Linux-Advocacy Digest #480, Volume #27 Wed, 5 Jul 00 19:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Just exactly what IS Linux, anyway? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (John Dyson)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Where did all my windows go? (Arthur Frain)
VM Ware looks cool. (Laura Goodwin)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: VM Ware looks cool. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 18:05:19 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
> >at random, Win32, results in late, buggy and bloated applications.
> >This does matter very much to the user.
> >
> >>Windo's is weal made.
> >
> >Good one Tim. You mean it makes you come out in a rash?
> >You must admit, this troll does have his moments.
>
> I mean its made good, not like LIE-nux that is maid by commy's and their all stoppid
>hippy's that cant' make a hole OS.
>
Are you saying that Windows is a hole OS?
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Just exactly what IS Linux, anyway?
Date: 5 Jul 2000 17:02:27 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes it is, as soon as you understand that there is no single dictator
>> controlling what combination of components you may use.
>
>But the premise of claiming certain components to be part of GNU/Linux to
>support one argument while at the same time disowning them to support
>another is logically flawed.
Not at all. They are separate, nearly unrelated layers. If you
don't like one, replace it.
>> >Well, which is it? Are the KDE/Gnome desktops part of "Linux," or aren't
>> >they?
>>
>> The choice of using them or not comes with Linux. And for the same
>> price...
>
>Fine. You are arguing that the separation of components is a good thing, and
>that the benefit of "mixing and matching" is a result. This is the same
>philosophy that the auto companies used in the 1980's with their "parts bin
>engineering" mentality. But since cars in the 1980s generally sucked, there
>are obviously drawbacks that need to be addressed.
I hadn't noticed any fewer choices in the cars you can buy today, but
I also don't see what it has to do with anything. If someone wants
a mini-van they shouldn't be forced to take a monster truck instead.
>>
>> For some things - and probably for most people.
>
>In what applications is "just the kernel" useful?
The more specialized the app, the less you need anything
resembling a normal user interface. There is the Linux
Router Project that puts the kernel and networking tools
on a single floppy. There is the TIVO which runs headless
in the traditional sense. I expect to see more of that
embedded style usage. If you have a problem with the user
interface, build a full-auto appliance.
>>
>> OK, now you are talking about distributions rather than Linux.
>
>Isn't that how most people acquire Linux?
Yes, but not the people that create them....
>Don't the distributions affect
>most people's initial experience with it? Users want to install a complete
>system, not just "Linux."
Perhaps, but they should realize that there are differences. Would
you talk about 'Word Processors' and 'Spreadsheets' as though
there were only one of each? Or imply that someone's initial
experience with one of them affects any of the others?
>> Who is 'we'? I like Linux precisely because there is no single entity
>> dictating how it can or should be used.
>
>"We" is the Linux community; those that use it and advocate it.
But so far you have not said anything that relates to Linux.
You could just as well be talking about KDE on FreeBSD or
Solaris.
>> No, a more accurate description is that limiting yourself to the
>> programs with feature integration is a trade-off at best.
>
>This highlights another shortcoming of the desktop environments. They don't
>provide new users with easy access to the myriad of other
>programs/utilities/functions that make Linux so useful. They limit users to
>programs that are specifically related to the desktop environment the user
>chooses to install. For example, my RedHat 6.2 distro installed Netscape for
>me as part of the KDE desktop option I selected. Nowhere did they provide
>menu access or even help on rudimentary utilities as "df" or "date."
Look under Redhat/utilities/xman. Under 'options', pick 'both screens'.
But don't expect drag-n-drop to work there even though point-n-click
does.
>> Perhaps there is a place for the 'dummy distribution' that only includes
>> one integrated window manager and app set. I hope this never becomes
>> the only choice. A compromise might be a reasonably complete
>> distribution with some canned window manager configurations that
>> only make the integrated apps visible on the desktop and menus so
>> you have to go out of your way to encounter things that work in
>> a different way.
>
>IMO, this is what they do now. They need to go the other way, and make it
>easy for new users to learn about stuff NOT related to apps that were
>written specifically for the installed desktop environment. They need to
>take a broader view of GNU/Linux as a whole, and so do the so-called
>"advocates."
Then they are going to encounter things that don't fit the narrow
view of the user interface you wanted earlier.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:17:24 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
<8k09ge$k91$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>There are reports of working systems at:
> http://www.qbik.ch/usb/devices/
I found reports indicating USB ZIP support is not in Mandrake 7.0/7.1. The
kernel is 2.2, I think USB or ZIP support is properly done in 2.3?
>I take it you haven't done the Mandrake 7.1 update to get the
>2.2.16 kernel yet, since you haven't whined about how you
>were too lazy to make a boot floppy first and it made you
>system unbootable. (I don't know if it will help, but it
>doesn't make sense to complain about less than the latest
>version).
Oh I did the upgrade all right. It took three hours to do and I was left
with a bootable system. The fact that the menus were mangled and Linuxconf
was broken were a cursory detail.
So, I reinstalled 7.1 from scratch. Things went much better this time.
>You managed to get a wierd one... The 4100 and 5200 are working. Why
>don't you do the driver?
Because I don't have the inclination or interest to.
>It's pretty easy to find the vendors that have linux driver on
>their web/ftp sites - before buying something that encourages
>vendors that don't support Linux.
I bought a 3DFX because I happen to like their 3D implementation. Glide
etc. seems to be well supported on a lot of games. Unreal Tournament runs
beautifully with it; Quake III Arena nows runs in 1024 x 768 mode without
stuttering.
I could buy myself a cheap PC just to run Linux. A CA810 system comes to
mind. Nice and cheap. Ah, but I've got no room left in my house for a third
PC. What about a laptop? Hmmm... where can I find a list of Linux
compatible laptops?
>You probably could get up back with the frame buffer version
>of X.
I think I tried the SVGA version; all I got was a nice band of garbage
across the top of the screen. I will be working away looking for a solution
to this, but I'm not expecting an answer any time soon.
>That's backwards: the vendors of those products support Windows. There
>are also vendors that supply Linux drivers or at least the info
>needed to write them.
Then Linux is backwards. It's still playing catchup. Everyone out there
falls over themselves to support Windows. Linux is usually an after
thought, if at all.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:19:25 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> ...a bit peculiar dontchathink. He takes one of the vendors
> that are actually providing some support to the USB developers
> and finds their more proprietary device.
I didn't pick a scanner deliberately because Linux doesn't support it.
> Actually, 3dfx has had linux drivers on their site for some
> time. They might be 'forthcoming' but at the very least the non
> anaceleptic should be able to aprise themselves of the situation.
Really? Where? I went looking but didn't find any Voodoo 5 drivers for
Linux.
> It is no particular quality of merit with respect to Windows that
> is responsible for a particular device being better supported under
> that system.
Windows is more popular than Linux, therefore vendors support it first.
Pete
------------------------------
From: John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:19:28 -0500
Jay Maynard wrote:
>
> On 05 Jul 2000 12:38:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Why should someone have the right to demand that others
> >give away their services?
>
> Why, indeed?
> Now, apply that question to the GPV. Why should the author of a GPV-licensed
> program - who has already made the choice to give away his services - have
> the right to demand that I do so, too?
>
IMO, the only moral authority that they have to ask that you give your
work away is lost if they call their work free.
The mistake that I kept making (over the years) is to 'assume' that the
GPL is a real free license. By totally ignoring the incorrect assertion
about the GPL being free, then it make no difference as to what authors
of GPLed code ask you to do... There is NOTHING wrong with it.
It is wrong to call GPLed (or GPV'ed :-)) software free, and then demand
some behavior that takes alot of that 'freeness' away. My position has
changed on this (now disagreeing with you) ONLY because I have come to
the conclusion that the mistake that I have made is in the assumption
that the truth was being told about the GPL describing a 'free'
license.
The GPL is yet another commercial license (with source code available)
in sheeps clothing :-).
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 5 Jul 2000 17:16:12 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yea and when I played audio CD's using X11Amp the CD wouldn't eject
>and even after 10 tries if it happened to decide it wanted to eject,
>any subsequent CD I put in the player, audio or data, would fail to
>read.
That's never happened to me on the 3 machines where I frequently
play CD's, but I usually use the KDE player. Can you describe what
causes it to happen so I can avoid it?
>Not to mention all the skips and slowdowns just playing an audio CD
>and trying to do something else.
I take it the 'something else' involved pushing the reset button
or power switch...
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 15:10:17 -0700
Perry Pip wrote:
>
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 16:11:46 GMT,
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Or to stop making statements like "Linux is 3
> >times faster than Windows" without pointing out what they really meant
> >to say was "Linux is three times faster than Windows for a specific set
> >of tests".
I'll thank you not to tell me what I "really meant to say".
What I meant to say was "Linux 3X faster that W2K", and
that's what I said (not some vague "Windows" term like you
insist on putting in your post).
Having said that, I provided links to tests run by people
other than you, MS, or Red Hat that support that statement.
People are free to visit those links and draw their own
conclusions. I'm not even claiming the information at
those links is correct - it's simply there for people
to evaluate. But I suppose it's part of the Windows
(Win 1.0, Win 2.0, Win 3.x, Win 9x*, NT, W2K, and CE)
paradigm to assume that people are too ignorant to
draw their own conclusions.
Are you disagreeing with what I said? I think in the
*context* in which I said it, it's a true statement.
You do know what *context* is, don't you?
> You really are being a hyprocrite, Pete. Instead of saying "Linux lags
> behind Windows" you should be saying "Based on my personal subjective
> limited experience, the Mandrake 7.1 default desktop lags behind the
> Windows 2000 Desktop."
Exactly. Thank you very much.
Arthur
PS: KDE != Linux
------------------------------
From: Laura Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: VM Ware looks cool.
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:23:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm excited about VM Ware, which makes it possible to run more than one
OS at a time without special partitions or rebooting. Too bad it's so
expen$ive - $300.00! I expect a less expensive version or cloneware
will be available for less within a year.
--
Laura Goodwin - Field Researcher for the Institute for the Very
Seriously Scientific Study of Human Sexuality and Bar and
Grill...*Specials Daily!*
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:22:01 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Linux noticed my WinTV card was there 2 years ago. It also
> happily allowed me to fully exploit it 2 years ago as well.
> (WinTV 401 to be precise)
I must have one that isn't supported.
> Yet the leading consumer video and audio card manufacturers
> have decided to start supporting linux for some strange reason
> as have the major scsi card vendors and several of the network
> card vendors.
Doesn't matter. There is always going to be this gap. You see, companies
make peripherals and people buy them. The companies make money on them.
Free software just gets pushed to the back - after all you get nothing out
of it except kudos.
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:24:33 -0500
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:42:09 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 15:30:20 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 15:51:05 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Wed, 5 Jul 2000 00:39:32 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
>> >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Jim Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> >>> Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>> >> >>> >Um, tell me, exactly where in the software known as Windows are
>> >> >>> >IRQ's
>> >> >>> >defined?
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >hint: it's a hardware thing, not a software thing...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> No, that's exactly what it isn't. The whole point of PnP is that
>> >> >>> IRQs etc. are settable by _software_ so that you don't have to
>> >> >>> bugger around with jumpers. In theory it should be simple for a
>> >> >>> PnP-aware OS to find a working configuration, but somehow Windows
>> >> >>> manages to break in exciting and unpredictable ways.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Because of hardware that doens't follow the PnP standards.
>> >> >
>> >> >Feh. That's *too* easy. Why is it, then, that a piece of hardware
>> >> >that
>> >> >resolutely fails to install and configure under Windows (no idea
>> >> >whether or not it "follows PnP standards") is capable of being
>> >> >installed flawlessly, in one hit, on the same machine under Linux?
>> >> >The
>> >> >hardware in question, BTW, was a Creative AWE32 and a Pace modem.
>> >>
>> >> Yet some people on here say Linux does a -worse- job of PnP detection
>> >> than does Win2k. Hmm... I think there's still a lot of confusion on
>> >> the issue. In any case, I've not had problems, save one, with
>> >> hardware installation in any X86 W2k or W98 (or Linux 2.2) machine.
>> >>
>> >> The one problem - inserting an unknown-brand NIC into an HP6645C (the
>> >> $150 computer) caused the machine to yell at me during powerup (before
>> >> an OS is loaded) with some sort of conflict, so I popped that NIC out,
>> >> put in another one, and all was well.
>> >
>> >So you just keep trying until you get something that works. No wonder
>> >Windows TCO is so high.
>>
>> You're prepared to guarantee any Macintosh accessory will work in any
>> Mac? We both know that isn't true, Joe. Stop bullshitting.
>
>It isn't?
>I've never seen _any_ Mac accessory that didn't work in the Mac series
>it was designed for.
>In Wintel land, OTOH, that's very common.
I have. I had a friend with a 7500 that didn't work with the first G3
accellerator he bought; he had to return it and get another. And
there are plenty of tales of incompatibilities - SCSI & video card
together, SCSI cards being in the wrong slot of a 9500, bus-mastering
only being on the top few slots of XXYY Macintosh, etc. If you
haven't read about it, I'd be very surprised. Oh, wait - this is Joe
Ragosta. I'm not surprised at all. :)
>>
>> >BTW, read a few PC magazines for a few thousand more examples.
>>
>> One can say the same about any computer system.
>
>Except Macs--where things just work.
...usually. But then, they usually work on the PC, too. Incidents of
problems on either platform are usually pretty rare.
>> >> >If a bunch of h8ck3r g33ks can get it to work, why on earth cannot
>> >> >Microsoft?
>> >>
>> >> On the contrary, those products were made to work in Windows. It's
>> >> you that hasn't gotten it to work; I suspect doing a bit of research
>> >> (BIOS PnP turned on? Did they have any IRQ assigned to them ever, if
>> >> not PnP hardware?) and such would help a lot...
>> >
>> >Of course. It's always the user's fault. Windows could never have a
>> >problem.
>>
>> If Windows can do it on XX user's machine, why not YY? Barring
>> hardware compatibility (as already mentioned), where are the
>> variables?
>
>Different configurations. That's the problem with Wintel machines. On
>the Mac, you ask: "is card xxx designed to work with my system?" If it
>is, it will almost always work (yes, I'm sure that there might be some
>bizarre counterexample, but that would be exceedingly rare). On Windows,
>you have to first ask what else might be installed.
Nah.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:34:06 GMT
Why do you have such a difficult time accepting an end result?
My car starts when I turn the key. I don't care who made the ignition
lock.
My doorbell rings when I push the button. I don't care who made the
wires.
Windows works. Supports virtually any piece of hardware. Mac supports
a lot of this hardware as well (USB).
Linux does not.
Stop blaming everyone in the world for the lameness of Linsux. If
manufacturers choose to not write drivers for Linux maybe there is a
reason.
Until they include drivers in the box with every new release of
hardware, Linux will lag well behind Windows and it doesn't matter who
is responsible, it is the end result that counts.
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:44:03 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:21:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:53:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:44:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>>Let me add to the list:
>>>>
>>>>1. Canon flatbed scanner. Works on Windows and on my daughters iMac.
>>>>
>>>>2. Canon printer. Half works. Never could make it print from
>>>
>>> ...this is what USB device standards are supposed to be for...
>>
>>Well apparently Windows and Mac got it right and Linux didn't because
>>it works fine on those 2 systems.
>
> It's not at all apparent that "mac and Windows" got it right.
> It might be more accurate to state that Canon bothered to
> accomdate those particular systems.
>
>[deletia]
>
> IOW: it's a 3rd party support issue.
>
> If you have a Mac, you might be a bit more lucky with who has
> decided to be nice.
>
> If you have NT, you might be a bit more lucky with who has
> decided to be nice.
>
> If you have any of them including WinDOS, you still have to
> be wary against buying a overpriced paperweight. Plus,
> you have to put up with WinDOS.
>
> IOW: caveat emptor still applies for PC hardware in general.
>
> It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
> of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:38:53 GMT
Sure is. Linux/Creative/Corel have been bragging about this alliance
to create multimedia stuff et they can't even provide Livewire for the
SBLive card which has been around for years.
Win2k has LiveWire and Win2k was released long after Linsux.
Vendors place their money where they can make money. They develop
applications and drivers where they can get the greatest return for
the dollar.
Nobody is using Linsux at home or on the desktop (the largest markets
by far) and the hardware vendors know this. That is why you don't see
the support.
Where is Opera BTW?
They have been working on that one for years.
Windows versions get released and updated all the time. Linux version
is still in alpha...
Typical Linsux....
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:17:24 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>Then Linux is backwards. It's still playing catchup. Everyone out there
>falls over themselves to support Windows. Linux is usually an after
>thought, if at all.
>
>Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:40:02 GMT
It's far more believeable than the one sided tripe you post here.
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:39:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:25:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>Yea and when I played audio CD's using X11Amp the CD wouldn't eject
>>and even after 10 tries if it happened to decide it wanted to eject,
>>any subsequent CD I put in the player, audio or data, would fail to
>>read.
>>
>>Not to mention all the skips and slowdowns just playing an audio CD
>>and trying to do something else.
>
> ...yeah, sure.
>
> We're supposed to believe you when you try and tell us that a
> process that consists of "Hey CD, start playing" causes load
> and concurrency issues.
>
>[deletia]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:41:47 GMT
Mandrake 7.x (not 7.1).
Load Audio CD.
Play audio CD.
Try to eject Audio CD.
Will not eject most times even with button on drive.
IF it decides it WILL eject, CD drive no longer works.
On 5 Jul 2000 17:16:12 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Yea and when I played audio CD's using X11Amp the CD wouldn't eject
>>and even after 10 tries if it happened to decide it wanted to eject,
>>any subsequent CD I put in the player, audio or data, would fail to
>>read.
>
>That's never happened to me on the 3 machines where I frequently
>play CD's, but I usually use the KDE player. Can you describe what
>causes it to happen so I can avoid it?
>
>>Not to mention all the skips and slowdowns just playing an audio CD
>>and trying to do something else.
>
>I take it the 'something else' involved pushing the reset button
>or power switch...
Just loading Staroffice will do.
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: VM Ware looks cool.
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:43:18 GMT
You could buy a whole freaking PC for $300.00 less monitor.
If you want to run Windows applications, run Windows. If you want to
run Linux applications (if you can find any useful ones that is) run
Linux.
If Linux keeps trying to be Windows it is going to die just like OS/2.
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:23:29 -0400, Laura Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm excited about VM Ware, which makes it possible to run more than one
>OS at a time without special partitions or rebooting. Too bad it's so
>expen$ive - $300.00! I expect a less expensive version or cloneware
>will be available for less within a year.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:45:00 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:40:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>It's far more believeable than the one sided tripe you post here.
In what manner is my description of the situation "one sided".
Playing an audio CD is indeed merely a matter of executing a
single ioctl. It's not a process that requires any non-trivial
amount of processing (assuming you want to display some sort of
ticker) unlike mp3 decode or DVD decode.
If anyone has a nasty habit of posting one sided tripe it is you.
I would (and have) at least give Be it's due in this sort of situation.
[deletia]
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:39:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:25:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>Yea and when I played audio CD's using X11Amp the CD wouldn't eject
>>>and even after 10 tries if it happened to decide it wanted to eject,
>>>any subsequent CD I put in the player, audio or data, would fail to
>>>read.
>>>
>>>Not to mention all the skips and slowdowns just playing an audio CD
>>>and trying to do something else.
>>
>> ...yeah, sure.
>>
>> We're supposed to believe you when you try and tell us that a
>> process that consists of "Hey CD, start playing" causes load
>> and concurrency issues.
>>
>>[deletia]
>
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:41:36 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:16:31 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>
>1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
Seems to work for others. Maybe you just need to learn the 'mount' command.
>2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no drivers.
HP uses a different protocol on the 4200C than the 4100 and 5200,
which are supported. Anyways, I went to the HP web page and only
Win98 drivers are available. HP plans to release W2k drivers but they
are not ready yet.
>3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this. Even
> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to install.
Funny. I just went to www.3dfx.com and they only have Voodoo 5
drivers for Win 95/98. None for Win2K. So which version of Windows are
you talking about??
>Windows support all of these products as there are drivers available for
>them.
>
Seems when you want to say "Linux lags behind Windows" in terms of
hardware support you mean win98. But when you say "Linux lags behind
Windows" stability you mean W2k. Hmmm...
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
