Linux-Advocacy Digest #156, Volume #26 Sun, 16 Apr 00 12:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Forget buying drestin UNIX. Buy him a memory (was Re: Detonators 5.14 UP!!!!!!!!)
(Rob Hughes)
Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU! MICROSOFT IS THRU! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Tim Haynes)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Tim Mayer")
Re: Detonators 5.14 UP!!!!!!!! ("TiMOiD")
Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC ("ax")
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Tim Mayer")
Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Bart Oldeman)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (John Hasler)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (C Lund)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux? ("Mike")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rob Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Forget buying drestin UNIX. Buy him a memory (was Re: Detonators 5.14
UP!!!!!!!!)
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 09:36:50 -0500
Hokay, laffing boi, here we go:
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=582727974&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=8
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=584994737&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=11
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=583419426&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=12
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=583958058&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=13
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=581992412&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=17
(this one pretty much sums up his whole view on copyrighted material)
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=575811841&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=22
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=582634042&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=27
(note drestin's stance on "licensing". also note that drestin was
requesting information about unreleased, and therefore unlicensed
drivers)
http://x31.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=582812581&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798&hitnum=32
(touches on pirating)
Some are more relevant than others, but I think we all get the idea....
If you want to read all of drestin's musings on the
linux/decss/piracy/copyright violation thing, look here:
http://x31.deja.com/dnquery.xp?search=next&DBS=1&[EMAIL PROTECTED]%20AND%20decss&ST=MS&offsets=db2000p1%0217%01db99p10%024%01db2000p2%021%01db2000p3%023&svcclass=dnserver&CONTEXT=955894517.1533345798
The entire crux is that drestin states that "pirating is bad" and
"violating copyrights is bad" and that "you shouldn't do that". So,
drestin then turns around and asks for information about drivers to
which he holds no license (unreleased drivers used against the creators
wishes). NVIDIA has send cease and desist orders to web site posting
their unreleased drivers, which I can certainly understand. I'm sure it
must be increasing their support costs when some luser calls up with a
broken beta driver wanting help, even if its only the 30 seconds or so
it takes to explain that its an unreleased driver. Now you, drestin, can
deny what you wrote all you want, as well as right me off as just
another "crazy linvocate", which would be weird in and of itself, since
I don't use linux and actually like w2k, but hey, you rationalize it any
way that makes you feel better. Have a nice day...
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 13:54:57 -0400, "Drestin Black"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:p.s., unless you can provide some documentation to:
:"All things you've proclaimed loud and long
:> that you will never touch, are completely opposed to, and further stated
:> that anyone stooping to such a level is lower than the lowest scum on
:> earth."
:
:I will continue to have to consider you a liar and lying outloud in these
:groups.
:I never said such things and you are lying.
:
:"Rob Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> Well, drestin, you should be able to access that on NVIDIA's site. Since
:> you've made several statements that you would never use anything pirated
:> or in any other way violating a copyright, and since these are obviously
:> leaked drivers, then unless you have signed an NDA you would be
:> violating an NVIDIA copyright. So, you'll just go to NVIDIA's site as a
:> registered developer with a signed NDA and a username/password, now,
:> right? I mean, this isn't much different from the whole DeCSS copyright
:> issue, pirated software, etc. All things you've proclaimed loud and long
:> that you will never touch, are completely opposed to, and further stated
:> that anyone stooping to such a level is lower than the lowest scum on
:> earth.
:>
:> On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:47:30 -0400, "Drestin Black"
:> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> :can anyone get the PDF file? Mine has a broken link.
:> :
:> :if so, can you post the proper link
:> :
:> :"Suzook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:> :news:otMJ4.4523$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> :> Here they are
:> :>
:> :> http://www.xs4all.nl/~bmsmit/
:> :>
:> :>
:> :
:>
:>
:>
:> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
:> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
:> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
:>
:
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU! MICROSOFT IS THRU!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 14:39:17 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Dear Chad.
> > >
> > > Microsoft is asking everybody to delete that .dll.
> > > They wouldn't ask us to delete the .dll if it weren't a threat.
> >
> > Because people are too stupid to set their permissions correctly.
> permissions for you NT people are like what you have to do in Linux.
> You know, Linux. That cruddy operating system which let's you do things.
NT lets you, and in fact encourages you to set permissions. What the hell
are you talking about? Or are you just ignorantly blathering again?
> Well, your not supposed to have to do that to NT as they were supposed
> to set your operating system up right folks and NOT include any .dll's
> with passwords like netscapeengineersareweenies....
Hey Charlie, do you even know the facts? Here, let's have a review:
1.) There is no backdoor password
2.) That dll only has one error: a buffer overrun which was found after WSJ
started this whole hype trip (that you fell for hook, line and sinker)
3.) However, it was found that if you do not set permissions correctly for
web publishing, it's POSSIBLE (although not likely) that someone could
read files from another user's account. Note that this has NOTHING to
do with that DLL files, this is just Permissioning 101.
> > Not to mention that there is a buffer overrun that was discovered (which has
> > nothing to do with this false 'backdoor' urban legend) and since this DLL
> > is pretty much depricated, MS is just advising to delete it for precaution.
>
> Depreciated = Netscape is out of business.
What? <sigh> That DLL has nothing to do with Netscape. That DLL was used to
facilitate using Visual InterDev 1.0's LinkView functionality. Since VID 1.0 is
depricated (because VID 6.0 is out) there is no use for the DLL anyhow.
It has nothing to do with Netscape, moron.
> > If MS were interested in backdooring your system, why would they tell you
> > to delete it?
> >
>
> Perhaps the entire world knows about it now Chad?
Knows what? That there is no backdoor. Perhaps you should get a clue like the
rest of us?
THERE IS NO BACKDOOR OR SECRET PASSWORD.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Haynes)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 16 Apr 2000 15:47:46 +0100
Reply-To: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"red-5" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[]
> > > Ugh, why am I arguing this point?
> >
> > Because you react to the word Nazi in the irrational knee-jerk fashion
> that
> > you think all Americans react to the word communist.
>
> Damn straight you get a knee-jerk reaction to the word "Nazi"- have you
> ever visited Auchwitz?
Anyone mind if I suggest that (some of us on) uk.comp.os.linux believe(s)
in Godwin's Law, and that this is getting (a) perilously close to such, and
(b) progressively off-topic for this group?
~Tim has set some followups.
--
| Geek Code: GCS dpu s-:+ a-- C++++ UBLUAVHSC++++ P+++ L++ E--- W+++(--) N++
| w--- O- M-- V-- PS PGP++ t--- X+(-) b D+ G e++(*) h++(*) r--- y-
| The sun is melting over the hills, | http://piglet.is.dreaming.org/
| All our roads are waiting / To be revealed | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 14:54:20 GMT
"Eric Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <cbaK4.42141$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Why would you want it to? Once the OS supports multiple instances, this
> > becomes the ideal solution for this type of problem. Multiple thread
> > share
> > memory and resources with the process, where multiple-processes are
> > completely isolated. Having this isolation is a great advantage when
one
> > of
> > them attempts something illegal (GPF).
>
> Maybe your software is a lot less reliable than mine, but the only
> things that I find crash are web browsers and games. I don't know
> anyone who launches multiple instances of Quake, and I would still
> rather have all my web pages open in one instance of a web browser. And
> even browsers don't crash *that* often.
There are always examples of applications that should exist as a single
instance, and certainly games like Quake is a good one. However reliable or
not, I prefer to minimize my loss when a single process crashes. Your
arguing that it's not a significant advantage, and perhaps that's true for
many cases, however in some cases it certainly will be.
How does the Mac handle printing one document while you edit another?
...
> > Don't confuse multiple instances with multiple threads. Multiple threads
> > enable a single application to do many things at once. Multiple
instances
> > allow you to run isolated processes, but each process can still run many
> > threads.
>
> So long as you have multiple threads, why bother with multiple
> instances? I don't buy your stability argument. I don't think the
> minimal return is worth it. When I'm on a Unix box, I could fire up six
> copies of Emacs, but I prefer instead to load my six text files into one
> instance of Emacs and switch between them with the Buffers menu. I
> can't remember Emacs ever crashing on me.
You insist it's minimal return, but it's not. Regardless, it's free because
the OS supports it, so the cost is nothing. In this case, why wouldn't you
implement it. Also, conceptually speaking, it just seems cleaner to me: One
document + One application + Multiple threads.
> > Multiple instances are isolated from each other, a single instance that
> > can
> > do many things at once is not. Say I run Internet Explorer twice, and
> > then
> > spawn 5 other windows from the second copy. If the first instance
> > crashes,
> > it will leave the other instance intact. However, if the second instance
> > crashes, it'll take all 6 windows with it. In the Windows world, this is
> > the
> > big difference. Hence, PMT and memory management allow for multiple
> > instances and improve the reliability of the system.
>
> You'd have to have pretty frequent app crashes to convince me that the
> interface nuisance was worth the stability gain. My software doesn't
> crash that often, and even so, I'd rather reload the three web browser
> windows I lost than spend time switching between apps during the
> majority of the time when the software *isn't* crashing.
There is no interface nuisance. Microsoft provides several very convenient
methods of switching apps.
> This introduces an extra layer of effort. If I have a lot of windows
> open, with a single instance, I go to the program's windows menu and
> select my window. With multiple instances, I have to select the
> instance and then the window. Or it introduces an extra submenu, or if
> all windows system-wide are listed at once I have to scan through more
> windows. I prefer the organization that comes from single instances.
But if every instance only had a single document, then you only really need
to select the window. If your talking about a lot of documents, then this is
probably a case where multiple instances fails. With only a handful of
documents, multiple instances are superior.
Tim
------------------------------
From: "TiMOiD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Detonators 5.14 UP!!!!!!!!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:54:24 +1000
The Win2k TNT2 drivers (5.14) are still sucky... 5 minutes after a restart,
oooh look a lovely BSOD. damn huh.
as long as i dont do anything on my computer, its rock solid...
*goes back to twiddling his thumbs*
"Rob Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Well, drestin, you should be able to access that on NVIDIA's site. Since
> you've made several statements that you would never use anything pirated
> or in any other way violating a copyright, and since these are obviously
> leaked drivers, then unless you have signed an NDA you would be
> violating an NVIDIA copyright. So, you'll just go to NVIDIA's site as a
> registered developer with a signed NDA and a username/password, now,
> right? I mean, this isn't much different from the whole DeCSS copyright
> issue, pirated software, etc. All things you've proclaimed loud and long
> that you will never touch, are completely opposed to, and further stated
> that anyone stooping to such a level is lower than the lowest scum on
> earth.
>
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:47:30 -0400, "Drestin Black"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> :can anyone get the PDF file? Mine has a broken link.
> :
> :if so, can you post the proper link
> :
> :"Suzook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> :news:otMJ4.4523$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> Here they are
> :>
> :> http://www.xs4all.nl/~bmsmit/
> :>
> :>
> :
>
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:00:07 GMT
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:53:26 GMT, ax wrote:
>
> >I rarely hear any discussion about X terminal. Can X terminal be
> >used with Linux server for cost saving for setting up a small computing
> >environment say for 10 to 20 people? If so, which vendors are
> >offering X terminals? If not, are there other alternatives?
>
> Hahaha ... an "X terminal" is a machine that doesn't run anything besides
> the X server ( like XFree86 ). They're not terribly popular nowadays, but
> I guess you could use one.
>
> I'm not sure how much it'd save you. If you want to run X at high color
> depth and res, you'll still need a reasonably powerful machine.
>
> One alternative would be to run a few low powered boxes, and run the
bulkier
> apps like Netscape and Star Office from a big server machine, but run
> everything else locally.
>
What about the so called NC (Network Computer)? Are NCs functionally
similar to or better than X terminals? Can NCs be used with Linux servers?
Are they cheaper than X terminals? Are there still NC vendors? Corel had
sold its NC product line. How about Oracle NCs?
> --
> Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 16 Apr 2000 11:04:48 -0400
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 13:20:43 +0200, Matthias Warkus wrote:
>It was the 15 Apr 2000 13:51:27 -0400...
>...and Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[Free market]
>> It's working quite well in most Western democracies.
>
>Thanks to heavy regulation by governments, international
>organisations, NGOs and such. The libertarians fail to grasp that a
I am not "the libertarians". My point is that communism is not the
answer to all the world problems. My point is that "experimenting" with
"communism" produces results so devestating that the communists disown
them.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:08:33 GMT
"C Lund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <oUbK4.42170$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > With Mac OS, creating
> > multiple windows for a single instance is unintuitive.
>
> You mean having different docs in each their window? How is that
> unintuitive? If you're sitting at a desk looking at multiple documents, do
> they magically crawl onto the same sheet of paper or do they stick to each
> their sheet?
But would you use your existing piece of paper to create or open new
documents? That's what I think is unintuitive. Using your desk metaphor,
every piece of paper is completely independent, but in the Mac OS they're
not. The Windows model more closely mimic the behavior of a folder, where
you have multiple documents within a folder. This is why you get multiple
windows within the application since it represents a single folder.
Tim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux?
Date: 16 Apr 2000 11:11:36 -0400
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 07:35:19 GMT, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Linuxs typically ship with vim/gvim which has syntax highlighting and
>>other goodies, and is certainly not "prehistoric".
>
>vim/gvim aren't plain vanilla vi, are they?
No, they're not. The main features gvim/vim adds are a GUI interface,
syntax highlighting, unlimited undo, "visual" mode ( where you can
highlight text then delete/copy/paste/perform regsubs ). The visual
mode is a really nice feature. plain vi ceratinly doesn't have any of these.
As far as "plain vanilla vi" goes, it's more or less a dinosaur -- most
of the Linux distributions ships with elvis ( another enhanced vi ) or vim
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 16 Apr 2000 11:14:01 -0400
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 04:48:13 GMT, John Hasler wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi writes:
>> Well show me a country where people "do productive stuff" out of their
>> "natural" desire to do so. ANy society, any time.
>
>Lots of people do "productive stuff" just for the hell of it. The thing
>is, their list of interesting productive stuff to do does not match up well
>with the supply of productive things in need of doing. The market provides
>incentives for them to rearrange their lists.
Not only is ist a good point, it's one I made about half a dozen times
in my post (-;
Cheers,
--
Donovan
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:09:41 GMT
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000, Eric Bennett wrote:
> Maybe your software is a lot less reliable than mine, but the only
> things that I find crash are web browsers and games. I don't know
> anyone who launches multiple instances of Quake, and I would still
> rather have all my web pages open in one instance of a web browser. And
> even browsers don't crash *that* often.
If I run "netscape &" on my Debian box and then again "netscape &", I get
two Netscape windows, part of the same instance of Netscape. It does not
permit proper multiple instances running of itself (I guess all linux
users know about the ~/.netscape/lock file ;-). OTOH, for multiple users
at the same time there can be multiple instances of Netscape, of course,
and they share their read-only memory.
> So long as you have multiple threads, why bother with multiple
> instances? I don't buy your stability argument. I don't think the
> minimal return is worth it. When I'm on a Unix box, I could fire up six
> copies of Emacs, but I prefer instead to load my six text files into one
> instance of Emacs and switch between them with the Buffers menu. I
> can't remember Emacs ever crashing on me.
Of course it depends on the application. Almost always I have multiple
instances of bash, xterm, etc. running.
Bart
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 16 Apr 2000 11:19:43 -0400
>Tell me why do we have to go somewhere out in the desert to start
>everything from scratch? I got a better idea, why dotn we take all
>the factories, farms ands other means of production the we have created
>working for the masters?
Who's to say that "you" created them ? Didn't the "masters" participate
in creating them as well ? It's not like the managers sit on their butts
all day counting their money, you know. How do you think frocefully
dispossesing people is going to help ? This inevitably triggers the kind
of bloodshed that we say under the Pol Pot, and the end result is that some
thug waving a gun has control. You reach social justice by means of
evolution. Violent means always induces a violent end, and this is why
those who tried putting Marx's theory into practice ended up finding
themselves living under oppressive autocratic regimes.
If running a business is so f*cking easy, and being a worker is really
so "demeaning", why don't more of the workers start their own business ?
The answer is simple -- not everyone has the courage and initiative to found
their own business. That's OK< because the capitalist system provides them
with challenging and fulfilling careers as employees.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 13:16:49 GMT
Vlad writes:
> Your farm must be the best kept secret, as Im sure it would be flooded by
> all the mexican migrant workers now working for cents not dollars if they
> knew about it.
I know people who employ Mexican farm workers. They pay around $7 or
$8/hr. The legal minimum is $5+, but I know of no one who can fill a job
for it.
> You can say so, I live in a country that only recently adapted
> free-market economy....
I think that you live in a country that claims to have adopted a free
market economy but that has actually adopted kleptocracy.
> The unemplyoment rate is so high that bosses can do anything they want to
> their workers.
And that country is clearly not the United States, so why do you keep
making proclamations about the nature of the job market here? Unemployment
in this region of the US is below 3%. An acquaintance of mine who works at
a grocery store recently told her boss that she was going to quit and find
a different job because she didn't like decorating cakes and wanted more
time off. He quickly found her different duties and changed her hours.
He also gave her a raise.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C Lund)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 17:23:15 +0100
In article <RHkK4.42413$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You mean having different docs in each their window? How is that
> > unintuitive? If you're sitting at a desk looking at multiple documents, do
> > they magically crawl onto the same sheet of paper or do they stick to each
> > their sheet?
> But would you use your existing piece of paper to create or open new
> documents? That's what I think is unintuitive. Using your desk metaphor,
> every piece of paper is completely independent, but in the Mac OS they're
> not. The Windows model more closely mimic the behavior of a folder, where
> you have multiple documents within a folder. This is why you get multiple
> windows within the application since it represents a single folder.
Sounds to me like your description of the Windows folder better describes
the Mac. One app (or folder), and hold several sheets of paper
(documents). While in Windows, each folder can only hold a single sheet of
paper.
> Tim
--
C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 16 Apr 2000 11:28:33 -0400
On 15 Apr 2000 19:31:56 GMT, red-5 wrote:
>murdered. Yes. Because free-market leads to monopolies, as companies will
>protect their revenue. Yes. In its purest form, it can be seen by drug
I still disagree with this. The fact that there exist monopolies does not
imply that there is nothing but monopolies, and indeed there are many markets
in which there are many players and no monopoly.
>I hate that "user pays" philosophy.
I also have a problem with it. This is one example where capitalism needs
to be softened. Education should be IMO part of a common "infrastructure"
that is available for everyone.
>Are the taxes a disincentive to consume, or a way to raise taxes from an
>inevitable process?
Both, of course.
> If they try occasionally to slow consumption, that is
>only to try to avoid boom-bust cycles that are the signiature of
>capitalism.
You're confusing "capitalism" with "economics". I don't see how communism
will prevent boom-bust cycles.
> Look at economics. It assumes constant progress. It assumes
>constant growth.
How does it assume this ?
>> Of course, we can't blame the "communists" for anything, because you've
>> conveniently defined the communists out of existence.
>
>Sorry. It's not convenience. I have never seen or heard of a communist
>country. They have always been nipped in the bud, ie the Paris Commune,
>the White army, etc etc etc
I could pull the same nonsense and claim that "there are
no capitalist countries" but since there are no communist countries, let's
take a look at the communist's "best tries" at "communism", for example
Cambodia, Vietnam, China, the former Soviet Union, etc.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux?
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:39:10 GMT
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 16:23:49 GMT, Mike wrote:
> > You're right - this guy appears to be thinking about this. I especially
like
> >the exchange between elford(?) and Miguel, about the issues with having a
>
> Why, thanks (-; You can call me "Donovan".
While we're on this friendly streak, let's push this printing thing a little
further.
You mentioned Miguel's breakdown of printing before:
> (1) an API for rendering data
> (2) a spooling system
> (3) a printer capability system
> (4) UI elements for the programmers to use.
>
> GNOME-print is about attacking (1) and (4).
By far my biggest peeve with Unix printing has to be related to
X11-Postscript discrepancies, and quite frankly, after all these years I had
given up hope that anyone in the Unix world viewed that as an issue. But
let's assume those things are fixed. When I print from my PC, I get a really
nice dialog box that lets me set all kinds of settings that are specific to
the printer (color, paper size and type, duplex, and so on) - I'm assuming
this is item 3 on your list. This makes it really easy to customize things.
On our Unix boxes, we do all that by setting up different print queues. The
only way to know which one is which is to keep a list of all the queues, and
sending our jobs to the right one.
Our printer vendor has provided some print commands with a bunch of options,
but those are command line based, and we haven't figured out how to use them
from Ghostview or from within our other graphical applications.
Is anyone addressing item 3?
-- Mike --
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
