Linux-Advocacy Digest #512, Volume #27 Fri, 7 Jul 00 03:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: VM Ware looks cool. (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: VM Ware looks cool. (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Steve Mading)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Steve Mading)
GoAT. (Was: Linux is just plain awful) (Ray Chason)
Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux (Ray Chason)
Re: Simon, why are you here? (Ray Chason)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Ray Chason)
Re: Apache Up, MS Down (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Ray Chason)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (jbarntt)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (John Dyson)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Steve Mading)
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? (Jacques Guy)
A e-mail client with Outlook-like functionality ("Adam Warner")
Re: GoAT. (Was: Linux is just plain awful)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Steve Mading)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Sam Holden)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Steve Mading)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: VM Ware looks cool.
Date: 7 Jul 2000 01:01:57 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>It has a really nifty feature that allows all disk modifications
>>>>to be logged rather than affecting the real disk, so no matter
>>>>what happens you can reboot to your last saved configuration.
>>>>This would be great for testing software that might accidentally
>>>>do something destructive.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, great for checking out the latest and greatest vbs viruses:)
>>
>>But only if you haven't mapped any network drives...
>>
>
>Of course, and even more importantly, only if I don't have any real
>email addresses in the address book!!
This last week I decide it really is a good thing that outlook
treats LDAP address books as 2nd class entities. Even though
it takes another annoying step to use it, when we had a virus
problem it turned out that it only propagated to the addresses
that people had saved in their local address books. It
didn't automatically extract the full company from LDAP as
it would have from exchange.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 7 Jul 2000 01:09:52 -0500
In article <8k3ri6$go6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>You can do this with GPL software. What you can't do is usurp the
>:>GPL software writers' desire to have their *OWN* code remain GPL'ed.
>
>: Perhaps you mean their desire to force the GPL on code that is
>: not their own.
>
>I challenge you to find some other way to do it that doesn't allow
>for the opposite problem - removing GPL from GPL'ed code.
The LGPL does not have this problem. Nor the one
I mentioned. But it doesn't serve the political
agenda of the FSF - the point of the GPL really *is*
to control and usurp the works of others.
>:>If you write your own code, your own code can be distributed however
>:>you like, so long as it isn't a derivative of the GPL code. (The
>:>reason for that last part is to avoid the sticky situation where
>:>some shmuck comes along and adds one irrelevant line of code to
>:>a GPL tool and then claims it as his own.)
>
>: No, the reason is clearly to take control over the whole of
>: anything that can possibly be considered a derived work,
>: regardless of the size, value, or author of the other
>: parts. Read the FSF discussion of why readline is GPL'd
>: as opposed to LGPL'd if you have any doubts about this.
>
>A link to this please?
Follow the 'philosophy' link from www.fsf.org to:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 16:13:08 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VM Ware looks cool.
I'm not so concerned with the expense of software but I get better
peformance VNCing (www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/) to another PC running
windozer.
IanP
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 7 Jul 2000 01:15:42 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Graham Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In gnu.misc.discuss, John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Your counter-example is fallacious. An example of a GPL-like parking
>> lot is that it is marked 'free parking', but that means that it is
>> 'free' to park there. However, a GPL-parking lot requires that you
>> pay to leave the lot with your car.
>
>How about another example.
>
> "A free man may not be enslaved, nor may his children".
>
>Does this "restriction" make a man any less free? I think that this is
>similar to the freedom offered by the GPL. The program is "free" and
>this freedom may not be removed.
It would be closer if you added that he and his children are
also not allowed to mingle with slaves, even though you
really don't think that your ability to impose that
restriction makes them any less free. And of course
the child's other parent doesn't get any choice in
this matter either. Still a pretty odd concept of
freedom.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:19:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8k39nk$d3m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>If you use GPL
:>source inside your own source, you can't easily make the two
:>have seperate licensing terms: "Okay, lines 1-40 of main.c
:>are under GPL, lines 41-44 are not, lines 45-120 are under
:>GPL, and lines 121-154 are not, ..." That just can't work.
: Note that the restrictions apply just the same if you
: link to libraries where the copyright and license terms
: are clear and simple.
I just finished composing an answer to Austin, who had
pretty much the exact same comment. In the interest of
reducing thread branches and saving my time, I'll just
tell you to look at the anwser I gave him up above.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:14:33 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On 7 Jul 2000, Steve Mading wrote:
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> : Yes, that's what I said. The GPL, in it's attempt to control the
:> : whole of a derived work, even the parts where the author of
:> : the GPL'd portion made no contribution, restricts these
:> : potentially useful works from being distributed. Even in
:> : the case where the combined portion is much less restricted
:> : than the GPL'd portion.
:> The reason for the GPL restriction is simply to avoid the
:> plagerism of calling the GPL code your own. If you use GPL
:> source inside your own source, you can't easily make the two
:> have seperate licensing terms: "Okay, lines 1-40 of main.c
:> are under GPL, lines 41-44 are not, lines 45-120 are under
:> GPL, and lines 121-154 are not, ..." That just can't work.
: This is not true. Look at the MPL for how this is done.
Expand the abbreviation "MPL" please?
Perhaps "can't" was too strong a word on my part. What I
meant was "It's impractical and difficult." Having to keep
track of each and every edit you do to the code for licenseing
purposes is not practical. It is also fuzzy when you aren't
adding code, but merely altering it. If I fix a typo in someone's
code, turning a period into a comma, do I own that one character
or does he? I don't think there's any practical way to keep track,
especially when you start talking about layering diffs on top of
diffs. (a chain of people editing the code, one after the other).
:> If you take great care to make sure your own code is well
:> walled-off from the GPL code, for example by making it be
:> a seperate executable with seperate source files, then it
:> isn't a "derived work" and you then only need to openly
:> redistribute the GPL parts, not your own.
: This is not true; if you so much as *link* GPLed code into yours (e.g.,
: you're calling *functions* in the linked code, but not using the code
: itself), distribution of the combined work must be under the GPL, which
: means that your unique code must either be GPLed or under a licence
: that offers no *different* restrictions (e.g., a credit clause).
True - that's why tools that were meant to be used this way (glibc)
allow for LGPL usage. Again, this is because it's too fuzzy to draw
the line between your code and the code you made use of. What if I
want to be a jerk by doing the following: take some GPL program and
simply replace the main() function with my own that does pretty much
the same exact thing, and calls all the same function calls as in the
original GPLed program, and then claim that this is "my" program now?
Before you say, "But nobody would do something like that", don't forget
that the GPL has to be able to defend against the likes of Microsoft,
and others of a similar ethical bent.
:> When you start inserting your own code in the midst of the GPL code,
:> then there is no good practical way to keep the credit for the two
:> parts separate.
: When you insert your own code in the midst of GPLed code, you are typically
: contributing back to the GPLed codebase.
But I thought this was about whether or not this practice is a good
thing or not - i.e. the REASON people are typically doing that is
precisely because of the GPL's restrictions.
: [Aside: I'm not picking on Steve here, but have I mentioned that people can
: be confused by the claims about the GPL? I thought so.]
I'm not confused by it - I just don't think it can be done any other
way without opening up the way for some greedy selfish bastard to
come along and take my right to use my own work away from me.
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: GoAT. (Was: Linux is just plain awful)
Date: 7 Jul 2000 05:13:35 GMT
Susan and Willy Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I manage a national software chain and as far as Linux is concerned, it
>is numero uno on the return list. The next nearest competitor isn't even
>close. And for those curious ones it is a kids game that sucks real bad
>although it is advertised on a national basis. It blue screens even in
~~~~~~~~~~~~
>the setup program on many computers, especially those with Win 98 SE
>installed.
"blue screens"? Sorry, wrong OS. Even on those rare occasions when
Linux kernel-panics (and it's been a couple of years since I've seen a
kernel panic) you don't get a blue screen. If Linux blue-screened,
it's because you had the BSOD screensaver running.
>In conclusion, our new policy is to warn people before they purchase
>Linux to understand what Linux is about, and that it is not a Windows
>replacement. We had a lawyer try and convert his entire office of 14
>computers to Linux with the hopes of using Wine to run the odd Windows
>application that didn't have a Linux clone.
>
>He almost went out of business and lost a lot of data. We had to provide
>onsite tech help for this customer so that he didn't sue the pants off of
>us.
If this lawyer was worth a plug nickel he'd have read the fscking GPL.
You know, where (just like the Windoze EULA) it says "no warranty."
Conclusion: WinTroll. And not even a very good one.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.best,alt.linux.sucks,be.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux
Date: 7 Jul 2000 05:22:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>What a dork.............
>
>Semantic police alert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Grow a sense of humor, Simon.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Simon, why are you here?
Date: 7 Jul 2000 05:28:18 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Yawwwnnnnn....
IOW, you don't have an intelligent rebuttal. That's OK. I didn't
expect one.
>The truth hurts sometimes....
Sorry to have hurt you with the truth. Can you suggest some pleasant
lies I can tell you next time?
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: 7 Jul 2000 05:19:24 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Learn to read, Dork.....
>
>It says "especially those with Windows 98 SE installed".
>
>You'd think with all thoses How-To's you dorks have to wade through
>you would have picked up the simple art of reading by now.
Maybe if Win 98 wasn't such a dogpile, it wouldn't bluescreen so much.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 16:23:11 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Apache Up, MS Down
Makes the .net thing look like some sort of desperation net share grab
thing.
IanP
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: 7 Jul 2000 05:51:24 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Chason) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>OK, granted, if you insist on the latest k3w1est toys you'll have
>>problems with Linux. Just answer me this: why Voodoo 5? Is there even
>>one game that really needs one, or benefits enough to justify spending
>>US$300 on one?
>
>What's "k3w1est" - coolest? Some kind of character mangling going on here?
OK, I should have said something like <sarcasm>coolest</sarcasm>.
>Why not Voodoo5? Why not any new hardware that doesn't have a Linux driver
>for it yet? Am I supposed to restrict what I buy because Linux doesn't
>support it yet?
If you want your hardware to work with Linux, then you buy hardware that
works with Linux. (Duh.) This does two things: it gives you hardware
that works with Linux, and it drops a hint to the manufacturers that
Linux support would be appreciated.
If you don't care whether Linux supports your hardware, then you don't
need to take that into account when shopping.
When hardware that works with Linux sells better than hardware that
only works with Windows, all else being equal, then there will be
Linux support.
>I bought Voodoo5 to speed up Unreal Tournament. It also means Quake III
>Arena runs a lot faster at higher resolution.
OK, that's a fair justification.
>>Bleeding edge hardware just doesn't make sense for most users. And by
>>the time it's not bleeding edge -- by the time there's actually some
>>applications you can use with it -- there's a fair chance of Linux
>>support, and the card will be cheaper as well.
>
>So I should wait for Linux to catchup?
No, I suggest you wait for the *applications* (Windows or Linux or
whatever) to catch up, and for the price to become sane. (Voodoo 5 looks
like a pretty good card but I think it's ridiculous to pay $300 for one.)
>Isn't this the whole problem? Linux
>lags behind Windows!
OK, Linux lags behind Windows. Now are you here to offer some solutions
to this little problem, or are you just going to go on pissing and moaning?
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: jbarntt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:20:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joel Barnett"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > <snipped the unimportant parts>
> >
> > Schools out for the Summer, eh ? Pretty unimaginative as trolls go,
> > i.e., obviously bogus storyline, stock Linux complaints,
>
> Oh, yes, there can't be anything to the story at all, especially
> considering that it only rehashes the same complaints you're already
> familiar with...
>
> Now is it just me or does that make no sense? Doesn't it seem as
though
> someone ought to actually look into these complaints and try to fix
the
> problem?
Sure, perhaps the original poster, 'Susie Wong', (name ring a bell
movie fans ?), should ask our lawyer to post so we could figure out
what went wrong. Of course, since this is just a lame troll, won't
happen.
>
> From my own experience with Linux, Windows, and Macintosh, I can see
how
> the complaints would make sense. The herd is stampeding to follow a
new
> leader ... only Linux isn't as polished as Windows.
>
> For development machines, servers, embedded apps, and tinker-toys,
Linux
> is great. But is it really ready for commercial software?
Think for a minute. The law firm with 14 pc's. Apparently one of the
lawyers decides to upgrade everything to Linux. Since data was lost,
obviously, backups aren't happening. Any sys admin who will change OS's
w/o doing a backup is an idiot. Don't care whether you admin NT,
Linux,Netware or whatever. Also, why would a law firm delegate this
responsibility to a lawyer ? At the hourly rates lawyers charge, hire a
consultant and get the job done right.
The World of Susie Wong is, in this case, the world of trolls.
>
> >etc. But keep trying, you might get better. Oh, in order to make a
> >good troll, it helps to know something more about Linux than what
you
> >pickup in COLA.
> >
> > By the way, why did the lawyer lose data ??
> >
> > JBarntt
> >
> >
>
> --
> Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>, Datadroid, Infernosoft
> Putting the No in Innovation. www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
> Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation. http://www.infernosoft.com
> "It doesn't matter what I think." -- "Dr." Laura
>
--
jbarntt
<Chocolate Watchband>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 01:30:25 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >Stallman and the FSF are certainly extreme. I just wish
> >they could be more honest in their terminology as well when
> >they describe the restrictions.
>
> They are quite honest actually. They just don't
> speak/act as if they expect their audience to be
> simpletons.
>
I suspect that you might be mislead... They do expect their
audience to be simpletons -- otherwise the myth of the
software being free wouldn't have lasted... It is a
sad commentary on those who cannot critically think, but
have a serial nature to their thought.
Note that when listening to idealogues, it is very easy to
be led into a path of distruction. Careful redefiniton
can make really weird claims look correct. Claims that
the GPL is 'free' haven't been critically analysed.
Luckily, this lie is now being reviewed.
John
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:24:09 GMT
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: : Other people half believe it already. They make the assumption that because
: : I favour Windows over Linux, I must be a moron or an idiot, or that I can't
: : read. They causually insult me, call me "shithead" etc.
: No, it's not because you favor Windows - it's because you use
: arguments with false premises when explaining why you favor
: Windows.
Let me apologise in advance about that post. I was reading too
fast and mistook you for simon777. The complaint above is
applicable to him, but not to you. Your only problem is that
you sometimes extrapolate your experiences too far, assuming
they are typical, which is not on the same level as what simon777
does.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:38:46 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Steve Mading wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : I have yet to hear of one single person who has stuck with Linux,
> : although many have tried it.
> Fscking Liar. Who do you think you are arguing with in this newsgroup?
> Figments of your imagination?
"Hear". Simple Simon the fish(*) wrote "hear," not "read".
However loud
you may shout, I am pretty sure he won't hear you, or me.
So, really,
he is not exactly lying.
(*) the fish: 777
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A e-mail client with Outlook-like functionality
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 18:36:37 +1200
Hi everyone,
I though this would be the best group to post in because you'll all be up on
the play with the latest and greatest Linux software.
I did some extensive searching and and testing of many e-mail clients and I
couldn't find a Linux e-mail client with this functionality:
Multiple pop3 accounts and smtp servers
Filtering and the ability to run filters on the current folder
Ability to read HTML e-mail (not essential, but would be nice)
Rudimentary spell checking
A reliable database.
Frankly it's unbelievable that Netscape Messenger doesn't allow more than
one pop3 address (and that goes for StarOffice as well).
I also went the way of using Fetchmail but then couldn't find a graphical
client that could reliably filter the e-mail after it was downloaded by
Fetchmail.
It may require a paradigm shift (like when I discovered Lyx). It may also be
that a powerful and reliable e-mail client is only a few months away.
I didn't try kmail again recently because it appeared to previously eat
data. But I did try (from memory) Mahogany, CSCMail, Pronto, Ishmail,
XCMail, xfmail, Spruce, etc. I didn't try others that did not include
filtering (e.g. I think Balsa, etc.).
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GoAT. (Was: Linux is just plain awful)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 23:19:36 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Susan and Willy Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Conclusion: WinTroll. And not even a very good one.
What else do you expect from Simon777 which is who this Susie Wong seems to
be.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:34:01 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (sandrews) wrote in
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
:> Let me see what does windows not support on my system...
:> oh, the Hell with that , lets try again:
:>
:> Let me see what does windows does support on my system...
:> 1. Nothing.
:>
:> hardware = MAC ;^].
:>
:>So now I have a broken system. End of evaluation.
: Very funny. Not.
: My statement "Linux lags behind Windows" still stands, despite your attempt
: (bad one at that!) at humour.
I don't see it as just humor. He brings up a very important point.
Windows only exists on the Intel-PC (For a while they also had NT
on MIPS and Alpha, but you don't hear anything about that anymore).
This is a perfectly legitimate point to bring up in this sort of
"my OS does more hardware than yours" contest. In the Linux world,
Intel is just one platform of many.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Holden)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:56:02 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 00:28:01 -0500, John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sam Holden wrote:
>
>> >>
>> >Please define 'end user.' :-) Since an attribute of GPLed code is
>> >source code, the end user is both the user of the entire piece
>> >of software AND those who use it as source code. Source code
>> >opens up other classes of users.
>>
>> End user is the one who uses piece of software. I don't include people
>> who take the code and use it in their own software.
>>
>Your definition of 'what you do or don't include' is exclusive and
>takes away the freeness of the software.
No it doesn't it. It grants lots of freedom to a particular group, and
grants less freedom to another. Both groups can do more with the code
then they could if it was not licensed at all.
--
Sam
In case you hadn't noticed, Perl is not big on originality.
--Larry Wall
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:53:11 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: What's my point?
: Linux lags behind Windows,
So can I assume from this statement that Windows for Sparc came out
before Linux for Sparc, as an example? No? Didn't think so.
: That's my point.
: What's yours? If you can't even be civil about it, then just go away.
We aren't being civil because you are making sweeping generalizations
from your arguments. So far all the arguments you have given could
only be used to support the statement "third-party hardware support
for Linux on the Intel PC platform lags behind Windows". Remove any
of those qualifiers and the statement can no longer be supported by
your arguments. Generalizing it to just "Linux lags behind Windows"
is going to piss people off because it ignores the fact that Windows
can't do non-Intel archetectures. It also ignores the fact that
hardware support isn't the only kind of way an OS can lag behind
another. There are a good many ways Windows lags behind Linux that
have nothing to do with hardware support - for example, Beowulf.
If you'd stop making the sweeping generalization, I'd stop arguing
the point (I can't speak for everyone else though). Just today
I wasted a few hours trying to get someone's modem to work in
Linux only to discover that it was a Winmodem. (Which it never
said anywhere in the documentation - we need truth in advertising
for computer hardware, but that's a seperate issue.) But anyway,
I know that hardware gets supported under Windows first. I blame
the vendors though, not the Linux OS. Who's "fault" it is doesn't
change the fact that the support does lag, though. On that point
you are right, but stop drawing sweeping generalizations from it,
and stop deluding yourself into thinking this is a reflection on
the two OS's themselves - it is simply a side-effect of the size
of their marketshares. There is no technical lack in Linux that
causes this situation - it is purely an economical decision on the
part of the hardware vendors.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: 7 Jul 2000 06:58:24 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: X amount of devices supported by Linux, Y supported by Windows.
: Y > X, therefore Linux lags behind Windows.
Using your logic, if 70% of the computers in the world were
exact duplicates of each other, with the same exact sound card,
same exact modem, same exact video card, and so on, then an OS that
only supported that one type of video card and that one type of sound
card and so on would have more "hardware support" than one that
supported all the other types out there. That's misleading at best.
That's like someone who only speaks English claiming to be
"a master of world languages", based on the fact that English
is so widely spoken around the world.
--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
