Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Dear Mike and Tracy; I recommend "Halls" to get rid of that delicate cough! It sounds like it's spreading to others in the forum. Dan - Original Message - From: "Mike Tracy Holt" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 2:31 AM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Well, you would actually have to take a look at the 'archive' version of these lists and then type in this same subject line in order to find this thread. Have fun, Mike Couldn't find the message that you refer to, all I could find was this (extract) from the lists page http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/flists.php3 Support Lists These lists can be used for free support: The first list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is for beginners. There is also a list for more experienced users : [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, you wrote: I believe if you go back to the 'newbie archive' from the mandrake home page, you'll find a message in this thread that talks about newbies and the importance of talking about every aspect of computing and how it compares to the Linux- Mandrake model (not quite in those words). It's not off-topic to talk about how other OS's compare because most people are still using Windows if not dual booting. Mike Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ?
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* - some constructive suggestions
Hi guys. I must admit that I am sending much of my e-mail from root. You are correct in that this is generally a Bad Thing. However, I am making so many changes to my system at the moment, many of which have to be done as root, that it is impractical to keep changing. Once I have got this laptop sorted I'll be back to my user account. Thanks for your concern though guys #;-D Regards, Ozz. "L. H. LOO" wrote: I do not believe he is "sends e-mail from the root account". More likely he is just advertising himself. ( Ozz, I am just joking ;-), no hard feelings please) Regards At 14-08-2000 08:17 PM, you wrote: hey Austin, this is way of topic, but what kinda sysadmin sends e-mail from the root account? kinda dangerous if you ask me (of course no one would ever ask me, I are a newbie and proud)
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Me thinks you need to find the root of the message... I simply added a comment. cheers, Mike - Original Message - From: "Dan LaBine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 6:49 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Dear Mike and Tracy; I recommend "Halls" to get rid of that delicate cough! It sounds like it's spreading to others in the forum. Dan - Original Message - From: "Mike Tracy Holt" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 2:31 AM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Well, you would actually have to take a look at the 'archive' version of these lists and then type in this same subject line in order to find this thread. Have fun, Mike Couldn't find the message that you refer to, all I could find was this (extract) from the lists page http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/flists.php3 Support Lists These lists can be used for free support: The first list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is for beginners. There is also a list for more experienced users : [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, you wrote: I believe if you go back to the 'newbie archive' from the mandrake home page, you'll find a message in this thread that talks about newbies and the importance of talking about every aspect of computing and how it compares to the Linux- Mandrake model (not quite in those words). It's not off-topic to talk about how other OS's compare because most people are still using Windows if not dual booting. Mike Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ?
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Couldn't find the message that you refer to, all I could find was this (extract) from the lists page http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/flists.php3 Support Lists These lists can be used for free support: The first list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is for beginners. There is also a list for more experienced users : [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, you wrote: I believe if you go back to the 'newbie archive' from the mandrake home page, you'll find a message in this thread that talks about newbies and the importance of talking about every aspect of computing and how it compares to the Linux- Mandrake model (not quite in those words). It's not off-topic to talk about how other OS's compare because most people are still using Windows if not dual booting. Mike Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ? It is my impression that Mandrake provided this platform for Mandrake newbies to get and give assistance with problems that they might have, I feel that prolonged off-topic threads are an abuse of the service that they provide at no cost to the user. To use the forum to post abuse is IMHO a shameful abuse of a valuable resource. E mail addresses are visible in the headers, so can be abusive off-list there is no need to lower standards by entering into flame wars, it serves no useful purpose and only serves to discredit the group as a whole.
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Good morning I believe that this email was sent to me in error. Yes I have just signed up as a "newbie" but no I did not write the article below to which you are replying. Regards David Hulme -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 August 2000 10:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Couldn't find the message that you refer to, all I could find was this (extract) from the lists page http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/flists.php3 Support Lists These lists can be used for free support: The first list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is for beginners. There is also a list for more experienced users : [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, you wrote: I believe if you go back to the 'newbie archive' from the mandrake home page, you'll find a message in this thread that talks about newbies and the importance of talking about every aspect of computing and how it compares to the Linux- Mandrake model (not quite in those words). It's not off-topic to talk about how other OS's compare because most people are still using Windows if not dual booting. Mike Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ? It is my impression that Mandrake provided this platform for Mandrake newbies to get and give assistance with problems that they might have, I feel that prolonged off-topic threads are an abuse of the service that they provide at no cost to the user. To use the forum to post abuse is IMHO a shameful abuse of a valuable resource. E mail addresses are visible in the headers, so can be abusive off-list there is no need to lower standards by entering into flame wars, it serves no useful purpose and only serves to discredit the group as a whole.
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* - some constructive suggestions
Yes, that is a good idea. Thank you.
Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*]
There was??? Must've been a U.S. thing! M$ never told us about 'em. You're not thinking about upgrade version, R Ya? - Original Message - From: "Jaguar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*] Dan LaBine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Dan LaBine Okay, Okay, Now Kiss and Make Up ! The Pissing contest ends here and now ! The problem here is that you're all right to some extent, and that's causing all the disagreement. Point #1 ) Darren,..You're right about this forum being for Linux help news, but you're wrong about Windows95 being an operating system. But at the same time you're also right about it being an operating system. Confused, yet ? Not counting the upgrades of the various versions of Win95, there were THREE releases. The first, Win95 A, was a little too close to DOS for comfort, because they (Microsoft) hadn't quite nailed the 32 bit system. Win95 B came a long way towards that goal, and fixed an enormous batch of "Bugs". Win95 C (The last release), was the closest that Windows95 would come. Unfortunately, it wasn't as backwards compatible as most of us would I hate to tell ya...there were also versions D and E of Win95 Jaguar have liked. But Darren, if an O/S was just an O/S, we wouldn't be here having this conversation. Point #2 ) Tom,...You're right on the money. Good to see someone focused on the best O/S on the planet, so far! Point #3 ) Adrian,...You're absolutely right about Windows3.0, and 3.11, but way out in left field on Windows95. It was an O/S all by itself, but I will admit that it was a "Clunky" one that was full of problems. The first version of Win95 (as previously mentioned, it is referred to as "A"), was intended to pave the way to get rid of DOS. I aggree that it didn't do a great job, but it wasn't running on DOS. Sorry. If you're Win98 system crashes when you try to run PKZIP, then you haven't allowed sufficient memory resources to your DOS prompt ICON. It runs just fine on every system I've ever had it on, including Windows98 SE. The question here is why use it at all?? Why not Winzip?? Anyway, I just thought you guys could use a break from pissing each other off. I assume that the reason that your all here, instead of hanging around the Microsoft forums, is because you're all gratified in seeing that there are excellent alternatives to Windows. Linux is the first one that is becoming "User Friendly". I would like to think that it will become the next "Technological Marvel" accepted and used by Billions, er um, Millions of satisfied people. But why all the stress guys? What's it gonna prove? Don't think that just because someone writes an article in a magazine, that the article is a profound parable from a prophet or some thing. These guys make mistakes too. And remember that these articles are also the writers' opinion, not necessarily facts ! The whole thing with Linux is that you should learn , and that involves personal experience, and studying, and playing with it. That's half the fun. You can screw it up as much as you want, write new apps, fix old apps, anything, and Linux will keep coming back for more! Anyway, that's my four cents! By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss something?? - Original Message - From: "Darren Hall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 1:52 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point. - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ? It is my impression that Mandrake provided this platform for Mandrake newbies to get and give assistance with problems that they might have, I feel that prolonged off-topic threads are an abuse of the service that they provide at no cost to the user. To use the forum to post abuse is IMHO a shameful abuse of a valuable resource. E mail addresses are visible in the headers, so can be abusive off-list there is no need to lower standards by entering into flame wars, it serves no useful purpose and only serves to discredit the group as a whole.
Re: [Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*]]
Nope...since I am in Canada...:)
Nope again...they were/are FULL versions.
Anyways, probably the ONLY FULL version of Win95 that is available, _NEW_,
would be ver. D or E.
Jaguar
Dan LaBine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was??? Must've been a U.S. thing! M$ never told us about 'em. You're
not thinking about upgrade version, R Ya?
- Original Message -
From: "Jaguar" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*]
Dan LaBine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Dan LaBine
Okay, Okay, Now Kiss and Make Up ! The Pissing contest ends here and
now
!
The problem here is that you're all right to some extent, and that's
causing
all the disagreement.
Point #1 ) Darren,..You're right about this forum being for Linux help
news, but you're wrong about Windows95 being an operating system. But
at
the
same time you're also right about it being an operating system.
Confused,
yet ? Not counting the upgrades of the various versions of Win95, there
were
THREE releases. The first, Win95 A, was a little too close to DOS for
comfort, because they (Microsoft) hadn't quite nailed the 32 bit
system.
Win95 B came a long way towards that goal, and fixed an enormous batch
of
"Bugs". Win95 C (The last release), was the closest that Windows95
would
come. Unfortunately, it wasn't as backwards compatible as most of us
would
I hate to tell ya...there were also versions D and E of Win95
Jaguar
have liked. But Darren, if an O/S was just an O/S, we wouldn't be here
having this conversation.
Point #2 ) Tom,...You're right on the money. Good to see someone
focused
on
the best O/S on the planet, so far!
Point #3 ) Adrian,...You're absolutely right about Windows3.0, and
3.11,
but
way out in left field on Windows95. It was an O/S all by itself, but I
will
admit that it was a "Clunky" one that was full of problems. The first
version of Win95 (as previously mentioned, it is referred to as "A"),
was
intended to pave the way to get rid of DOS. I aggree that it didn't do
a
great job, but it wasn't running on DOS. Sorry. If you're Win98 system
crashes when you try to run PKZIP, then you haven't allowed sufficient
memory resources to your DOS prompt ICON. It runs just fine on every
system
I've ever had it on, including Windows98 SE. The question here is why
use
it
at all?? Why not Winzip??
Anyway, I just thought you guys could use a break from pissing each
other
off. I assume that the reason that your all here, instead of hanging
around
the Microsoft forums, is because you're all gratified in seeing that
there
are excellent alternatives to Windows. Linux is the first one that is
becoming "User Friendly". I would like to think that it will become the
next
"Technological Marvel" accepted and used by Billions, er um, Millions
of
satisfied people. But
why all the stress guys? What's it gonna prove? Don't think that just
because someone writes an article in a magazine, that the article is a
profound parable from a prophet or some thing. These guys make mistakes
too.
And remember that these articles are also the writers' opinion, not
necessarily facts ! The whole thing with Linux is that you should learn
,
and that involves personal experience, and studying, and playing with
it.
That's half the fun. You can screw it up as much as you want, write new
apps, fix old apps, anything, and Linux will keep coming back for more!
Anyway, that's my four cents!
By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss
something??
- Original Message -
From: "Darren Hall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on
Windows.
2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on
operating
system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have
about
the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would
prefer
to
not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a
mailing
list
for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may
have
a
severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience
and
personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has
something
to
offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point.
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote:
It would be bet
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
I believe if you go back to the 'newbie archive' from the mandrake home page, you'll find a message in this thread that talks about newbies and the importance of talking about every aspect of computing and how it compares to the Linux- Mandrake model (not quite in those words). It's not off-topic to talk about how other OS's compare because most people are still using Windows if not dual booting. Mike Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ? It is my impression that Mandrake provided this platform for Mandrake newbies to get and give assistance with problems that they might have, I feel that prolonged off-topic threads are an abuse of the service that they provide at no cost to the user. To use the forum to post abuse is IMHO a shameful abuse of a valuable resource. E mail addresses are visible in the headers, so can be abusive off-list there is no need to lower standards by entering into flame wars, it serves no useful purpose and only serves to discredit the group as a whole.
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
I'm quite sure Mandrake dosen't mind all the Windows bashing one bit. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aren't we all forgetting a couple of important issues here ? 1) What is the name of this group ? 2) Who hosts it ? It is my impression that Mandrake provided this platform for Mandrake newbies to get and give assistance with problems that they might have, I feel that prolonged off-topic threads are an abuse of the service that they provide at no cost to the user. To use the forum to post abuse is IMHO a shameful abuse of a valuable resource. E mail addresses are visible in the headers, so can be abusive off-list there is no need to lower standards by entering into flame wars, it serves no useful purpose and only serves to discredit the group as a whole. John Join the Linux Revolution - Help push rocks uphill !!!
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
We have one Novell server at work, one NT server, and one Linux server, and we're getting a second Liunx server. (yay!) But everyone's workstation currently has to run Windows, though I am hinting broadly about how grand a Linux workstation or two might be. ;) Mark Weaver wrote: we don't have that problem where I work. We're using Groupwise. It's a lot more bullet proof than Outlook and much nicer to administrate. Thank God for Novell technology. It ain't Linux, but it's pretty darn close. Hey Kathleen, Hi Roman Also, Outlook sux. :P I have to use it at work. Why do you have to use it at work ? Can't you download another email client ? Roman We have to use it becuse our small company wants everyone using the same software, and there is a temporary moratorium on internet downloads due to some virus problems in the past (before I was hired! it wasn't meee!) Kathleen, posting from BeMail tonight -- Kathleen Dickason Registered Linux user #182139
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Wow Kathleen...sounds like you all are going to get there before we do. There's a project in the works right now that will be using a Linux Mandrake machine as a database warehouse and server, but other than that I don't see the management allowing a workstation change-over anytime in the near, or sometimes distant future. Wish they would though cause it would make administering the network and the user-workstations alot easier and less demanding of our time. That would allow us much more time to develope in-house solutions. Good luck and keep on plugin the Penguin. O, and please stay in touch and let me know when you begin the switch. I and the rest of the IT staff where I work will be eagerly awaiting news. -- Mark ** =/\= No Penguins were harmed | ** _||_ in the making of this | ** =\/= message...| Registered Linux user #182496 On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Kathleen Dickason wrote: We have one Novell server at work, one NT server, and one Linux server, and we're getting a second Liunx server. (yay!) But everyone's workstation currently has to run Windows, though I am hinting broadly about how grand a Linux workstation or two might be. ;) Mark Weaver wrote: we don't have that problem where I work. We're using Groupwise. It's a lot more bullet proof than Outlook and much nicer to administrate. Thank God for Novell technology. It ain't Linux, but it's pretty darn close. Hey Kathleen, Hi Roman Also, Outlook sux. :P I have to use it at work. Why do you have to use it at work ? Can't you download another email client ? Roman We have to use it becuse our small company wants everyone using the same software, and there is a temporary moratorium on internet downloads due to some virus problems in the past (before I was hired! it wasn't meee!) Kathleen, posting from BeMail tonight -- Kathleen Dickason Registered Linux user #182139
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point. - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a little brain fade on my part ;) Chill out a little. In the meantime, I hear cooker's fixin to be in an internal code freeze in 'bout 2 weeks. KDE2 and XF-4 should be release grade by then also. My guess, look for Mandrake 7.2 come late September/early October. XF-4, KDE2, and the fixable problems fixed with those some of y'all had with 7.1 -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Nickolas Koehne wrote: You're right. All windows OS's before 95 and NT were just GUI's for MS-DOS. The easiest way for this to make sense to most people is that you had to install MS-DOS before you could actually install Windows. On newer versions of Windows, you need not install DOS anymore. You do need to configure the partition on which you're going to install Windows as a DOS partition before you install Windows, though. -- Kathleen Dickason Registered Linux user #182139 Sorry to butt in; you don't really have to configure any type of partition when installing Windows. You can start with an unformatted drive, then you choose if you want to use FAT 16 or FAT 32 for the filesystem (do you want to enable large disk support?). M$ sort of did a number on the public with their goofy naming scheme; 'Dos' is something similar to the bash, sh or whatever you *nix shell you want to think of, but they also named their kernel 'Dos'. Now with newer Windows products, the Dos shell is mostly just a crippled way of doing things from the command line. It's not necessary, but it exits anyway. Mike (if I totally missed the topic, just ignore this)
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
who is being racist here. windows sucks and that's the truth. no racism there. :) -- Mark ** =/\= No Penguins were harmed | ** _||_ in the making of this | ** =\/= message...| Registered Linux user #182496 On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Darren Hall wrote: Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point. - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a little brain fade on my part ;) Chill out a little. In the meantime, I hear cooker's fixin to be in an internal code freeze in 'bout 2 weeks. KDE2 and XF-4 should be release grade by then also. My guess, look for Mandrake 7.2 come late September/early October. XF-4, KDE2, and the fixable problems fixed with those some of y'all had with 7.1 -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, you wrote: Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. So says you. No public list, news or mail, is a forum (or should be) for personal attacks, nor will ever be devoid of semi-related topics. Disagreement yes, but to do so by denigrating the character of another poster ... *NO* ! Calling somebody else's (not even mine, don't know why i even feel like tryin to educate you) opinion as: "It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant." ...is more of a reflection on you than anything else and has no place in a public forum. _Which is all I damn said to begin with._ and then in the interests of harmony, I tried to change the subject. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Matter of opinion, it's a GUI that runs on top of DOS. Just the same as the X-Windows server runs on UN*X (linux). and since most Linux users are fresh from, still dual boot W9x, it IS on topic. 'Specially since UN*X is not 640K limited, and new users might benefit from understanding that fact. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. As of win 98, still runs on top of the Disk Operating System (DOS 7.1) that has a 640K limit. To clarify the basis of my opinion, I was a W95 and W98 M$ beta tester, M$ educated ;) I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. good, not another word after this from me either This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Well, here you're definitely out of whack. Any human exchange of ideas and experience is subject to error/mistake. Personally i've learned more by my mistakes and errors, and those of others, than I believe I'da ever learned from perfect people. yeah, that means sometimes i post wrong stuff. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point. On that i agree, and since this is a UN*X list, I don't believe I've been remiss in pointing out some social value that winblows still has ; My best advice is that if you're already stuck with it, wear it out as best you can : I still use it for burning CD's and flyin airplanes... just call me SkyKing, you do remember Penny too, don't ya ? ... ;- and what'a hell has 'racist' got to do with any of this.. bye -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a little brain fade on my part ;) Chill out a little. In the meantime, I hear cooker's fixin to be in an internal code freeze in 'bout 2 weeks. KDE2 and XF-4 should be release grade by then also. My guess, look for Mandrake 7.2 come late September/early October. XF-4, KDE2, and the fixable problems fixed with those some of y'all had with 7.1 -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in wi
Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*]
Dan LaBine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Dan LaBine Okay, Okay, Now Kiss and Make Up ! The Pissing contest ends here and now ! The problem here is that you're all right to some extent, and that's causing all the disagreement. Point #1 ) Darren,..You're right about this forum being for Linux help news, but you're wrong about Windows95 being an operating system. But at the same time you're also right about it being an operating system. Confused, yet ? Not counting the upgrades of the various versions of Win95, there were THREE releases. The first, Win95 A, was a little too close to DOS for comfort, because they (Microsoft) hadn't quite nailed the 32 bit system. Win95 B came a long way towards that goal, and fixed an enormous batch of "Bugs". Win95 C (The last release), was the closest that Windows95 would come. Unfortunately, it wasn't as backwards compatible as most of us would I hate to tell ya...there were also versions D and E of Win95 Jaguar have liked. But Darren, if an O/S was just an O/S, we wouldn't be here having this conversation. Point #2 ) Tom,...You're right on the money. Good to see someone focused on the best O/S on the planet, so far! Point #3 ) Adrian,...You're absolutely right about Windows3.0, and 3.11, but way out in left field on Windows95. It was an O/S all by itself, but I will admit that it was a "Clunky" one that was full of problems. The first version of Win95 (as previously mentioned, it is referred to as "A"), was intended to pave the way to get rid of DOS. I aggree that it didn't do a great job, but it wasn't running on DOS. Sorry. If you're Win98 system crashes when you try to run PKZIP, then you haven't allowed sufficient memory resources to your DOS prompt ICON. It runs just fine on every system I've ever had it on, including Windows98 SE. The question here is why use it at all?? Why not Winzip?? Anyway, I just thought you guys could use a break from pissing each other off. I assume that the reason that your all here, instead of hanging around the Microsoft forums, is because you're all gratified in seeing that there are excellent alternatives to Windows. Linux is the first one that is becoming "User Friendly". I would like to think that it will become the next "Technological Marvel" accepted and used by Billions, er um, Millions of satisfied people. But why all the stress guys? What's it gonna prove? Don't think that just because someone writes an article in a magazine, that the article is a profound parable from a prophet or some thing. These guys make mistakes too. And remember that these articles are also the writers' opinion, not necessarily facts ! The whole thing with Linux is that you should learn , and that involves personal experience, and studying, and playing with it. That's half the fun. You can screw it up as much as you want, write new apps, fix old apps, anything, and Linux will keep coming back for more! Anyway, that's my four cents! By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss something?? - Original Message - From: "Darren Hall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 1:52 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. That is my only point. - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a little brain fade on my part ;) Chill out a little. In the meantime, I hear cooker's fixin to be in an internal code freeze in 'bout 2 weeks. KDE2 and XF-4 should be release grade by then also. My guess, look for Mandrake 7.2 come late September/early October. XF-4, KDE2, and the fixable problems fixed with those some of y'all had with 7.1 -- ~~ To
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Dan LaBine wrote: From: Dan LaBine Okay, Okay, Now Kiss and Make Up ! The Pissing contest ends here and now ! The problem here is that you're all right to some extent, and that's causing all the disagreement. Point #1 ) Darren,..You're right about this forum being for Linux help news, but you're wrong about Windows95 being an operating system. But at the same time you're also right about it being an operating system. Confused, yet ? Not counting the upgrades of the various versions of Win95, there were THREE releases. The first, Win95 A, was a little too close to DOS for comfort, because they (Microsoft) hadn't quite nailed the 32 bit system. Win95 B came a long way towards that goal, and fixed an enormous batch of "Bugs". Win95 C (The last release), was the closest that Windows95 would come. Unfortunately, it wasn't as backwards compatible as most of us would have liked. But Darren, if an O/S was just an O/S, we wouldn't be here having this conversation. Point #2 ) Tom,...You're right on the money. Good to see someone focused on the best O/S on the planet, so far! Point #3 ) Adrian,...You're absolutely right about Windows3.0, and 3.11, but way out in left field on Windows95. It was an O/S all by itself, but I will admit that it was a "Clunky" one that was full of problems. The first version of Win95 (as previously mentioned, it is referred to as "A"), was intended to pave the way to get rid of DOS. I aggree that it didn't do a great job, but it wasn't running on DOS. Sorry. If you're Win98 system crashes when you try to run PKZIP, then you haven't allowed sufficient memory resources to your DOS prompt ICON. It runs just fine on every system I've ever had it on, including Windows98 SE. The question here is why use it at all?? Why not Winzip?? Anyway, I just thought you guys could use a break from pissing each other off. I assume that the reason that your all here, instead of hanging around the Microsoft forums, is because you're all gratified in seeing that there are excellent alternatives to Windows. Linux is the first one that is becoming "User Friendly". I would like to think that it will become the next "Technological Marvel" accepted and used by Billions, er um, Millions of satisfied people. But why all the stress guys? What's it gonna prove? Don't think that just because someone writes an article in a magazine, that the article is a profound parable from a prophet or some thing. These guys make mistakes too. And remember that these articles are also the writers' opinion, not necessarily facts ! The whole thing with Linux is that you should learn , and that involves personal experience, and studying, and playing with it. That's half the fun. You can screw it up as much as you want, write new apps, fix old apps, anything, and Linux will keep coming back for more! Anyway, that's my four cents! By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss something?? The delicate cough thing started a while back. it was the beginning of this thread, although not the original subject.
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
When I had to re-install Win98 recently (don't ask! heh), the installer checked to see whether the partition had DOS formatting or VFAT or whatever... Now I'm confused! Kathleen, with way too many OSes You do need to configure the partition on which you're going to install Windows as a DOS partition before you install Windows, though. -- Kathleen Dickason Registered Linux user #182139 Sorry to butt in; you don't really have to configure any type of partition when installing Windows. You can start with an unformatted drive, then you choose if you want to use FAT 16 or FAT 32 for the filesystem (do you want to enable large disk support?). M$ sort of did a number on the public with their goofy naming scheme; 'Dos' is something similar to the bash, sh or whatever you *nix shell you want to think of, but they also named their kernel 'Dos'. Now with newer Windows products, the Dos shell is mostly just a crippled way of doing things from the command line. It's not necessary, but it exits anyway. Mike (if I totally missed the topic, just ignore this)
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
So says you. No public list, news or mail, is a forum (or should be) for personal attacks, nor will ever be devoid of semi-related topics. You're right Tom, no conference is devoid of off-topic msgs. But when you start defending people's rights to post them the road to chaos is a short one. Given that most of the msgs I've seen in the past couple days refer to AOL (doesn't support Linux) and Windows, I'd say this conference has strayed WAY beyond the occasional off-topic (or using your term "semi-related" msg. BTW, when this happens in a conference, the knowledgable people are the first to bail out. Since this is a conference that people sign up for to get advice, it doesn't bode well for the advice that will be given unless it gets back on track. Cheers --- Larry
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Mark Weaver wrote: Dan LaBine wrote: By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss something?? The delicate cough thing started a while back. it was the beginning of this thread, although not the original subject. That was me, stomping my widdle feet in the subject line. *blush* Kathleen
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, you wrote: So says you. No public list, news or mail, is a forum (or should be) for personal attacks, nor will ever be devoid of semi-related topics. You're right Tom, no conference is devoid of off-topic msgs. But when you start defending people's rights to post them not so much defending Larry, it's just an unavoidable part of havin human's post to any list and often a fortunate one the road to chaos is a short one. Given that most of the msgs I've seen in the past couple days refer to AOL (doesn't support Linux) and Windows, I'd say this conference has strayed WAY beyond the occasional off-topic (or using your term "semi-related" msg. i don't agree. I believe most linux users, new or not so new, still dual boot, i do. In that context, and considering 99.% of new users come from windoze, I believe it's entirely on-topic, 'specially on a 'newbie' list, to discuss every facet of the process of converting from windoze/or going entirely linux, and the differences. just my NSHO. I'm of course willing to bend to the majority lead, but I think you'll find the word 'windows' in the M$ sense, more times on the developers list than on the newbies list. do an archive search BTW, when this happens in a conference, the knowledgable people are the first to bail out. Since this is a conference that people sign up for to get advice, it doesn't bode well for the advice that will be given unless it gets back on track. don't quite agree again. it's just as well that people see there's nothin but opinions expressed here, advice should be suspect, prob'ly subjective. Cheers --- Larry bon noche, tom -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*]
yes...but were they any better than B and C? Seems to be that if M$ wouldn't have worked so hard at making the OS so compatable with every blasted application designer and his brother Windows wouldn't be so darn unstable. Just another one of linuxs' strengths. If you want to write software for Linux you've got to write it so that it will get along with the OS. kind-a like too many hands in the .dll cookie jar. Know what I mean? They should have stuck with what worked. Windows 3.1 was the last good, and stable OS that M$ made. Everything after that kinda went south. -- Mark ** =/\= No Penguins were harmed | ** _||_ in the making of this | ** =\/= message...| Registered Linux user #182496 On 12 Aug 2000, Jaguar wrote: Dan LaBine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Dan LaBine Okay, Okay, Now Kiss and Make Up ! The Pissing contest ends here and now ! The problem here is that you're all right to some extent, and that's causing all the disagreement. Point #1 ) Darren,..You're right about this forum being for Linux help news, but you're wrong about Windows95 being an operating system. But at the same time you're also right about it being an operating system. Confused, yet ? Not counting the upgrades of the various versions of Win95, there were THREE releases. The first, Win95 A, was a little too close to DOS for comfort, because they (Microsoft) hadn't quite nailed the 32 bit system. Win95 B came a long way towards that goal, and fixed an enormous batch of "Bugs". Win95 C (The last release), was the closest that Windows95 would come. Unfortunately, it wasn't as backwards compatible as most of us would I hate to tell ya...there were also versions D and E of Win95 Jaguar have liked. But Darren, if an O/S was just an O/S, we wouldn't be here having this conversation. Point #2 ) Tom,...You're right on the money. Good to see someone focused on the best O/S on the planet, so far! Point #3 ) Adrian,...You're absolutely right about Windows3.0, and 3.11, but way out in left field on Windows95. It was an O/S all by itself, but I will admit that it was a "Clunky" one that was full of problems. The first version of Win95 (as previously mentioned, it is referred to as "A"), was intended to pave the way to get rid of DOS. I aggree that it didn't do a great job, but it wasn't running on DOS. Sorry. If you're Win98 system crashes when you try to run PKZIP, then you haven't allowed sufficient memory resources to your DOS prompt ICON. It runs just fine on every system I've ever had it on, including Windows98 SE. The question here is why use it at all?? Why not Winzip?? Anyway, I just thought you guys could use a break from pissing each other off. I assume that the reason that your all here, instead of hanging around the Microsoft forums, is because you're all gratified in seeing that there are excellent alternatives to Windows. Linux is the first one that is becoming "User Friendly". I would like to think that it will become the next "Technological Marvel" accepted and used by Billions, er um, Millions of satisfied people. But why all the stress guys? What's it gonna prove? Don't think that just because someone writes an article in a magazine, that the article is a profound parable from a prophet or some thing. These guys make mistakes too. And remember that these articles are also the writers' opinion, not necessarily facts ! The whole thing with Linux is that you should learn , and that involves personal experience, and studying, and playing with it. That's half the fun. You can screw it up as much as you want, write new apps, fix old apps, anything, and Linux will keep coming back for more! Anyway, that's my four cents! By the way, whats all this about a "delicate cough"? Did I miss something?? - Original Message - From: "Darren Hall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 1:52 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* Yes i agree. But, 1. this is for linux news not personal views on Windows. 2. The claims (which are obviously biased) that Win9x is not on operating system is just rediculous. Despite any personal feeling you may have about the OS it is still plain and simply, an Operating System. I would prefer to not spend my time dealing with this subject anymore. This is a mailing list for people seeking knowledge and one bad "opinion" from a person may have a severe effect on someone just starting out. Limiting their experience and personal growth in everything that is out there. Each OS has something to offer. Let us try to not be so racist. Tha
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
It was not my intention to become part of this silly "is it an operating system thread" but since you've demonstrated yourself as being one of the reasonable, and knowledgable folks here I'll comment further. i don't agree. I believe most linux users, new or not so new, still dual boot, i do. In that context, and considering 99.% of new users come from windoze, I believe it's entirely on-topic, 'specially on a 'newbie' list, to discuss every facet of the process of converting from windoze/or going entirely linux, and the differences. just my NSHO. I'm of course willing to bend to the Let it be written, let it be done :-) This should be THE definition of what is/isn't on/off topic. Note, however, that you said "process of converting", not a debate about what windoze is/isn't. It's largely irrelevant to "converting" as I'm sure you'd agree. I know I'm starting to split hairs here but it also doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the current thread has long since run its course and it has started to get (not your involvement) heated...and a complete waste of time. don't quite agree again. it's just as well that people see there's nothin but opinions expressed here, advice should be suspect, prob'ly subjective. Possibly I don't understand this conference. I subscribed, and have seen many others express that they subscribed, when I installed Linux on my machine and wanted to know more about it. If this is a general conference for the discussion of all things computer then fine, let's just deal with opinions on any topic. What do you think of wireless communications? Is Linux better suited to Handheld devices than Windows? What will the year 2010 bring? But if it's supposed to be about helping people establish Linux as their operating system of choice, shouldn't "opinions" be constrained to those that help people "in the process of converting..."? Just to remain "on topic", has anyone here gotten a SupraMax 56i PCImodem to function under Linux? It's not a Winmodem but the standard advice (using setserial) for getting it acknowledged by Linux (Mandrake 7.0 or RedHat 6.2) doesn't seem to work. Cheers --- Larry
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Correct as far as you go Adrian, W98 is also still just A GUI runnin on top of good 'ol outdated 640K DOS. I don't know about win2k, don't have it don't want it. 'Bout all that windoze 9x is still the best at is a game platform, and everything I've read says W98's much better than win2k for that. DOS isn't hidden in any W9x, just edit MSDOS.SYS to BootGUI=0, and you'll boot to DOS 7.x (W98 is DOS 7.1). Add 'Logo=0' and you can watch it doin it. If you boot to DOS in any other fashion (eg, DosMode, F8 at boot), a quick run of 'mem /c' will show there's some windoze overhead still present. If you edit msdos.sys to eliminate Windoze, 'mem /c' will show no Windoze overhead present. [note: all W9x CD's are not created equal, some will provide a pure DOS prompt by using F8 at boot] This 'pure' DOS prompt is suitable for even flashing your bios, MOF, I prefer it to doin flashes from a floppy. It also will sometimes get a DOS based program runnin which refuses to work right in DosMode, or F8 Which is another reason to keep Windoze around, 'least for a while ;) That and rippin the TT fonts to use with Linux, so don't microwave those old W9x CD's just yet ;- -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
really? which part is wrong? oh, my feelings Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, Darren Hall wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. Could you please elaborate ? Adrian's answer seems "competant" enough, and I can see no glaring errors in it. But I'd like to learn more... Ron the Frog, on the banks of the Paraguay River. - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- My karma just ran over your dogma. --- http://personales.conexion.com.py/~rolgiati ---
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Sorry to break into this thread. It caught my attention. A friend of mine told me a story about the birth of Win95. A few guys who worked for a company were bought by "MickeySoft" ... one of the guys for this purchased company thought it would be interesting to move DOS to 32 bit. As the story goes ... Mickey managers were scared of Billy Bob and didn't want to do the project.Billy had already told the press that NT was the product. Period. The maverick decided to do it on his own. Eventually the topic came up in a meeting ... managers said the work wasn't possible. The maverick spoke up and said the project was about complete. Billy Bob - seeing dollars in his eyes - gave the project a thumbs up. And that ... according to this story ... is how Win95 was born. Now - somewhere - someone has written this in a book - anyone know the title? Something about 'guys in the attic' ... Just thought it was funny that the argument of Win95 being an OS is still debated. But the above may explain why win95/98/ME development has been so separated from Win NT. -Original Message- From: Darren Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 12:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
You can just press the esc key to watch it boot as well. BTW, how do you run 32 bit applications in DOS? - Original Message - From: "Tom Brinkman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 3:35 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Correct as far as you go Adrian, W98 is also still just A GUI runnin on top of good 'ol outdated 640K DOS. I don't know about win2k, don't have it don't want it. 'Bout all that windoze 9x is still the best at is a game platform, and everything I've read says W98's much better than win2k for that. DOS isn't hidden in any W9x, just edit MSDOS.SYS to BootGUI=0, and you'll boot to DOS 7.x (W98 is DOS 7.1). Add 'Logo=0' and you can watch it doin it. If you boot to DOS in any other fashion (eg, DosMode, F8 at boot), a quick run of 'mem /c' will show there's some windoze overhead still present. If you edit msdos.sys to eliminate Windoze, 'mem /c' will show no Windoze overhead present. [note: all W9x CD's are not created equal, some will provide a pure DOS prompt by using F8 at boot] This 'pure' DOS prompt is suitable for even flashing your bios, MOF, I prefer it to doin flashes from a floppy. It also will sometimes get a DOS based program runnin which refuses to work right in DosMode, or F8 Which is another reason to keep Windoze around, 'least for a while ;) That and rippin the TT fonts to use with Linux, so don't microwave those old W9x CD's just yet ;- -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Tom, actually, i'm totally wrong as someone on the list pointed out to me. i made myself look like an idiot =) but i'm touched that he (she? i didn't pay attention) cares about me. =) my only reason for suspecting that more happened between win95 and win98 is things such as my experience with PKZIP. i never had win95 at home, just at work and used PKZIP there all the time. when i got win98 at home PKZIP crashed, i spent forever trying to figure out how to configure my DOS window settings, or whatever, as i figured that was the reason. then i went to PKWares site found out they did have a new program for win98. so that is what makes me think something of substance took place between 95 98. i also know nothing about win2000... once i understand Linux i'm sure i will use win98 only for photoshop games, so i don't think i'm going to spend any effort on win2000. i have heard third hand reports of people who like win saying win2000 stinks... but have neither seen a 2000 system nor talked first had to anyone who has one. and more comments below.. Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1:35:35 PM 8/11/00 On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: Correct as far as you go Adrian, W98 is also still just A GUI runnin on top of good 'ol outdated 640K DOS. I don't know about win2k, don't have it don't want it. 'Bout all that windoze 9x is still the best at is a game platform, and everything I've read says W98's much better than win2k for that. DOS isn't hidden in any W9x, just edit MSDOS.SYS to BootGUI=0, and you'll boot to DOS 7.x (W98 is DOS 7.1). Add 'Logo=0' and you can watch it doin it. If you boot to DOS in any other fashion (eg, DosMode, F8 at boot), a quick run of 'mem /c' will show there's some windoze overhead still present. If you edit msdos.sys to eliminate Windoze, 'mem /c' will show no Windoze overhead present. [note: all W9x CD's are not created equal, some will provide a pure DOS prompt by using F8 at boot] my comment: h i thought i knew all the MSDOS.SYS tricks =) i never tried booting to DOS as you describe, i only use the F8 or boot option menu. i will have to try this out. thanks for the tip (right now there are about 500 people going "this is a linux list!") This 'pure' DOS prompt is suitable for even flashing your bios, MOF, I prefer it to doin flashes from a floppy. It also will sometimes get a DOS based program runnin which refuses to work right in DosMode, or F8 Which is another reason to keep Windoze around, 'least for a while ;) That and rippin the TT fonts to use with Linux, so don't microwave those old W9x CD's just yet ;- -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] me again: i agree, tho i hate win98 in may ways, it does have good things about it. i still have a second computer, MSDOS 6.2/Win3.1. i like to fire it up and talk to my teenager friends about "the old days" have a better one adrian
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Well, win95 isn't very much dos, but I will admid the same dos core is underneath all the gui memory useing stuff. I didn't know about the pkzip thing, but I know laplink 95 will not run under 98. I found a rumor you might be intrested in: Did you here about microsofts encription program? It turns out it is programed to be easy to break, for someone who has a universal decripter. Microsoft got off, because there was no way to prove it was not just a bug. IE sends back information to microsoft? I knew it can be made to do that by microsoft, but I dont think it does it every time. - Original Message - From: Adrian Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 6:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, you wrote: It would be better if you actually researched something before you went spouting off. You really have done an outstanding job at making yourself look completely incompetant. We don't need personal attacks here either. Everyone is _entitled_ to give their opinions, experience, etc... right or wrong Gawd I know sometimes it's just a little brain fade on my part ;) Chill out a little. In the meantime, I hear cooker's fixin to be in an internal code freeze in 'bout 2 weeks. KDE2 and XF-4 should be release grade by then also. My guess, look for Mandrake 7.2 come late September/early October. XF-4, KDE2, and the fixable problems fixed with those some of y'all had with 7.1 -- ~~ Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Adrian Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] *delicate cough* somebody said: "Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes." nooo. don't make me go balistic. win95 is not an OS. win95 still ran on DOS, M$ just changed the name of many of the DOS files so no one would know it. this was on of the things some of the computer magazines pointed out when win95 came out (along with the fact that IE took an inventory of the software on your computer sent that information to M$ when you logged on the internet). of course, M$ denied this at first, but eventually admitted it was true. it may have a new file system, but it's not an OS - they just did a slightly better job of hiding DOS. i think there were actually more changes made in win98, under the hood. one case in point. PKZIP, the command line version, will run fine in a DOS box under win95, under win98 however it will just crash. PKWare had to come up with a new program to run PKZIP from a command line in win98. that's my opinion and you all know what opinions are like *haha* adrian Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
i have never used WinNT, tho i almost installed it when i went to Linux - then decided not to due to lack of drive space for 3 operating systems. when i get a larger drive for my OSs i want to do a Win98/Linux/WinNT system so i can learn NT, but as you allude to, i was under the impression that NT is a new OS with almost nothing from DOS, this comes only from reading the odd artical however, as i say - not from hands on experience. now that you tell this story, it sounds familer to me. i don't recall any specifics however. Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2:58:28 PM 8/11/00 Sorry to break into this thread. It caught my attention. A friend of mine told me a story about the birth of Win95. A few guys who worked for a company were bought by "MickeySoft" ... one of the guys for this purchased company thought it would be interesting to move DOS to 32 bit. As the story goes ... Mickey managers were scared of Billy Bob and didn't want to do the project.Billy had already told the press that NT was the product. Period. The maverick decided to do it on his own. Eventually the topic came up in a meeting ... managers said the work wasn't possible. The maverick spoke up and said the project was about complete. Billy Bob - seeing dollars in his eyes - gave the project a thumbs up. And that ... according to this story ... is how Win95 was born. Now - somewhere - someone has written this in a book - anyone know the title? Something about 'guys in the attic' ... Just thought it was funny that the argument of Win95 being an OS is still debated. But the above may explain why win95/98/ME development has been so separated from Win NT.
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
"Carjam" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4:11:49 AM 8/11/00 IE sends back information to microsoft? I knew it can be made to do that by microsoft, but I dont think it does it every time. adrian replys: i dont' know the specifics actually. the story as i read it is this. when Win95 first came out, one of the computer mags (PC World or one like it, i don't remember now) said that the first time you logged onto the internet with IE, IE would check the software on your computer, see if you were registered and pick up the seriel number, and send this information to M$. it seemed that they said this only happened the first time you logged on. M$ initially denied it, then later - in this same magazine, it was written that M$ admitted, yes this is true - but this function can be disabled. the magazines response was 1. how to disable it is not documented 2. since no one knows it's happening, why would you try to disable it? having never owned a Win95 system, only Win3.1 98 i don't know the actual specifics (how to disable, does this really happen, etc.) i have never heard any rumors, tales, stories etc that IE still does this. this was the first thing that made me suspicious of M$. truth be told, i liked Win3.1. i know, call me sick. Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Hey Kathleen, Hi Roman Also, Outlook sux. :P I have to use it at work. Why do you have to use it at work ? Can't you download another email client ? Roman We have to use it becuse our small company wants everyone using the same software, and there is a temporary moratorium on internet downloads due to some virus problems in the past (before I was hired! it wasn't meee!) Kathleen, posting from BeMail tonight
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Its okay Kathleen! I've still got my old vintage 1987 Atari Mega ST with 4 megs of Ram and Motorola 68000 CPU running @ 16mhz. grin Go you! :) (4 whole megs! hee! for the time that rocked) :) As for the Amiga, I owned several in my younger days, they were simply great machines for their time. (and if anyone is watching Linux Today, you'll have seen an article about new things from the Amiga crowd. Still going strong after all these years!) YES Oh well. Off news-list/topic, and I apologise to the easily offended in advance... ;-) -- /\ DarkLord \/ Kathleen, who is really going to post about LInux again next, honest
RE: [newbie] *delicate cough*
get a new hard drive! that's what i did! *grin* master 10 gig drive - win 98 linux mandrake 7.1 slave 13.6 gig drive - BeOS freeBSD whoknowswhat next ;) i have never used WinNT, tho i almost installed it when i went to Linux - then decided not to due to lack of drive space for 3 operating systems. when i get a larger drive for my OSs i want to do a Win98/ Linux/WinNT system so i can learn NT, but as you allude to, i was under the impression that NT is a new OS with almost nothing from DOS, this comes only from reading the odd artical however, as i say - not from hands on experience. now that you tell this story, it sounds familer to me. i don't recall any specifics however. Adrian Smith 'de telepone dude Telecom Dept. x 7042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2:58:28 PM 8/11/00 Sorry to break into this thread. It caught my attention. A friend of mine told me a story about the birth of Win95. A few guys who worked for a company were bought by "MickeySoft" ... one of the guys for this purchased company thought it would be interesting to move DOS to 32 bit. As the story goes ... Mickey managers were scared of Billy Bob and didn't want to do the project.Billy had already told the press that NT was the product. Period. The maverick decided to do it on his own. Eventually the topic came up in a meeting ... managers said the work wasn't possible. The maverick spoke up and said the project was about complete. Billy Bob - seeing dollars in his eyes - gave the project a thumbs up. And that ... according to this story ... is how Win95 was born. Now - somewhere - someone has written this in a book - anyone know the title? Something about 'guys in the attic' ... Just thought it was funny that the argument of Win95 being an OS is still debated. But the above may explain why win95/98/ME development has been so separated from Win NT.
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Hey Kathleen, Also, Outlook sux. :P I have to use it at work. Why do you have to use it at work ? Can't you download another email client ? Roman
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Kathleen Dickason wrote: snip The post you replied to was one mainly reminiscing about Tandy (I had a WP2!), Atari, and Amiga. *nostalgic sigh* Not mainly M$ bashing. Sorry, nice list peoples. I wanted to get that off my chest. I shall go sit down and be quiet again now. *sheepish grin* -- Kathleen Dickason Registered Linux user #182139 Its okay Kathleen! I've still got my old vintage 1987 Atari Mega ST with 4 megs of Ram and Motorola 68000 CPU running @ 16mhz. grin As for the Amiga, I owned several in my younger days, they were simply great machines for their time. (and if anyone is watching Linux Today, you'll have seen an article about new things from the Amiga crowd. Still going strong after all these years!) Oh well. Off news-list/topic, and I apologise to the easily offended in advance... ;-) -- /\ DarkLord \/
Re: [newbie] *delicate cough*
Just a few points to make: Microsoft did make computers easy to use. They made the first endureing GUI os. Windows is easy to use, no question about that. The problem is that makeing it easy to use also made it unreliable and insecure. Windows 3.0 thru 3.11 are not opperating systems. They are just shells, running on top of dos. Windows 95 is an opperating system. It contains a completly new filesystem(fat32 and fat16 with changes to support long filenames) and a new io.sys. windows 98 is really windows 95 with a few cosmetic changes. Anyone tried takeing a hex editor to io.sys. You will find error messages, boot messages, and loads of stuff you can safely edit. managed to change the 'Starting windows 95' message at startup into 'Shatered windows 95'. - Original Message - From: Kathleen Dickason [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 4:32 AM Subject: [newbie] *delicate cough* Oh dear. I am going off-topic here, but I can't help myself... "Robert McNealy" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nobody "froces" anyone to sell their company. That is a business decision, most often for the best of the business-owner. Microsoft has the clout to "buy" its expertise. None of these exchanges can happened with consent. I think you mean '"forces"' and "can happen without consent"...not trying to be unkind, just to make sure I am understanding you. Uhm. Do you know anything about Microsoft's business practices or history? Things certainly *can* happen without consent. Ask the folks at Netscape. Many of would not be in the IT, MIS, PC industires if it weren't FOR Microsoft. Through their business practices, they mass-marketed and made computers easy to use and popular. No one can argue that. Apple did not, or we would all be rooting for government to chew them a new a--hole.
