just went to the homepage and was welcomed with: In short, Mew is a great MIME mail reader for Emacs/XEmacs Ugh!!! I am very sorry if I offend, but I find emacs/xemacs about the most off-putting thing in Linux. Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp. -- Phillip Deackes Using Storm Linux 2000
Re: Mail/news software
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Phillip Deackes wrote: I disagree and am continually posting info about an excellent email app called Ishmail. It was a commercial offerring but the source code has now been released. It is available on www.ishmail.com I looked at this a while back (and debianized it in the process.) It's nice if you like that kind of thing but not my cup of tea. I can send you my .deb if you like but I've no interest in officially maintaining it. -- Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mail/news software
On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:13:19PM +0100, Phillip Deackes wrote: I am very sorry if I offend, but I find emacs/xemacs about the most off-putting thing in Linux. Show a newbie that and you will see the dust as he turns and runs back to the Windows camp. That is not always the case. I tried out vi and emacs when I started as a Linux newbie and did not like vi. I could not immediately understand it's logic. I could however immediately start using emacs. It has an easy and very good tutorial for newbies and after 5 years I am still learning and enjoying new features. Johann -- J.H. Spies, Hugenotestraat 29, Posbus 80, Franschhoek, 7690, South Africa Tel/Faks 021-876-2337 Sel/Cell 082-255-2388 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it. But whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it. Luke 9:24
Re: Mail/news software
Kofa writes: What mail and news software do you recommend? Gnus has all the features you list. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, Wisconsin
