Linux-Advocacy Digest #124, Volume #35 Mon, 11 Jun 01 04:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: UI Importance ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Colin Day)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? ("Robert Morelli")
Re: Any lICQ users here? (GreyCloud)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Terry
Porter)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? (GreyCloud)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? (GreyCloud)
Re: XP finally reveals it true colors!!! (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s (GreyCloud)
Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s (GreyCloud)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:04:48 +0200
"macman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9g0bea$8a2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This feature will be disabled by default in the shipping builds.
> >
> >
>
> Really? You know that how?
MS said so in the article.
> Microsoft hasn't even admitted that it was there. If Mossberg hadn't
> found it, they'd probably deny it even existed.
You *are* aware that it's pretty big selling point for Office XP (wonder why
they didn't call IE 6 XP, for that matter).
It's right there in the options menu, and it appear in the help.
Here is a qoute:
"Use MSN smart tags to find more information about certain words or phrases
that appear on a Web page you are viewing. When you see a word or phrase
underlined with a purple dotted line, you can place your mouse cursor over
that word or phrase, and a list of links to more information about it
appears. To see additional information, click a link"
> I doubt very much that you have sufficient inside information to know
> what's going to be in the final build.
No, but MS has, and they said it will be disabled by default in the final
build.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:06:02 +0200
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5yUU6.72655$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > It's not the change in the appearance of the web site that people
find
> > > > unacceptable, it's the change in its hyperlinked content.
> > >
> > > This feature does not do that. Despite what some
> > > articles are saying, these SmartTag things are not
> > > hyperlinks, not unless you think anything that
> > > involves and underline is a hyperlink.
> > >
> >
> > Are you saying that if you click on these smart tag marks, they WONT
> > take to a page that wasnt intended by the autor of the page?
>
> From the screenshots and descriptions I've seen, it
> appears that, indeed, clicking on them won't take
> you anywhere.
>
> Instead, you point at the underlined word and
> a little icon appears, hovering over the text;
> I think you click on this and a separate
> pop-up window appears. Within the window,
> there are conventional links to various things.
>
> Maybe you just point at it. Not sure about
> that.
You click on it like a normal link and it opens.
In a new window, I might add.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:10:12 +0200
"Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article
> <HPLU6.71636$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel
> Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is BabelFish also evil?
>
> Straw-man argument. Theoretically, the information content of the page
> (its mapping from symbols to real-world objects, actions, and concepts)
> is not altered when it is translated into a different language.
You don't have to deal with translating text very often, do you?
Translation, even if done by an expert human, can totally change the meaning
of the text.
If done by a machine... well, it can render the whole thing into a senseless
bunch of characters.
I present this link as proof:
http://members.tripod.com/~Mysterium/ser0053.html
> > > Let's say you're a paperboy or a newsstand. Do you have the right to
> > > insert your own pages into the newspapers and magazines you sell?
> >
> > Don't they? I observe that some bookstores insert
> > advertisements for themselves in books. Sure, they
> > call them 'bookmarks'... :D
>
> The bookmarks advertise the bookstore where you go the book and are
> recognized by the reader as separate from the book. The links added by
> he MS browser, however, may not be distinguished by the user as being
> added by the browser and not the page author.
They have a *very* distinct look, I posted a screen shot, did you saw it?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:13:15 +0200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:hrYU6.11734$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Considering that the FSF *CREATED* the GPL, one would think that they know
> what they meant when they wrote it, and thus their interpretation is what
> was intended.
That is not given.
If I write a contract, and it has something in it that can be interupted in
two (or more) ways, *my* interuptetion of it isn't neccecarily what the
court will support. In fact, it's often the other side that the court will
support.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:16:11 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If you use a DVD to install an O/S it will be slower than a current
> CD-ROM.
Not if you factor noticing that the OS wants another disc, finding the disc,
and replacing it.
I would estimate this as 5 minutes per each disc, for myself. Maybe more.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:18:35 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ccRU6.38128$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The drive has been reformatted, so I can't check anything at this
> point. The reason I couldn't delete the directory named PRN is
> that it is a magic device name and NT (or any other version of
> windows) normally won't let you do any file operations to it
> regardless of the rest of the path. No one should have been able
> to create that directory name even if they did have write permission
> and the anon ftp user shouldn't have had write permission in the
> first place.
Yes, I know about PRN.
But it's possible that the FTP server used an API which doesn't check for
magic device names, which is how it created the directory.
It might've been possible to delete it the same way, too.
BTW, you can open & write to PRN, so some file operations are allowed.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:19:25 +0200
"Marada C. Shradrakaii" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >So I can click on a .doc document and >have the word proccesor open it
for
> >me?
>
> Having a link that says "1998 Sales Figures" and opens WordPerfect when
clicked
> is different from having the 1998 sales figures document open inside your
> browser. The latter is what I'm concerned about.
Yes, it open up in the browsers.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:23:24 +0200
"Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Said Ed Allen in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 10 Jun 2001 12:01:02
> >>In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >>
> >>[eallen@allenhome rename]$ for n in *
> >>> do
> >>> mv $n ${n%gif}bak
> >>> done
>
> Notice that that loop is done entirely with 'bash' builtins.
>
> That shows the kind of power differential between DOS and Unix
> shells because the same loop works for 'ksh'.
You are aware that *DOS* had it too? And that CMD has it as well or better?
(I don't do CMD, I use WSH)
------------------------------
From: Colin Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:43:45 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 2 Jun 2001
> >"KSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:cKUR6.846$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Ben Franchuk wrote:
> >>
> >> > I find a network card install in Linux quite simple. It has been over 4
> >> > years since I used a dial-up ISP. A Linux install with a network card
> >with
> >> > my ISP requires setting the IP address, gateway and name servers. I
> >never
> >> > experienced a Linux install that did not identify the NIC and load the
> >> > correct drivers.
> >>
> >> Maybe I could get you to install Linux on my computer. I've tried Debian
> >> and Red Hat, neither found my NIC, and I could never get networking to
> >work.
> >> Win2k came up just fine with networking and all.
> >
> >This is a big problem with Linux. Many cards use a common chipset, which is
> >fine if Linux can detect it, but if it can't,
>
> Do you have some reason to think it couldn't?
>
> >you may not know what chipset
> >it's using, and the companies web site usually doesn't say.
>
> Why would that be a "big problem"? My brother can't get Win98 (which
> came on the system with no choice of alternative) to find or recognize
> (or boot with!) his NIC,
Is it a PCI card, and if so, is PCI bus mastering enabled in the BIOS?
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:41:09 +1200
"Peter Köhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Stuart Fox wrote:
> >
> > Try running XF86Setup on an AST PC with an ATI Mach32 chip on the
> > motherboard. X will not run afterwards, and will not run until you edit
> > the config file.
> >
> On what junkyard did you find that stuff?
Linux advocates told me that Linux with X would run fine on a 486, with 16MB
memory so I tried it. It didn't. It ran fine with no X loaded.
It was an old PC from work. Sad.
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:44:30 +1200
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9g1om3$qvo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:ccRU6.38128$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > The drive has been reformatted, so I can't check anything at this
> > point. The reason I couldn't delete the directory named PRN is
> > that it is a magic device name and NT (or any other version of
> > windows) normally won't let you do any file operations to it
> > regardless of the rest of the path. No one should have been able
> > to create that directory name even if they did have write permission
> > and the anon ftp user shouldn't have had write permission in the
> > first place.
>
> Yes, I know about PRN.
> But it's possible that the FTP server used an API which doesn't check for
> magic device names, which is how it created the directory.
> It might've been possible to delete it the same way, too.
>
I just tried at work on a Win2K box, you cannot create a PRN anything from
command line ftp under 2000. NT4 may be different?
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 23:48:52 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > If you use a DVD to install an O/S it will be slower than a current
> > CD-ROM.
>
> Not if you factor noticing that the OS wants another disc, finding the disc,
> and replacing it.
> I would estimate this as 5 minutes per each disc, for myself. Maybe more.
Depends on the O/S.
But from what I've read the DVD will take twice as long to install as 3
CD-ROMS.
I started one Linux install on an older machine and the CD-ROM drive was
only 2x.
That took about 2 1/2 hours to do. The same linux install on a 48x
CD-ROM took about 20 minutes.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:57:15 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>> "Rene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:pwTU6.38562$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > 1.- Is Linux (kernel) programmed on C or C++? 2.- Is GNOME programmed
>> > on C or C++?
Linux, like Windows, is coded in C. So is GNOME.
>> >
>> > Is this the wrong place to post this question? Sorry I apologize,
>> > could
>> you
>> > please be so kind to point me to the right news group?
This is an okay place to post the question. The only thing to be aware
of is that after we answer your question, somebody's going to throw
a punch. Then we're going to start ranting and flaming about something.
Soon you'll see dozens of posts here, arguing points that have nothing
to do with your questions. Apart from that, it's an okay place to post
such a question. You might also consider
comp.os.linux.development.apps
comp.os.linux.development.system
>> Linux is written in C, like all UNIX's, GNOME, I am not too sure,
>> however, I do know KDE is written in C++, as they donot require the
>> same low level access as an OS kernel requires.
> Why do people always assume that C++ can't do what C can do? It is
> absurd. Low level access has absolutely nothing to do with it. There is
> almost nothing you can do in C which can not also be done in C++. The
> kernel is written in C, although one can write modules in C++ were one
> to desire to do so.
> <RANT>
> GNOME is written in C for some stupidly flawed logic. I have yet to see
> a reasonable explanation, with the possible exception that the original
> developers only knew C and decided that ignorance was a better strategy
> than actually learning about computers and computing languages. KDE,
> IMHO, is far more stable BECAUSE it uses C++. GNOME is a pitiful hack
> which attempts an object oriented paradigm who's design criteria
> directly adheres to the strengths of C++, yet they chose not to use C++.
> It is a shame that so much development time and effort has been
> dedicated to a project which was a failure from the very start. </RANT>
I have to agree with the above rant. The usual hype is that even though
GNOME is written in C it's really an elegant object oriented system. The
truth is that the code is very ugly stuff. GUI environments like GNOME
just beg to be object oriented, and forcing it into C using a set of
weird conventions is very bogus. It's more of the same old fashioned
thinking that pisses me off at a large part of the UNIX community.
There's no good technical reason for sticking with C; it's just UNIX
and GNU tradition. Andy Herzfeld mentioned this issue. The Eazel
team reluctantly agreed to write in C lest they shock the GNOME
community with that new fangled thing called objects.
The purpose of GNOME is to bring Linux into the
1980's and beyond, yet the GNOME team shackles itself to those
old 1970's ideas that cripple UNIX.
There was an opinion piece on OS opinion a few months ago about
why so few Linux developers use C++ rather than C. From the
responses, it was clear that a lot of Linux developers haven't
made an informed judgement about this. They just think C++
is "complicated" because they aren't willing to tax their lazy
brains enough to learn about object oriented programming, one of
the standard concepts in computer programming.
This is probably part of the reason GNOME is progressing so slowly
despite having a rather large community of developers.
I myself settled on GNOME for "philosophical" reasons before Qt
fixed the licensing problems. I still use GNOME, but I'm not blind.
It's very unreliable and not up to the standards of KDE.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Any lICQ users here?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:36:48 -0700
Richard Thrippleton wrote:
>
> If so, questions need answering. Is it just a problem with my
> version, or have the protocols on WinICQ clients been changing recently?
> Recently, I've been unable to send messages directly to more and more
> Windows users. Some ICQ servers kick me off saying invalid protocol number,
> and file transfers to me result in errors in the log about 'TCP v6
> encryption'. What the f*ck are AOL playing at?
>
> Richard
Sounds like ipv6 protocol is being used at AOL... it would seem to make
sense, seeing how big they are. But that's AOL for ya.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 11 Jun 2001 07:36:23 GMT
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 13:28:31 +1000, green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had a trident 8900c and xfree 4.0
> defaulted and would not go higher than 640x400 in 16 colour (4 bit) mode
> because there wasn't
> a svga driver for it and no default vesa driver.
>
> thank god (or the maintainers ;) that it was fixed in 4.1 and 4.2
>
> but still it caused some grief.
>
> I have to guess when setting up the card in xfree 3.x, in XF86Config .
>
> and it can support and does a 1024 X 786 @ 256 colour (8 bit).
>
> something to do with clock modes and scan rates.
> resolved most trouble after guessing values that xconfig gave and tested
> correctly but
> didn't work on later runs. no the config file wasn't being over written.
> just setup passes some thing
> to X that I can't find.
>
> conclusion setting up x is not easy.
I've had 3 Trident video cards and they were the most junky, rubish
I've ever owned. The 8900c had all of 512 megs ram, which wasnt
upgradeable and therefore limited the resolution/colors.
Even I, with my love of old ISA cards, ditched the Tridents I owned
*years* ago. I'm supprised anyone would use them now, when S3 variants
with 4 megs ram are available in PCI and for about $50 Australian.
The Trident 9000c I owned failed on hot days, splashing colored lines
all over the screen. Yes it was under Windows in those days (pre 1997).
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:42:00 -0700
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ, unfortunately, runs
> > > on Windows.
> > >
> > > Matthew Gardiner
> > >
> > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just isn't
> > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
>
> About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they were
> moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or if
> it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard about it
> if it went south.
>
> -c
>
> >
> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:84aU6.9834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:3%9U6.1335$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In article <3b212110$0$94312$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers
> > > > says...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] dripot> wrote in message
> > > > > >news:CP8U6.1221$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >> What's the skinny ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >What software are they running for what?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Haven't heard about the fiasco today ?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm talking about what they use for managing trades.
> > > >
> > > > Well, their web site runs under AIX, so one would assume that they're
> > > > probably a big IBM shop, and are probably running trades under AIX and/or
> > > > OS/390.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Vester
> > A credible Linux advocate
> >
> > "The avalanche has started, it is
> > too late for the pebbles to vote"
> > Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
Highly unlikely that any stock exchange is using micros or microsoft
products to run the core of operations. These are done with
mainframes... goto comp.os.vm or comp.os.vms and ask the question.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:44:33 -0700
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
> unfortunately, runs
> > > > > > on Windows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > > > >
> > > > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> > > > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just isn't
> > > > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> > > >
> > > > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they were
> > > > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or if
> > > > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard about it
> > > > if it went south.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Only the front end is running WinDog, the back end is not according to a
> > > Information Week article.
> >
> > It is Unisys
> > http://www.nasdaq.com/reference/sn_indices_temp_disrupt_000218.stm
> > With 300,000 terminals involved in trading, how could it be losedos?
> > NASDAQ requires much more than what a toy operating system like losedos
> > can provide.
>
> Well, I don't know about your "losedos", but Unisys seems to be
> convinced that Win2K Datacenter is where their company needs to be.
> http://www.gartner.com/webletter/microsoft/article4/article4.html
>
> Abbey National decided to give their old mainframes the boot:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/datacenter/evaluation/casestudies/abbey.asp
>
> Financial services? Unix won't cut it here.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/datacenter/evaluation/casestudies/ragnarok.
> asp
>
I highly doubt that... as UNIX and Apache are primarily the predominant
O/S and webserver software out there.
You need big iron for heavy volume trading.
So far that is all that is running,... BIG IRON.
> Won't be long before NASDAQ is running an ES-7000 or a few.
>
> -c
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Date: 11 Jun 2001 07:48:52 GMT
Subject: Re: XP finally reveals it true colors!!!
>Fixes were actually offered for the K6 chip.
The "official" fix I saw was marked as for OSR2-- not the retail version. I
have seen an unoffical repackaging of the fix for other revisions, but by then,
it was too late for me.
>Also, why not use a Mac?
>compared to a mid range, brand name PeeCee, they are pretty much a tie,
A lot of people, especially home users, are going to be attracted to that $499
eMachines box with the $400 rebate if you sign your kidneys over to LargeISP,
over the $799 or more Mac.
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:48:51 -0700
Corpus Callosum wrote:
>
> <flame>
>
> Why are KDE and Gnome both attempting to replicate Microsoft Windows
> when technologies like XML and CORBA would make something so much
> more elegant possible?
>
> Why are they still coding user interfaces in C or C++ when XML would
> be so much better?
>
> Consider this: Imagine an XML markup language for defining user
> interfaces using GTK or QT. Tags might look something like this:
>
> <button name="cancel" inheritThemes="yes" text="Cancel"
> onClick="some::kind::of::object:address()"/>
>
> Then every user interface including the desktop could be declared
> in XML. Users could customize interfaces or write.. get this.. whole
> new ones that draw upon the functionality of multiple applications!
>
> Imagine being able to write your own XML interface definition to
> merge, say, a seperate mailreader and web browser together! Or a
> code editor and a debugger? Don't like how the menus work in
> your application? Open a text editor and change them!
>
> It would also be much easier and more flexible for app authors since
> they literally would not have to worry about the pains of X and GUI
> programming... they could just write their XML to call their event
> functions through an ORB of some kind. Applications could even
> be controlled over the network via CORBA or something similar.
>
> That would be like, totally 2001 man!
>
> But instead the KDE and Gnome teams are sitting there listening
> to Totally 80s trying to duplicate Windoze and coding UIs in
> C and C++ that look and feel like Windoze when even M$ is
> gradually moving towards something like I mentioned above.
>
> Taaaaake onnnnn meeee.... take on me.... taaaake meeeeee
> ooooon! ... I'lll beeee goooone...
>
> Love shack! Baby, Love shack!
>
> </flame>
What did you discover... ah yes,... a thirteen year old finally
discovered masturbation.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:50:44 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> Can you say, N-U-T-S-C-R-A-P-E-6, the whole interface in XML, and look where
> that has ended up doing to the browser. 30Meg memory print for every window,
> which peaks at around 60mb when using the mail program.
>
> Matthew gardiner
>
> "Corpus Callosum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > <flame>
> >
> > Why are KDE and Gnome both attempting to replicate Microsoft Windows
> > when technologies like XML and CORBA would make something so much
> > more elegant possible?
> >
> > Why are they still coding user interfaces in C or C++ when XML would
> > be so much better?
> >
> > Consider this: Imagine an XML markup language for defining user
> > interfaces using GTK or QT. Tags might look something like this:
> >
> > <button name="cancel" inheritThemes="yes" text="Cancel"
> > onClick="some::kind::of::object:address()"/>
> >
> > Then every user interface including the desktop could be declared
> > in XML. Users could customize interfaces or write.. get this.. whole
> > new ones that draw upon the functionality of multiple applications!
> >
> > Imagine being able to write your own XML interface definition to
> > merge, say, a seperate mailreader and web browser together! Or a
> > code editor and a debugger? Don't like how the menus work in
> > your application? Open a text editor and change them!
> >
> > It would also be much easier and more flexible for app authors since
> > they literally would not have to worry about the pains of X and GUI
> > programming... they could just write their XML to call their event
> > functions through an ORB of some kind. Applications could even
> > be controlled over the network via CORBA or something similar.
> >
> > That would be like, totally 2001 man!
> >
> > But instead the KDE and Gnome teams are sitting there listening
> > to Totally 80s trying to duplicate Windoze and coding UIs in
> > C and C++ that look and feel like Windoze when even M$ is
> > gradually moving towards something like I mentioned above.
> >
> > Taaaaake onnnnn meeee.... take on me.... taaaake meeeeee
> > ooooon! ... I'lll beeee goooone...
> >
> > Love shack! Baby, Love shack!
> >
> > </flame>
> >
Hehehe.... nothing like ol senna cotte wouldn't cure! Nutscrape 6
really is one slow program and a disk hog.
--
V
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
