Linux-Advocacy Digest #213, Volume #26 Fri, 21 Apr 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: at the risk of ignorance...a little too late for that (Bart Oldeman)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Roger)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Christopher Browne)
Re: Standard desktop... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KDE is better than Gnome ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Adobe FrameMaker available on Linux (David Steinberg)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Colin R. Day")
Re: 'To Be Up or Not To Be Up' (Jim Richardson)
Re: Windows2000 sale success.. (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Solaris (was Re: Windows 2000 etc.) (abraxas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: at the risk of ignorance...a little too late for that
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:33:16 GMT
[stopped crossposting to rec.games.roguelike.nethack]
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Karl Knechtel wrote:
> Bart Oldeman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : do you? In *nix all binaries (or representations) are in a few
> : directories: you don't need a long path. To implement such a thing in
> : Windows you need a directory full of batch files or a very long path.
>
> Did I give the impression I was a Windows user? Sorry...
Oh sorry, their monopoly position makes one assume this if someone doesn't
explicitely say that (s)he uses another OS.
> True; fortunately I'm rarely in a position where I have to do "serious
> editing" remotely [I'm using *n?xen on basically every remote system I
> connect to, and MacOS at home. Presumably this is not a terribly common
> arrangement? ;)]
>
> : Emacs (probably needs some customization) or Nedit or mcedit or ...
> : should be fine for you as well.
>
> In a 24x80 character window?
Emacs and mcedit do.
> : > run in the background with. I thought this class of OSes was supposed to
> : > do PMT; how come if I run netscape without an & from an xterm, the commands
> : > in the xterm window don't get executed until I quit Netscape, even if I
> : > minimize it and bring the xterm window into focus? Shouldn't a command
>
> : Just make the xterm active, type Ctrl-Z (stops netscape) and then bg
> : <enter> (puts it in the background) if you want to use that xterm for
> : commands again. It's not a big deal.
>
> Thanks for the tip. That's not at all obvious though...
No. It should be in everyones 'Introduction to the unix command shell',
IMHO.
> : The reason why it goes this way, is that your shell (e.g. bash) doesn't
> : know whether netscape is going print some stuff in the xterm. And if you
> : don't like this, why don't you just make an alias?
>
> ...Why would one app ever print to another's window? And so what if it does?
> Why should it get in the way? Doesn't each process get its own stdout stream?
No. All apps started from that xterm (the foreground one and all the
background ones) share their stdout. So you can get weird things this way.
> : or make an icon on your desktop, or start it from the menu?
>
> Because a) I don't know how b) there IS no menu. The only *n?x I'm using
> where I can get at any graphical experience (i.e. run Netscape) gives me,
> upon login, a screen with a grey background and an xterm window in the
> middle, and that's it.
Maybe you get a menu if you click with you left/middle/right mouse key on
the background. You could also ask your sysadmin how to get a friendlier
desktop (they _do_ exist, in fact there are loads of them).
> I don't "choose" to use the shell, it's the sort of *n?x experience which is
> offered to me.
It's unfortunate for you that you haven't been offered something else. 10
years ago, your experience was more common, but even the then available
window managers had menu's by e.g. clicking on the background. Netscape
(or even Mosaic) didn't exist back then anyway.
Bart
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:45:45 GMT
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:44:27 -0400, someone claiming to be Rich C
wrote:
>"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Then in what way are they forcing you to upgrade, which * was * your
>> original contention, after all...
>Well, I wasn't the one who said this, but I think B. Viking is lamenting the
>fact that QBASIC.EXE doesn't run reliably under ANY modern version of
>windows, which is testament to the fact that they don't provide true DOS
>environments.
Assuming that the first assertion is correct, and I would be
interested in proof that it is so, this just pushes the premise back
one step: in what way are they forcing you to use "modern" versions
of Windows?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:49:04 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Chris Wenham would say:
>josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > And out of curiosity, do you know if and how TeX compares with
>> > Postscript?
>>
>> It doesn't.
>
> I know that Postscript is a programming language as well. Is this the
> main difference? Do you know what other differences are?
Typical Postscript code involves:
a) Declaring some font bitmaps,
b) Defining a few functions to simplify deployment of text
c) Proceeding on to transform some text into bitmaps, and display
that,
d) Produce bitmap graphics, and display that.
In contrast, TeX involves:
a) A prologue that indicates what font family to request,
b) Macros to simplify deployment of text,
c) Then, taking text, and transforming it into characters, and indicating
where those characters should be displayed on the page.
d) On occasion, you put in a reference to an external bitmap, and
indicate where on the page it should be placed.
While there are some parallels, the notable differences are that:
a) Postscript involves rendering bitmaps, while TeX doesn't.
b) Postscript provides a stack-based functional language not unlike
Forth, whilst TeX provides a macro rewriting system.
It is _real_ common to transform the .dvi output by TeX into Postscript
to send it on to a printer.
--
"...Deep Hack Mode--that mysterious and frightening state of
consciousness where Mortal Users fear to tread." -- Matt Welsh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Standard desktop...
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:43:33 GMT
Ohhhh, wow, what an advanced user interface explorer is... Are you ready
to replace your windows with explorer??? Explorer does NOT come close to
the sophistication of KDE. As I have said at the start, Closed source
(explorer) does not compare to open source (KDE). Then again, the new
netscape browser (open source) is more sophisticated than explorer.
If can run explorer WITH OUT a windows style user interface then post
again. Otherwise explorer is just an app that runs within a windows
style UI. I can run KDE without access to the command line interface of
Linux. CAN YOU RUN EXPLORER WITHOUT ACCESS TO THE WINDOWS INTERFACE??
In article <8dnv1k$qee$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yes, internet explorer is an user interface. you can write
applications for
> it. you can produce complete programs in it without touching any of
the
> native gdi controls. it has an api, it is very extensible and
configurable.
> it can also be a reporting tool and a shell (ie4). yes, internet
explorer
> is the next generation user interface for windows.
>
> what qualities in an user interface are you looking for that are not
> available in internet explorer? what is your definition of an user
> interface?
>
> davorin
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8dnoem$972$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Are you claiming that Explorer is a USER INTERFACE????? < Snicker >
>
> > The only OS's that Explorer (AN APPLICATION) are ported to are OS's
that
> > MS ports them to. The MS Windows (THE USER INTERFACE) is NOT ported
to
> > any other platforms NOT EVEN TO OTHER MS OS'es. KDE (A USER
INTERFACE)
> > can be ported to ANY OS by ANYONE with enough skills. The point is,
KDE
> > (USER INTERFACE) can move faster and farther than can the MS desktop
> > (USER INTERFACE). Explorer is NOT A DESKTOP (USER INTERFACE)!
> >
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:46:34 GMT
What ever interface for Linux that works best for *YOU* is the best
interface for *YOU*. I like KDE better than Gnome, that does not mean
that KDE is better. Infact, many times, the command line is the best
interface for me.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: Adobe FrameMaker available on Linux
Date: 22 Apr 2000 02:09:33 GMT
David Rolfe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I have downloaded the beast (around 20megs) and tried it out. It does
: not appear too buggy (ie has not crashed, hung, or done other bad things
: yet). Of course one only gets to use this until the end of the year. But
: by then, if I am seriously using the program I will maybe buy it ...
: especially if us beta folks get a good price .... dream a little dream
: for me :-).
Hi Dave,
I had no idea that FrameMaker Beta was available for Linux. This is great
news! FrameMaker is a really good program for document creation, since
it's really easy to use (you don't spend as much time tinkering with
formatting as you do in, say, Word), produces beautiful output, and is
very cross-platform. I'm definately very happy to see it on Linux.
First thing after reading your post, I grabbed a copy.
I was wondering, though, if anyone had any troubles or success with
getting the help to work. I installed FM in /opt and, like they said on
the web page, untarred the manuals and help files to
/opt/FM556_linux/fminit/usenglish/, but when I try Help|Contents,
Help|Index, etc., it tells me it "Cannot find online help
files. Reinstall the help system and try again." Since I know they're
there (I just untarred them), how can I know where it's looking?
Anyways, this is the only problem I've had; it seems to actually run
smoothly, which isn't too surprising since it's actually a UNIX app (that
couldn't be anything but Motif, could it?), not a WINE-ported Windows app,
like others we've seen lately. :)
I, too, would definately consider buying this app, if it's not too
ridiculously priced.
--
David Steinberg -o) Boycott Amazon.com! Fight
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \ the "1-Click Order" patent:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v http://www.nowebpatents.org
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[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: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 02:23:25 +0000
Shell wrote:
> "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >TeX/LATeX does the job. As does emacs, gcc, etc.
>
> So does Notepad. Doesn't mean I like to use it.
Does what job? Can you compile programs from within Notepad?
>
> --
> Steve Sheldon email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> BSCS/MCSE url: http://www.sheldon.visi.com
> BEEF! - Cause the west wasn't won on salad.
Linux! 'Cause the web wasn't won by Windows!
Colin R. Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: 'To Be Up or Not To Be Up'
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 02:48:30 GMT
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000 22:14:59 GMT,
Mathias Grimmberger, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>> > I guess we are heading towards a future with no technical computer mags
>> > at all. Only tabloids hyping whatever vendors want to sell today. :-(
>>
>> Um, no. It's just the number of "general-purpose" technical mags (c't,
>> iX) that's shrinking. Specialised mags for certain platforms, certain
>> software (e.g. Java) etc. still flourish.
>
>Hmm, that's true. I think it is a bad thing though. It means there will
>in the end be no place to go for the big picture. You see, a mag
>specialized in a certain platform or a certain language is in effect
>kind of hyping what it is specialized in. It very likely won't present
>the whole truth.
>
>I'm not saying that e.g. a special Java mag is not a good thing to have,
>it just would be bad to not also have a mag telling people that Java is
>not the solution to all problems. And this can not be a C mag for
>obvious reasons.
>
>[BTW, lest a language war develops, Java is just an example here]
>
Dr Dobbs for the "big picture" on languages, and Circuit Celler ink for
hardware and embedded, midnight engineer for just plain cool stuff.
For a lot of what you mention, usenet and the web will take over.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows2000 sale success..
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 02:36:07 GMT
In article <yaPL4.1686$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"billwg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Any chance of getting some background information (My URL is at the
bottom).
> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8dnehk$thi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > I wouldn't be suprised if by the end of the summer, we were actually
> > looking at Linux on retail shelves. Even Microsoft has hinted at
> > Microsoft Office for Linux. Once the remedy portion of the hearing
> > is established, I wouldn't be suprised if OEMs and Software vendors
> > started very agrressively backing Linux.
> >
> > If the remedies are reasonable (Giving FTC authority to regulate
> > and mediate Microsoft contract practices), the Supreme Court will
> > uphold the verdict and the FTC will relax controls as Linux captures
> > 30-50% of the desktop market.
> > When Linux establishes a sufficient
> > share of the market that Microsoft
> > can say it's no longer a monopoly,
> > the FTC won't need to regulate Microsoft because the OEMs will be
> > able to choose how much of a balance of each OS they want to sell
> > and market based on the terms Microsoft gives them.
> I think that this is an incredibly optimistic view of things.
Perhaps. I'm sometimes a bit optimistic about timelines. I had
predicted that the Internet would be 60 million by mid 1994, it
actually took till January 1995. Part of the problem was that
several companies were trying to do PPP over X3 pads to X.25/T1
networks. The problem was that the delays made TCP/IP seem too
slow. It wasn't until the X3 pads were replaced with terminal
servers (mostly BSD or Linux systems) that the high-bandwidth was
really available.
> > The retail buyer is looking for games, internet,
> > on-line banking, education, and
> work-at-home compatibility, generally
> in that order, based on motivation
> surveys that I have seen.
The problem with surveys is that they ask a specific set
of questions instead of asking general questions accepting
general answers, and parsing the prose.
The retail buyer of computers, like home internet users, are
seeking much more than specific applications.
In no particular rank, look at the driving force behind both PCs and
the Internet.
Communication - people want to talk to each other. This means they
want to publish as well as subscribe. This is why we now have
13 million web sites, 60,000 newsgroups, and nearly every
significant publications has a "feedback board". Linux gives
users the ability to publish using DSL connections. They aren't
running businesses, just expressing viewpoints and interests.
There are even cases where people have created websites as permanent
memorials funded perpetually after their deaths.
Information - where to get the lowest price on airfare, which hotels
are located next to the ocean, who has an unusual car, where to get
unusual products. You can already bid on items at auctions, get
multiple competitors to bid for your purchase dollars, and even
negotiate contracts interactively via chat lines. At one time,
directory assistance was called "information", but people wanted
to know things like, where's the best seafood restaurant in NYC.
Today, you can get zagat ratings on-line.
Temporality is becoming more significant too. At one time, an investor
could use search engines and check their e-mail a few times a day and
outperform even the best fund managers. Today, people want real-time
information and they don't want to get good news (even bad news is
good news to an investor) after everybody else gets it. They want
to know if someone has bid $2 less than their last bid 2 minutes
before closing.
People are using cell phones, pagers, and wireless palm pilots
to get the latest information instantly. Except that the information
requests aren't private. If a mutual fund manager knows that 2000
people have alerts programmed when the price drops to $35, he knows
he can buy all day at $36, but if he lets it drop to $35, he will
trigger a whole bunch of buyers.
Linux provides privacy. Linux lets you collect the information,
parse it, and trigger the alerts at preset values only you knew.
Information in a useful form - most people today are suffering
from information overload. It's not unusual for people to get
200 e-mails each day. Some of this e-mail needs to be delivered
immediately (possibly even via pager or wireless text-only e-mail),
others can be killed immediately and automatically (make $$$ starting
your own business). And others need to be prioritized. Linux
can provide this type of control with smart-filters, kill files,
and autoforwording. With Linux you can create multiple e-email
accounts for free.
Often the useful form means NOT in GUI format. Graphical user
interfaces are great when you know that only one response is required.
But when you have a whole stream of results coming in in real-time,
possibly to numerous different queries, it's often better to
parse the "flat text" and add the "glitz" at the last minute.
Control - people want control of their system. They want control
of who gets what information, who they purchase from, who they
get service from, and what they can do with their machine.
Linux gives even the casual user the ability to choose from multiple
vendors (6 distributions), multiple support providers (10 support
companies), customizations (numerous consulting firms), and
numerous applications ranging from free but boring to expensive
but really impressive.
> Linux can deliver most of that, but doesn't
> really have a message that differentiates
> it all that much from Windows.
The big message with Linux is that the customer is in control.
In fact, even the simple act of selecting a distribution can
be fun and interesting. Each distribution targets particular
types of users. Their support programs also support diffent
types of users.
> Where the consumer is interested, Linux
> doesn't have much of a story beyond
> "Me, too!" in terms of application availability
> and is often fighting an
> uphill battle to prove even that much.
Actually Windows 2000 has the same problem. The problem is
that most users are not satisfied with Windows 95 or Windows 98.
It's like owning a motorcycle that you have to ride to and from
work even when it's raining. It beats walking, but you would
really like the option of staying dry in the rain and not looking
at a gravel covered road with deep concern. Linux is more like
a luxury car with a V8 engine. You have the choice of Automatic
Transmission (simple GUI interfaces) or 5 speed high-performance
Transmission (scripting languages).
> The consumer doesn't see a Turbo Tax
> or Quicken for Linux at hand and I know
> of no plan to create one.
Part of the problem with Linux is that there is so much software
and so little room on the wrapper. We may see growth of the
O'Reilly strategy. O'Reilly gives the creators of products like
PERL, or other Linux utilities (actually Open Source utilities)
the opportunity to write documentation or publish their documentation
as paperback books, and pays them royalties. You can go to many
Barne's and Noble's and see as many as 200 such books sitting on
the shelves. The only problem is that there are over 3500 "products"
"built in" to Linux.
In many cases, contributors to Open Source actually make money by
offering "for fee" enhancements.
Ironically, there is a personal finance management tool that does
take QMF (Quicken Format) files and provides a very quicken-like
display. The actual electronic fund transfer functions are actually
restricted by federal regulations. However, it wouldn't suprise me
to see that either Quicken itself, or a competitor, would support
Linux. In fact, Microsoft has been trying to push out Quicken with
Money, and Quicken may actually retaliate by releasing a Linux version.
It's actually quite likely that, with a little pressure from the
FTC and the DOJ, Microsoft will have to remove restrictions that
prevent putting Linux versions of an application on the same CD-ROM
as the Windows 95/98/NT/2000 versions.
> Education software isn't real obvious to
> the consumer either.
Let's see, Linux offers full source code to kernel, library, and
popular applications, but you can't see any educational value. :-).
> They can do games (I guess),
Definately. There are numerous games in the "bundleware".
There are also several commercial games, including Activision,
Electronic Arts, and even emulation of the Atari 2600 (the games
are offered on CD-ROM).
> internet (for sure), and MS Office compatible (StarOffice),
> but somebody is going to have to advertise the heck out of
> Linux to get the ball rolling.
Ironically, the Internet had grown to nearly 60 million users before
the first Superbowl commercial for an Internet company aired. On the
other hand, I could see multiple Linux distributions advertized on
national televison within 18 months.
At one time, publications like PC magazine didn't dare give the
type of coverage that would attract Linux advertizers because
they didn't want to risk losing their share of Microsoft's $4 billion
advertizing budget (including Co-op).
> The non-technical buyer, who is part
> of the great majority of PC buyers, is
> going to perceive the Linux box as some
> kind of low-cost substitute for the
> "real thing"
Actually, many nontechnical users are exploring
Linux, primarily out of curiousity, and are then
issuing glowing reviews of all of the goodies.
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 1%/week!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Solaris (was Re: Windows 2000 etc.)
Date: 22 Apr 2000 03:09:33 GMT
Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> So? That doesn't mean it can't exploit common efforts. Infact,
>> Sun was started as an effect of 'common effort'. They just choose
>> not to explicitly acknowledge other similar efforts by outsiders
>> these days.
> I think the issue with Sun is that if they include the GNU tools, then people
> will go to them for support. Even when you tell customers up front that you're
> just giving them the stuff, but not supporting.. many will still call you. Sun
> clearly would not want to support these tools... they're not their tools.
Some people apparantly need a little help with the concept of 'commercial
package'. :)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
