Linux-Advocacy Digest #668, Volume #25 Fri, 17 Mar 00 14:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Rex Riley)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (Pjtg0707)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Windows 2000: nothing worse ("Mr. Rupert")
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
("Chuck Swiger")
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed (Tim Kelley)
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed (Tim Kelley)
Linux for Mac PPC 6100 and SE/30 (Larry Niebur)
Re: Salary? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Salary? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Linux for Mac PPC 6100 and SE/30 (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Offtopic (BWMiller)
Re: Salary? (John Hagen)
Re: Offtopic (BWMiller)
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed ("Chad Myers")
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(John Jensen)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob Hauck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rex Riley)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:10:52 GMT
In <8athfr$l0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Jensen wrote:
> Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : The <rant> in MP's post had an aire of frustration at the obvious. MP
> : reframed the solution everyone was making for a QuickTime problem - that
> : wasn't.
>
> : I didn't read any elitist whiner "we got ours - now here's how you get
> : yours" posturing. It's disengenious packaging BSD+Gnu with MP's
> : observation making Apple out the moral hypocrite.
>
> : Any *attitude* ... was the temerity of condemning Apple closed source
> : when it suits Linux philosophy and ignoring Apple open source when it
> : doesn't.
>
> I think I started this, actually. In replying to mbkennel's question of
> what Apple could do to enguage the Linux movement, I wrote:
>
> "Or 'Why, exactly?'
>
> Why didn't Apple make a Quicktime player for Linux?
>
> They certainly didn't owe it to anyone, but why did they decide
> not to make friends?"
>
> We were discussing how Apple could build bridges to the Linux community,
> and I was suggesting that Apple simply didn't want such bridges. The
> first answer I got to the QuickTime question was that it would take too
> long and be too costly. Later we were informed my Mr. Paquette that it
> was actually pretty easy.
>
> (It is amusing that at least one other person in this group who earlier
> said "too hard" has now shifted seamlessly to "too easy". Ah well, this
> is *.advocacy and consistency is a little too much to expect.)
>
> It seems to reinforce my feeling that the Apple culture is uncomfortable
> with the Linux movement, when they will cast about for any reason not to
> help them.
>
> I'll say it again, lest there be confustion "They certainly didn't owe it
> to anyone, but why did they decide not to make friends?"
>
> If the answer is that Apple doesn't want those kind of friends, we can
> take that information and move on.
>
>
Insanity is asking the same question over again expecting different answers.
This philosophical matrix you work at constructing around Apple has no tenets
upon which to host logical debate. Unilaterally assigning malappropriation
of thought and non-actions on Apple's behalf is the Justice Clarence Thomas
dilemna. Accused, maligned and painted a turncoat on the Linux revolutionary
forces - Apple cannot disprove the falsehood?
-r
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:22:55 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 16:34:36 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 20:07:02 -0800, Aaron Melgares
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >(JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ultimately, the most sensible course of action is to
>> >> move the market away from vendorlock that forces those
>> >> of us that would like to have reasonable free will in
>> >> our buying choices to essentially 'steal' someone else's
>> >> patented work without their permission.
>> >
>> >For God's sake, this is the most incoherent doubletalk I've seen on
>> >Usenet in ages. I'm nominating you for this years' "OpenFreeSourceLinux
>> >GreedyCorporateBastardsKilledMyDog Award"
>> >
>> >Yeah, Linux users are very oppressed not being able to watch movie
>> >trailers and other corporate commercials on their computers. What a
>> >crock...
>>
>> No, we object to being LOCKED OUT OF CONTENT being distributed
>> on a presumably open system. What apple is doing is tantamount
>> to encouraging content providers to distribute their 'print'
>> media in msword format rather than html.
>>
>> Real Audio is really no better but they at least are widening
>> the availability of their decoders.
>>
>> RMS has the right idea. Shun Apple.
>
>
>Hmmm.
>
>Apple uses the industry standard mpeg4 format. Real and Microsoft are
>using proprietary formats.
>
>What's your point?
This is just the sort of half-truth that Apple peddles.
The crucial bit, the bit that actually contains the
information is not infact 'industry standard'.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based videoa 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monpolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pjtg0707)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:25:37 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:58:51 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Geoff Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Would you rather we rewrite the kernel in Fortran or COBOL? :-)
>
What have you got against Fortran? And why can't you guys get your
acts together and rewrite Linux in Fortran, so I don't have to learn
any new stuffs anymore? >;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:28:35 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:10:52 GMT, Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In <8athfr$l0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Jensen wrote:
>> Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> : The <rant> in MP's post had an aire of frustration at the obvious. MP
>> : reframed the solution everyone was making for a QuickTime problem - that
>> : wasn't.
>>
>> : I didn't read any elitist whiner "we got ours - now here's how you get
>> : yours" posturing. It's disengenious packaging BSD+Gnu with MP's
>> : observation making Apple out the moral hypocrite.
>>
>> : Any *attitude* ... was the temerity of condemning Apple closed source
>> : when it suits Linux philosophy and ignoring Apple open source when it
>> : doesn't.
>>
>> I think I started this, actually. In replying to mbkennel's question of
>> what Apple could do to enguage the Linux movement, I wrote:
>>
>> "Or 'Why, exactly?'
>>
>> Why didn't Apple make a Quicktime player for Linux?
>>
>> They certainly didn't owe it to anyone, but why did they decide
>> not to make friends?"
>>
>> We were discussing how Apple could build bridges to the Linux community,
>> and I was suggesting that Apple simply didn't want such bridges. The
>> first answer I got to the QuickTime question was that it would take too
>> long and be too costly. Later we were informed my Mr. Paquette that it
>> was actually pretty easy.
>>
>> (It is amusing that at least one other person in this group who earlier
>> said "too hard" has now shifted seamlessly to "too easy". Ah well, this
>> is *.advocacy and consistency is a little too much to expect.)
>>
>> It seems to reinforce my feeling that the Apple culture is uncomfortable
>> with the Linux movement, when they will cast about for any reason not to
>> help them.
>>
>> I'll say it again, lest there be confustion "They certainly didn't owe it
>> to anyone, but why did they decide not to make friends?"
>>
>> If the answer is that Apple doesn't want those kind of friends, we can
>> take that information and move on.
>>
>>
>
>Insanity is asking the same question over again expecting different answers.
>
>
>This philosophical matrix you work at constructing around Apple has no tenets
>upon which to host logical debate. Unilaterally assigning malappropriation
>of thought and non-actions on Apple's behalf is the Justice Clarence Thomas
>dilemna. Accused, maligned and painted a turncoat on the Linux revolutionary
>forces - Apple cannot disprove the falsehood?
They give lip service to openness and then turn around and
encourage everyone to join their 'windows only club'. They
choose to treat smaller competitor systems just as Microsoft
would prefer to treat Apple.
This is why we chuckle at Apple when they claim to give away
BSD and not their hypocrisy when they do so the day after the
first TPM trailer was snugly vendorlocked away from anyone
who contributed to the BSD codebase.
Nevermind Linux, Apple is excluding the exact same people that
they sponged their OS core off of.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based videoa 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monpolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:33:26 -0600
Nothing worse than being stopped at a red light only to have a bum
attempt to wash your windshield and hand you a W2K CD.
So far, I have come to learn through these newsgroups that W2K is
riddled with more than 60,000 bugs, cannot scale to Hotmail-style
services, is expensive to buy, is not selling very well, is a
multi-user OS through a GUI kludge, encourages users to run as root,
is a virus haven, and is an administrative nightmare of endless
clicks and check boxes.
--
Mr Rupert
IRIX64
.
------------------------------
From: "Chuck Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:46:49 GMT
In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ ...absolutely nothing worth reading, again... ]
Plonk.
-Chuck
Chuck 'Sisyphus' Swiger | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Bad cop! No Donut.
------------------------+-------------------+--------------------
I know that you are an optimist if you think I am a pessimist....
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:52:17 -0600
tony roth wrote:
>
> mlw as usual making blanket statements, without a lick of proof! Let me see
> I have 2k plus users maybe .005% run as power user or above!
It doesn't make a difference really. A default user can fuck up
an NT system so bad that it won't run. The default file system
permissions are a fucking mess (in other words, wide open), and
to change them to sane values will break almost every app you
run, because they are always writing shit to directories under
the system root. Especially M$ apps such as Outlook.
There really isn't any comparision to the neatness and
organization of any unix and the completely nightmarish piece of
shit that windows is.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: 17 Mar 2000 18:51:59 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Terry Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Just a heads up - using environmental variables in news posts is Unix dweeb
>rule number three, surpassed in pure annoyance only by using "fsck" as
>a swear word, and calling "X Windows" anything besides "X Windows".
I note that there is no such thing as "X Windows"... it is called X,
period. The corresponding "heads up" is an exercise left to the reader.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:53:11 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:46:49 GMT, Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[ ...absolutely nothing worth reading, again... ]
>
>Plonk.
Sticking your head in the sand won't make the 'bad ideas' go away.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, they / | \
are no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:55:08 -0600
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > But it still can't do any more damage than that user's rights allow.
> >
> > But most users need to run as power users, or local admin, so as much
> > damage as it wishes.
>
> They don't "need" to, that's just how lazy sys admins set them up.
>
> It's possible to run a tight ship and still run all the apps the person
> needs to.
Let's see your recommendations for NTFS file permissions, Chad.
Give them to us. You're full of shit and you know it.
Changing the permissions under systemroot to read only will fuck
everything and most apps will not work.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Niebur)
Subject: Linux for Mac PPC 6100 and SE/30
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:47:42 -0600
Hi,
I want to get started with Linux on Macs, but I want to use old Mac boxes
like SE/30's and a PPC 6100. Where do I start?
I had heard of Yellow Dog, but when I went to their site I found out there
Linux only runs on Macs with a PCI bus.
Is Linux fast enough on an SE/30?
I thought I could get by with internal small HD's and an external 2 GB.
Will that work?
Thanks for any help you can provide!
Larry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 22:08:18 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 8 Mar 2000 18:41:53 GMT...
...and Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that where "racism" ( for want of a better word ) kicks in is
> in the "networking". It's simply easier to "network" with your own race.
> ( Women have the same problem in male dominated industries btw ) This
> problem is extremely subtle and also somewhat self-perpetuating. It's
> precisely the kind of thing that affirmative action was designed to
> ( but often fails to ) address.
*completely OT!*
Someone recently explained it to me, but I forgot it in the meantime:
what is affirmative action again?
mawa
--
Some people seem to have a kind of key to life. They've got an easy
way to decode it, or either to strip it clean of everything that
doesn't go with their model of it. Other people have got to face it in
its entirety, or at least what looks like its entirety. -- mawa
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 22:16:13 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Thu, 9 Mar 2000 12:06:10 +0100...
...and Martin Knoblauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Universities are mostly public and almost free of fees. Still a university
> education will coust you (you parents) a lot of money. With a five year
> minimum study time and 12/13 school years you leave university at age 24
> earliest. If you get a PHD it will bring you to 30-35. This is something
> that hurts us a lot (so industry says at least ...).
The industry should just shut up.
They want our education system do deliver 22-year-old university
graduates (with five year's job experience:) who are willing to work
more than their parents for less pay.
In short, they expect impossible things from the state without giving
the state a single penny to live up to their expectations.
If they're not satisfied with the people the education system
delivers, they should go ahead and offer competitive private education
to have their cadres drilled the optimal way. It's a pity that at the
moment, the industry seems to be able to extort everything from the
German government because whenever the government complains about
the industry's wishes, they start whining about how noncompetitive,
losing and lazy everything in Germany is and how it will cost tens of
thousands of jobs if the government doesn't comply immediately to
their demands.
mawa
--
Around the corner lives a hacker with a terminal
And on his Web page is a PNG of RMS
He likes to keep his Sun workstation clean
It's a clean machine...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux for Mac PPC 6100 and SE/30
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 18:15:47 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 11:47:42 -0600, Larry Niebur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
Try linuxppc.org.
You will need a different variant of linux to run on a 68K mac.
>
>I want to get started with Linux on Macs, but I want to use old Mac boxes
>like SE/30's and a PPC 6100. Where do I start?
>
>I had heard of Yellow Dog, but when I went to their site I found out there
>Linux only runs on Macs with a PCI bus.
>
>Is Linux fast enough on an SE/30?
>
>I thought I could get by with internal small HD's and an external 2 GB.
>Will that work?
>
>Thanks for any help you can provide!
>
>Larry
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BWMiller)
Subject: Re: Offtopic
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 18:16:44 GMT
Try Samba.org.
- BWMiller
CallNOW.com NetAdmin
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 08:30:33 -0800, Ilya Grishashvili
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sorry, this msg probably should not be here...
>
>Anyway, I want to get a reallly cooool T-shirt with Linux
>symbolics (like Red-Hat or something...)
>
>Is there any web where I can order it?
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------
>Ilya Grishashvili
>Computer Systems Group
>Ph.D. CS Department
>Marlan & Rosemary Bourns College of Engineering
>University of California, Riverside
>Office: Bourns Hall B246
>Phone: (909) 787-2893
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Web: mirage.cs.ucr.edu/~elias/
>------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 10:18:45 -0800
From: John Hagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> Around the corner lives a hacker with a terminal
> And on his Web page is a PNG of RMS
> He likes to keep his Sun workstation clean
> It's a clean machine...
Are there more lyrics to go with this snippet??
Damn, now I'll have "Penny Lane" goin' round in my head all day..
Cheers,
--
john hagen ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BWMiller)
Subject: Re: Offtopic
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 18:19:26 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 08:30:33 -0800, Ilya Grishashvili
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sorry, this msg probably should not be here...
>
>Anyway, I want to get a reallly cooool T-shirt with Linux
>symbolics (like Red-Hat or something...)
>
>Is there any web where I can order it?
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------
>Ilya Grishashvili
>Computer Systems Group
>Ph.D. CS Department
>Marlan & Rosemary Bourns College of Engineering
>University of California, Riverside
>Office: Bourns Hall B246
>Phone: (909) 787-2893
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Web: mirage.cs.ucr.edu/~elias/
>------------------------------------------------
Try Samba.org.
- BWMiller
CallNOW.com NetAdmin
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 12:21:28 -0600
"Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Wow... where to start with this one...
> It doesn't make a difference really. A default user can fuck up
> an NT system so bad that it won't run.
False Statement #1
> The default file system permissions are a fucking mess
> (in other words, wide open), and
Misleading Statement #1, um it's not like you can't change them, and
that's what the Security Configuration Editor is for: setting up one
box and replicating the security to others
> to change them to sane values will break almost every app you
> run,
False Statement #2, this is a gross exaggeration, if not completely
false. There are SOME 3rd party poorly written apps that require
rediculous permissions, but not very many.
> because they are always writing shit to directories under
> the system root.
False Statement #3
> Especially M$ apps
False Statement #4
Office97 can be deployed in a highly secure environment.
There is a document on MS's site saying that you essentially have
to have everything open, but it's wrong. The writer was too lazy
to test it otherwise.
There is a discussion on this on NTBugTraq.
It turns out that the Office97 requires read/write to the temp
directory (which COULD be somewhat bad, but it's minor) Read/Write
to the Templates directory, but not necessarily the NORMAL.DOT,
and Add permissions to the SYSTEM32 directory.
It doesn't not need to modify existing files, it's just that,
in a special case when a special addition to Excel is used (I think
it's for advanced financial calculations, it's an add in that has
to be specially loaded from the CD) it wants to write a temp file
to SYSTEM32 and then delete it when it's done.
So you would assign to SYSTEM32
Administrators: Full Control
SYSTEM: Full Control
Authenticated Users: Read, Execute, Add
CREATOR/OWNER: Full Control
If you don't use that special add-in, you can lock SYSTEM32 down tight,
which is what is recommended.
> such as Outlook.
False Statement #5
If any of the Office apps are broken, it's not Outlook. Outlook requires
the LEAST privleges since it does everything it does in the user's
home dir (PST files, OST files, PAB, etc).
If I were to pick the worse Office app for security, it would be
Excel because of the SYSTEM32 deal mentioned above.
Office2000 is much better in this reguards, and it even has it's own
security configurator for mass deployments in high security environments.
> There really isn't any comparision to the neatness and
> organization of any unix and the completely nightmarish piece of
> shit that windows is.
Crass, ignorant Statement #1
-Chad
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: 17 Mar 2000 18:22:26 GMT
Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: In <8athfr$l0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Jensen wrote:
: > I'll say it again, lest there be confustion "They certainly didn't owe it
: > to anyone, but why did they decide not to make friends?"
: >
: > If the answer is that Apple doesn't want those kind of friends, we can
: > take that information and move on.
: Insanity is asking the same question over again expecting different
: answers.
But I've gotten several answers already ;-)
: This philosophical matrix you work at constructing around Apple has no
: tenetsupon which to host logical debate. Unilaterally assigning
: malappropriation of thought and non-actions on Apple's behalf is the
: Justice Clarence Thomas dilemna. Accused, maligned and painted a
: turncoat on the Linux revolutionary forces - Apple cannot disprove the
: falsehood?
I've only suggested that non-action shows lack of interest, nothing more
sinister.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: 17 Mar 2000 18:40:41 GMT
Reply-To: bobh{at}slc{dot}codem{dot}com
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 15:19:47 -0600, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Except for the part about running on Solaris, AIX, VMS, Linux, Amiga,
>> and just about every other OS ever made. >>
>You know, it seems like you guys dwell more on this than anyone else does.
That would be because Unix people tend to have to deal with lots of
different platforms. Unix in various incarnations does run on many and
varied systems. I know that you Windows folk would just like all that
messy heterogeneity to go away, but that doesn't seem likely to happen
anytime soon.
>We're simply comparing functionality in text editors. Emacs is definately
>feature rich, don't get me wrong, but it takes a PhD to get them to work,
>let alone master them.
You are grossly exaggerating the difficulty. Which makes sense since you
haven't actually ever used the program.
>So, simply because it runs on a bunch of platforms it's a good program?
That is one of many benefits. If you have to change platforms a lot, it
is a very important benefit. By itself, that property says nothing about
whether it is a good program or not.
>No. I'm simply stating that Vi, Emacs, et al are incredibly
>overcomplicated for a not-that-complicated task.
Emacs, vi, etc, are often the right tool for the job. If your task is
editing autoexec.bat, maybe they are overkill. But if your task is
writing 100k lines of C++ and managing releases with a version control
system while ensuring that the code meets the company coding standards,
then maybe they are great tools. Why can't you recognize that being able
to use a program in the first five seconds is not the only criterion for
goodness, especially when you are talking about professional-grade tools?
>No, Bob, text editing DOESN'T have to be this difficult. Cutting and
>pasting DOESN'T have to involve 20 key strokes!.
It doesn't, and if you had ever actually used it instead of just hating it
because of an irrational hatred of all things Unix, you would know that.
Nobody would use such a thing and the fact that you think there are
millions of deluded souls who don't know any better says more about you
than anything I can think up.
Cutting and pasting in Emacs can take _no_ keystrokes if you use the
mouse. Or, you can use the registers and kill ring and be able to keep a
dozen snippets of text around to be pasted hours later. Lots of editors
have features like this Chad, and ALL of them are going to take some
learning if you want to use the more advanced stuff. For another example,
there's regular expressions. Many Windows text editors have regular
expression searching, just like Emacs and vi. And even though it is
Windows, you still have to understand regular expressions to use this
feature, and that takes more than six seconds to learn.
There are things wrong with Emacs, sure, just like any other program.
The GUI menus are poorly laid out for example. But the fact that it has
been around forever and continues to have a large and growing userbase
must mean that it doesn't completely suck.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
