Linux-Advocacy Digest #241, Volume #27 Wed, 21 Jun 00 21:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows98 (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager (Jeff Szarka)
Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows98 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Better Wintroll Than Wintrolls (was: Re: Desperately Seeking Intelligent
Windows Advocates...) (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Windows98 (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Linux, easy to use? ("Robert L.")
Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future. (Mark
S. Bilk)
Re: Number of Linux Users (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Processing data is bad! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Boring (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Windows98 (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What UNIX is good for. (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:15:05 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:47:51 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>That must be why there's a cottage industry selling all kinds of
>"How to use LoseDows" videotapes.
>
>Intuitive, my ass.
Not really.
They even have a "Dating For Dummies" book out there now.
Hard to believe. I thought that kind of stuff came naturally?
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:09:05 -0400
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:54:28 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>The wintrolls keep repeating this lie that windows "has a better
>desktop" even though it is blatantly false ... when you press
>them then you see what the problem always was: linux doesn't
>have this program, doesn't run this game ... this has nothing to
>do with windows being a "better desktop".
Windows 9x is a much better enviorment and Linux is a much better OS.
I'd rather use something that is the best of both worlds. Win2k.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:56:06 -0400
On 21 Jun 2000 16:11:31 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>> I think I like the Microsoft solgan better.
>
>I would agree with you, except that *you* started this little flame
>fest (that's par for your course, IMNSHO).
Maybe I should have said "KDE is not a very good clone of Windows" but
I do find it pathetic since so many people try to deny what it is. If
you want to clone the Windows UI, fine... I can see why. It's a very
solid clone of other UI's over the year. It works very well.
After all, Redhat shipped with that one window manger, the EXACT clone
of Windows 95 until KDE came along. I forget its name but I'm sure
everyone else knows it.
Linux is trying to clone Windows to become a consumer grade OS. Now if
only the rest of the OS would try to clone Window's ease of use Linux
could be sitting on my hard drive right now.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:26:04 GMT
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:57:01 -0400, PowerUser
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>LINUX IS HERE TO STAY, AND AT THE RATE THAT IT IS GROWING/DEVELOPING,
>IT WILL BE THE MAJOR OS OF THE FUTURE.
As long as .3 percent of total market share is what you are looking
for, I would say you are right on track.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:28:24 GMT
I like to say that Linux is so much better on paper but Windows wins
in the execution department.
Somewhere between the laboratory and the desktop, Linux has undergone
a frontal lobotomy.
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:09:05 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:54:28 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>The wintrolls keep repeating this lie that windows "has a better
>>desktop" even though it is blatantly false ... when you press
>>them then you see what the problem always was: linux doesn't
>>have this program, doesn't run this game ... this has nothing to
>>do with windows being a "better desktop".
>
>
>Windows 9x is a much better enviorment and Linux is a much better OS.
>I'd rather use something that is the best of both worlds. Win2k.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:24:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a file in your home directory called .xinitrc (if not, create
> it). Just put the line
>
> exec kwm
>
> into this file, make sure it is executable (by chmod +x .xinitrc) and
> run X. This will show you what just kwm is like. Although, if you
want
> to try out just a window manager instead of a windowing environment,
> you'd probably be better out trying out enlightenment or something
else
> designed to run as just a window manager. KWM isn't really much
without
> the other components of KDE.
Yep, it was pretty minimal but still an interesting thing to see.
Looks like trying one of the other window managers would be the
way to go here, I never could find KWM as a standalone window manager,
I assume that that isn't its mission in life.
Thanks!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:31:44 GMT
On 21 Jun 2000 19:11:52 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I don't see it flicker on mine.
>
>Take the scroall bar and move across the page realy fast.
That's if you can get it to do anything at all while a page is
loading.
I can't believe the Linonuts put up with such a shit browser.
>>
>>
>>> That's ugly and slow. They reason why everyone blames X
>>> is because none of the window managers are nearly as fast as the
>>> Windows UI.
>>
>>Everyone blames X? I don't blame X.
>>
>
> ...everyone accept Linux zellots.
Doesn't matter what component is to blame if the end result is that
the fonts look like shit, and they do, that's all that matters to an
end user.
Typical of the geeks, they will argue over and over again about a
semantic point but the problem never gets fixed.
>>
>>> The only common link is X. I don't care what the exact
>>> reason is. Either it needs to be fixed or people need to stop
>>> promoting Linux as the second coming of Jebus for the consumers.
>>>
>>> KDE exists to apeal to a desktop user. Since it clones the Windows UI
>>> we'll assume it is meant to apeal to a Windows desktop user.
>>
>>So Windows comes with 8 desktops out of the box? I would hope
>>that the KDE team is more ambitious than just trying to clone Windows.
>>
>>
>>> For
>>> whatever reason, it's slow and ugly.
>>
>>Ugly?
>>
>
>Yes. UGLY.
It makes my eyes tear....
>>
>>> It has been slow and ugly for
>>> years now.
>>
>>KDE hasn't even had release versions for two years.
>>
>>
>>> If Linux was only going after the server market it wouldn't
>>> be a big deal... they're not. KDE is a consumer level product and it's
>>> just not very good. (for whatever reason)
>>>
>>
>>KDE is good.
>
>slow is good. criptic is good. commands are good. Lye to yorself all you want.
It's fantasy land around here.
>>
>>>
>>> Is X better than MS TS? Maybe. I don't know/care. TS works great for
>>> doing remote administratoin of my servers.
>>
>>Colin Day
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Run Linux on your desktop? Why? I ask for proof, not advocacy lies....
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:34:11 GMT
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:28:15 -0600, "John W. Stevens"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> Some of it of far better quality. TeX, for example, if one learns
>> how to use it, can generate beautiful text.
>
>TeX . . . there is no substitute.
Ever try root canal?
Given the choice of being subjected to using tex or having root canal
I would choose the root canal.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Better Wintroll Than Wintrolls (was: Re: Desperately Seeking
Intelligent Windows Advocates...)
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:57:58 -0400
On 20 Jun 2000 04:31:49 GMT, "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If I had more time I'd try myself just for the heck of it.
Priceless...
I guess that stack of man pages and how-to files really does add up
after a while.
"Time is money but space is a long, long time" - Frank Zappa
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:07:30 -0400
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:42:16 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>David Cancio wrote:
>
>> Why can't I use my hardware (Windows 98 targeted most of it) at full power ?
>> Yeah, I know GNU/Linux does support most of the hardware, but a lot of
>> vendors add nice features that are only available with Windows 98 drivers.
>
>Your post really sounds like a thinly veiled troll.
Right because since he disagrees with THE LINUX WAY he must be a very
bad person.
>Well, the first thing you don't mention while you're talking
>about windows 98 being able to "drive your hardware at full
>power" (whoa) is that WINDOWS DOESN'T FUCKING WORK.
>
>How many times do you need to reinstall the piece of shit before
>you realize that not everyone LIKES spending hours upon hours of
>their time reinstalling software, being forced to look at ads,
>constantly being asked stupid questions by the os, and having my
>personal information sent out over the internet by half a dozen
>crapware programs? I don't use windows for the same reasons I
>don't spend all my time with with car salesmen, or stick my face
>in a toilet. I find it very unpleasant.
Did you ever consider some people don't like spending HOURS trying to
get simple things in Linux to work the way they want them too? I've
never had to reinstall Win2k. NT is the future of consumer Windows.
>In other words, using linux and windows are such entirely
>different experiences that I can't even see why one would even be
>tempted to ask this question. I would ask: If you've invested
>the time and effort to learn linux / unix then why in hell would
>you use windows?
Either drink the Kool-Aid all the time or not at all huh?
------------------------------
From: "Robert L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:39:14 GMT
Here what i do when installing package.
# rpm -i nameofpack.rpm
( -U if i upgrade )
# rpm -qpl nameofpack.rpm | grep bin
The output of this last command is all file that go in any *bin* directory.
Habitualy, you see only binaries.
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le
message news: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Imagine the following scene...
>
> Example I
> =========
>
> I insert the "Applications 2" CD into my Linux Mandrake 7.0 system and
> click on the CDRom Icon. I'm presented with a web style page of all the
> applications on the CD. Very nice.
>
> I pick one and am led to the RPM's directory. I install it, and... cor
> blimey guv'nor, where did it go? It apparently installed ok (well, I'm not
> absolutely sure about that), but I can't see it on the menu _anywhere_.
>
> I pick another one, and I click on something that looks remarkably like a
> shell script. Nothing happens. I click again... and nothing happens. I
copy
> the shell script to a seperate directory, and click on it... nothing
> happens. I run up an XTerm and run the shell script... ah... checksum
> error. Hmm... checksum error on a CDRom?
>
> Now, when I clicked on the same file in kfm, nothing is reported. At
least,
> not on the desktop. It _is_ reported but "underneath" X - if I switch to
> the console (CTRL-ALT-F12). X regularly reports all sorts of things, but
to
> the process terminal that created it, and not to anywhere immediately
> useful!
>
> ACK!!!!
>
> This is how Linux is better than Windows?
>
> Even Digital UNIX deliberately put up a console Window so you could _see_
> these rather important messages!
>
> Example II
> ==========
>
> KPackage is a nice tool to load RPM's. Unfortunaly, unlike the super user
> version of kfm, it doesn't prompt the user for the root password if it
> tries to do something that requires priv's. So, fire up an XTerm, su, then
> type xfm. Finally you get what you wanted.
>
> One of the file managers asks you for a password using a Console prompt!
> Nothing like a bit of inconsistancy there, huh?
>
> Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
Date: 22 Jun 2000 00:51:27 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:57:01 -0400, PowerUser
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>LINUX IS HERE TO STAY, AND AT THE RATE THAT IT IS GROWING/DEVELOPING,
>>IT WILL BE THE MAJOR OS OF THE FUTURE.
>
>As long as .3 percent of total market share is what you are looking
>for, I would say you are right on track.
In the business world, Linux market share is probably 30% --
one hundred times the .3% figure repeatedly posted by our
resident liar, Steve/Mike/Simon (for which he never gives
a reference).
By going to this web page, and clicking on the free data
link, one can access various industry surveys taken as late
as one year ago -- 2Q99 (more recent ones cost a dollar a
minute to access):
http://www.infotechtrends.com/freedemo.htm
Thanks to WhyteWolf for posting this one, which you get by
checking the "web" box:
99Q2 - Percent of Web servers using each operating system.
Percent of Web servers using each operating system.
Windows NT 26%
Linux 21%
Solaris 16%
BSDI 11%
SGI (IRIX) 9%
Free BSD 8%
JOURNAL/SOURCE/TITLE DATE PAGE
VARBUSINESS/ 12-Apr-99 58 Netcraft/
*GENERATION LINUX - NIPPING NT's HEELS
So, Linux had almost caught up to Windows NT in web server
market share a year ago, and the most popular Unix systems
combined exceeded NT's share by 2.5 to 1 (.65/.26).
But if you instead check the boxes for "software" and
"systems", you can get this report:
99Q2 - Percent of information technology managers using
or planning to use Linux as a general purpose desktop
or workstation operating system.
Currently Use 10%
Use Within 12 Months 20%
No Plans 68%
Don't Know 1%
JOURNAL/SOURCE/TITLE DATE PAGE
VARBUSINESS/ 12-Apr-99 54 InformationWeek/
*GENERATION LINUX - NEXT STOP: DESKTOP
One year ago, when KDE and Gnome, along with hardware and
installation support, were much less developed than they
are now, Linux was already in use on the desktop/workstation
computers of 10% of all businesses. The figure may now
be 30%, if the managers planning to switch to Linux have
followed through.
The next LinuxWorld Conference and Expo will be held
August 14-17 2000, in San Jose, Calif. The last one was
huge! See hundreds of companies and organizations with
GNU/Linux/OSS related products. Meet Linus and RMS.
Pet a real penguin! Register now for free admission to
the exhibits, Aug. 15-17 (save $25).
http://www.linuxworldexpo.com/
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Number of Linux Users
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:57:42 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "John Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:7t625.2215$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > As the number of Linux users BOOMS to 0.3%. Is Linux taking over??!!
> > > >
> > > > http://websnapshot.mycomputer.com/systemos.html
> > > >
> > > > http://bbspot.com/News/2000/4/linux_distros.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > oh my god, that was hilarious!! I loved it. Posted it on a BB here at
> work
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> >
> > Proving that you are an idiot.
> >
> >
> and you have no sense of humor
>
> and that extended silliness below your signature proves what to us?? <;)
I post in other newgroups.
The signature is pre-emptive strikes against idiots.
Bucking for your own entry?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > ICQ # 3056642
> >
> > H: Knackos...you're a retard.
> >
> > A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
> >
> > B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
> >
> > C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
> > sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
> > that she doesn't like.
> >
> > D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
> >
> > E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> > ...despite (D) above.
> >
> > F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
> > response until their behavior improves.
> >
> > G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> > adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:58:32 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:14:34 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Yea but Windows GUI looks and works well.
> >
> >You've obviously never used X11
>
> Sure have and it looks like shit and is slow as shit.
>
> This applies to both Intel platforms and RS 6000 platforms.
RS 6000 is shit.
>
> it makes my eyes tear.....
Obviously you're running on lousy graphics hardware.
>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:43:05 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> There is a reason why the rest of the world has moved mostly to GUI.
> >> >
> >> >Unix has had a GUI since, oh... 1983 or so... that makes 17 years.
> >> >
> >> >By comparison..windows is.. what... 10 years old?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Boring
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 21:02:05 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:15:52 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Tim Palmer wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:12:54 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Tim Palmer wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Jorge Cueto wrote:
> >> >> >>This newsgroup is starting to be bored ... I guess GNU/Linux has finally
> >> >> >>won and Windows advocates can't just debate anymore :-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I think the real problem with advocacy is that Linux has won.
> >> >>
> >> >> Uhm, no. Not even close.
> >> >>
> >> >> >What is Microsoft going to do in the next 5 years but die.
> >> >>
> >> >> The government can't do anything to them until the appeals proscess is over.
>By then, this whole
> >> >> UNIX revival thing will halve blone over.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If people don't think the KDE is a better desktop than W2k then
> >> >> >what are they going to say when KDE2 is out soon?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> That it sucks. Just like the KDE befor it. You can put Windos like environmant
>ontop of UNIX, but
> >> >> thats' still UNIX under theare,
> >> >
> >> >Thank goodness, I like having a stable OS.
> >>
> >> You cant make a easy-to-use OS on top of UNIX. Thatts the point. No matter what
>you do, you
> >> can't get rid of the eccentrictys of UNIX accept by getting rid of UNIX
>alltoggether.
> >
> >
> >No Tim Palmer, that's not true.
>
> Reelay? Then what OS is based on UINX that is easy to use like Widnows?
I started using Unix in 1983.
When I was first introduced to M$ lose-ware, EVERYTHING was difficult
barely functional pipe implementation
kindergarten wildcarding
each program interprets wildcard characters, not the shell, so
it's extremely inconsistant
Losedows: no scripting capability other than that same shit-bag DOS
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> and you can't get rid of the limmitations of UNIX except by getting
> >> >> rid of the UNIX. That is why UNIX+KDE fales now just like UNIX without it did,
>and UNIX+KDE2 will
> >> >> continnue to fale in the future.
> >> >
> >> >What sort of limitations? No GPF's or BSOD's?
> >>
> >> No surround sound.
> >
> >I have that.
> >
> >> No coppy-protected DVD.
> >
> >I have that.
> >
> >> No SBLive support.
> >
> >I have that.
> >
> >> Limmited video support
> >
> >I have several ways to watch a video, dozens and dozens...
>
> Yeah, DeCSS, whitch is illeagle.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Just face it: UNIX is the PAST. Leave it in the 1970s whear it belongs.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >It's also the future.
> >>
> >> It cant evan play DVDs. You call that the _future_?
> >
> >
> >Yes you can. I am.
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >I think the Microsoft community realizes that there is no competing with
> >> >> >Linux as the Linux community comes out with a new version roughly once
> >> >> >every 6-9 months.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, and you accuse Windwos of making peopal upgrade.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >But Linux companies don't charge as much, and one can upgrade
> >> >a few packages at a time?
> >>
> >> You can do that on Windos too.
> >
> >
> >No you can't. Windows is all or none.
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >This in comparison to Windows 2-4 year revisionary
> >> >> >history,,, with complete writeups from the ground floor up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Charlie
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Colin Day
> >> >
> >
> >
> >He never signes his mail to me...
> >I'll sign it for him.
> >
> >> Tim 'Clueless in computerland' Palmer.
> >
> >Thank you Tim.
> >
> >Tim, people are actually getting smarter every year using Linux.
> >You should attempt to get smarter.
> >
> >
> >Charlie
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:24:16 -0400
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:54:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 22:33:25 +0200, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>See my post above. Most importantly :
>>
>>a) Improved hardware detection, configuration, support & management (not
>>just a desktop function).
>
> Actually, this has NOTHING to do with the desktop.
It does. What's wrong with GUI based hardware detection?
>>b) Improved desktop design, consistency, presentation (eg fonts,
>>appearance).
>
> This is just another generalization split into smaller generalizations.
There are simply to many examples to list them all. Linux is a mess as
a consumer level OS.
>>c) Improvements to X (speed, presentation, etc).
>
> Same as b.
>
> Although, as far as fonts go there are plenty that can be used
> effectively in place of their Windows counterparts. That's just
> a common bit of FUD shared amongst Lemmings.
Get this... you install Linux... It's ugly. The fonts are HORRILBE.
End of story. I'm not interested in hearing how I can fix it. Fix it
for me, I'm a CONSUMER after all. (assuming I was strictly a consumer)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:37:36 -0500
On 21 Jun 2000 18:51:43 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>> What other security is there besides XHost +hostname for limiting who
>>>> can redirect your X server or plug into your X server?
>>>
>>>There are three direct authentication systems: xhost, cookies, and
>>>Kerberos.
>>>Indirect protection could be developed through the use of a VPN, or for
>>>those on a budget, SSL.
>>
>>Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was easier to set up? Terminal
>>Server is a breeze - just install it, and you're then done. Why can't
>>Linux be this easy?
>
>Errr, it is. You just install ssh if you don't already have it
>installed and it takes care of the xauthority setup and X
>redirection for you when you use it for remote connection. And
>of course if you are doing something remotely over a
>low bandwidth connection that can be done in character mode
>you don't need to bother with the GUI at all.
There's nothing easy about it.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 21:04:15 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:31:22 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 19 Jun 2000 06:03:04 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 00:18:06 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>Tim Palmer wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>or even a good LOGO interporator.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >Oh yeah, I want Win2K just to allow kids to program in LOGO!
> >>>> >
> >>>> >Brilliant!
> >>>> >
> >>>> >(IMO, one would be better off buying a used Amiga for that sort
> >>>> >of thing, or perhaps an old Mac II.
> >>>>
> >>>> But not UNIX beacause LOGO is far too advanced for UNIX!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Logo is available for Linux. I have ucblogo-4.6-2. Now, MicroWorlds
> >>>might be a problem.
> >>
> >>Photoshop is avallable for Windows.
> >
> > When we feel like spending that much for an image
> > manipulation program it might be relevant...
> >
> >[deletia]
> >>>> of us want an OS that supports the hardware we alreaddy have. Linux doesn't
>even come cloase
> >>>> in hardwair support. Windows beats _any_ UNIX hands down.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Almost any external modem is supported. In fact, all I had to do for mine
> >>>was plug it in and use modemtool to set the symlink for /dev/modem.
> >>
> >>EXTERNAL? Did Linux not suppoart the inntermal modem that came with your PC?
> >
> > Did Windows 3.1?
>
> It supported the modams that came with it preinstalled.
SNORK!
>
> >
> >[deletia]
> >
> >--
> > If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
> > tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
> > the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
> > |||
> > / | \
> >
> > Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
