Linux-Advocacy Digest #732, Volume #27 Mon, 17 Jul 00 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: which OS is best? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Help with printer (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Pan)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (R. Tang)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: linux, of course!! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: linux, of course!! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 17 Jul 2000 14:35:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tore Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Colin R. Day" wrote:
:>
:> Tore Lund wrote:
:>
:> >
:> > Some Unix programs are very efficient in terms of minimal finger
:> > movement. However, as long as every program has a different set of
:> > commands, this is inevitably cryptic and user-hostile. Add to this that
:> > these programs lean heavily on the CTRL key, which is hardly usable with
:> > its current position on the IBM keyboard. No wonder people prefer point
:> > and click instead.
:> >
:>
:> The XF86Config file has a line that allows one to swap CTRL and caps lock.
: If I really believed that the CTRL key belonged in the slot to the right
: of A, I'd join you in an uphill battle to move it back to that position.
Pfuca manufactures keyboards with the control key next to A. So
perhaps there is some hope.
: However, there is something called touch typing, that really requires an
: easily available Caps Lock key. On the other hand, there is no pressing
: need for a CTRL key - unless one considers compatibility with historical
: keyboards a pressing need, that is.
What sort of typing requires the use of a Caps Lock key? (other than
first time AOL users) Other than the occasional #defined C constant,
I can't think of any particular use for the key. On the other hand,
the ability to double the amount of possible "special purpose" keys
through the use of a control key seems very helpful by comparison.
Even Microsoft continues to use the control key for quick shortcuts.
So it seems only natural that the key should be placed in a more useful
location.
: Unix people should learn to slaughter some of their holy cows once in a
: while, the CTRL key being perhaps the holiest of them all.
I see no particular reason to eliminate the control key, especially
since there's nothing to replace it with as yet. The F* keys (1-12)
offer less than half of the possible combinations of
control + letter and remain largely unused (MAME being a
notable exception). Adding keys to the left (ala Sun keyboards)
with actual functions ("copy", "undo", etc.) isn't a bad idea, but
it has the problem of pulling one's hands away from the main keys
in order to use them.
If we must slaughter some keys, I think the "Windows" ones should be
first to go :)
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 09:35:09 -0500
Ray Chason wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I know how to spell, I
> >know gramar (fairly well),
> ^^^^^^
> Ahem....
>
> --
> --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> Delenda est Windoze
Voice of Beavis:
"Oh yeah, yeah. Sorry 'bout that."
And illustrates my point exactly. When I'm just writing for fun, or
voluntarily, I'm not looking to be perfect. I'm looking to get my point
across.
Anyway, my bad.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help with printer
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 09:40:12 -0500
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 22:13:09 +0800, Aravind Sadagopan
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It has nothing to do with Winprinter
>
> It has to do with Lie-nux not evan beeing abal to support it's own printers.
I didn't realize Linux had "it's own printers" (actually should be its
own printers, but let's not get picky about spelling with Timmay!). So,
is this some new project by the kernel people to create "Linux's own
printers"?
(THIS IS A JOKE! PLEASE CONSIDER THIS NOTICE WHEN REPLYING!)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 07:44:13 -0700
phil hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:12:41 -0700, Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In part because they need to attract developers and they realize that
> >the best way to attract developers without paying them is to license
> >under the gpl.
>
> That's possibly part of it.
>
> However, making a big complex program open source won't necessarily
> attrack many outside developers -- look at netscape.
True. But then netscape lost its corporate soul when aol bought them
out. OTOH, look at Applix Office. They couldn't attract any third
party vendors to work on their shelf projects. Then they switched to
open source and they have literally been rolling in new developers.
People helping them port from proprietary amake to gnu make, etc.
> OTOH, does Star Office need many developers? I doubt it, office suites
> are mainly old ideas by now, and won't be coming up with any readical
> new features.
I'm not so sure that I agree. Again, their strategic direction seems to
be embedding office tools directly into sgml documents to give them a
chance to compete in the same marketspace with office 2k.
> The main things that'll need changing with SO in the
> future are small improvemnts, such as compatibility with MS's continually
> changing file formats.
Yeah. And their hostile changes to dll libraries to force
incompatibilities in competitor's products, etc.
--
Pan
www.la-online.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 14:37:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump) wrote:
> In article <8kfh73$pci$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Please explain what that means, and what is the connection between
that
> >and slavery.
>
> :-) Obvisouly you didn't read the definition of slavery on m-w.
1 : DRUDGERY, TOIL
2 : submission to a dominating influence
3 a : the state of a person who is a chattel of another
b : the practice of slaveholding
Which one did you mean to apply to software?
Drudgery and toil imply laborious effort, which I am not sure I can
think of applying to software (after all, software doesn't mind working
;-)
3: seems to apply to people.
So, I guess it was 2:. Did you mean that one?
> >If you mean that somehow "free software" is being enslaved by some
> >other software, IMHO you need to stop antropomorphizing.
>
> Why? I find that it annoys the hell out of all the people I care to
> annoy.
Because the next step is talking to your dog, and outside of Disney
movies it ain't funny? ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 09:47:47 -0500
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> > > premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> > > you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> > > you are lazy, stupid people"
> >
> > This right here seems to be a valid and humorous sig. Why not leave it
> > at that?
>
> That would be fine, its 4 lines long, which is acceptable by
> netiquette standards. The problem is Nathaniel, this is only a
> *fraction* of his normal sig. The above is only the first
> *paragraph*. His normal sig is *29* lines long, *29*, look around,
> you can easily find a post from him with the full sig. You can also
> find posts which have the full sig, sent *after* his response above,
> so maybe we should ask him why he cut his sig down, just for this
> response in this thread?
> The full sig reads like a continuation of old arguments he's had with
> other folks in other groups (maybe here as well, I don't know), which
> makes it utterly pointless to every one else, *besides* the people he
> mentions in the sig. That's why I suggested earlier that Aaron send
> this to the people mentioned in the sig, and stop spamming the rest of
> us.
>
> --
> "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire
>
> Ed C.
>
> -----= 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! =-----
I have seen his full sig and was simply asking (as I've seen the 'cut
down' version two or three times) why he couldn't just leave it at this
first "section" of his normal sig. I do think his full sig a overkill
(probably even to the people that it *is* valid to) and that it is a
huge waste of bandwidth (he replies with one liners and leaves that
insipid sig attached), but it is up to him to change it. I think that
little section of the sig I asked about is the only one that really fits
and that is understandable to anyone (no matter whether you saw where it
came from or not).
So, are you 'listening'? What do you say?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (R. Tang)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 17 Jul 2000 14:24:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000, JS/PL wrote:
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> You argue from an intentional position of ignorance. Its boring.
>> >
>> >No - a bunch of socialist personality types sitting around agreeing (and
>> >insisting) that government should steer the design of their software is
>> >boring.
>>
>> You don't even understand what's happened well enough to complain
>> intelligently.
>>
>> MS is being broken up so the government does not have to get involved with
>the
>> design of software.
>
>How naive are you?
Not as much as you, apparently.
>This ruling automatically assigns a team of government
>employees with the task of enforcing this assinine ruling until the end of
>time. If the ruling stands (*which most feel it won't) the United States
>Government will be designing the OS in a MUCH greater sense than your
>idiotic "so they won't have to get involved" foolishness.
Don't be stupid.
--
-Roger Tang, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Artistic Director PC Theatre
- Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL]
- http://www.abcflash.com/a&e/r_tang/AATR.html
-Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:39 +0200
void <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:35:01 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> Single-user or not, nobody wants their computer locked up because one
> application has a serious bug. Operating systems should be resilient
> against programmer error, because bugs happen and they happen a lot.
See my other post about Linux.
> Can you find a way to make cooperative multitasking as robust as
> preemptive multitasking?
Compare the Mac to Win95?
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:41 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 18:10:27 +0200, Lars Tr�ger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> You clearly haven't worked with any systems like HP Unix boxes, or Sun
> >> workstations. The only time I've _ever_ had a part not work in a Sun
> >> box was due to bad hardware. Whereas I've seen people have all kinds of
> >> problems with Mac equipment.
> >
> >So if I plug in a USB mouse, it just works?
>
> ...if it's a proper USB mouse that should even be true in
> Mandrake 7.1...
Context: So if I plug a USB mouse into a Sun box, it just works?
In case you still didn't get it: Suns don't have USB, so you can't just
plug one in.
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:38 +0200
void <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 04:44:14 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >The needs of a desktop system
> >are different than those of a multiuser system or a server, of course,
> >but PMT still wins out, it just needs to be tuned differently (e.g.
> >things like user input need to be giving high priorities).
>
> A modern scheduler is sufficently self-tuning to work well on servers or
> desktops without modification. When my FreeBSD machine runs its nightly
> 2 am maintenance scripts, I can only tell if I'm physically present to
> hear the disk drive's noises.
Well then, Linux doesn't seem to have a modern scheduler. The solitair
app that comes with KDE in the Suse distro has a bug in one of the
games. When it's triggered, the game hangs in a loop and everything
slows to a crawl.
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:40 +0200
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could just force the program quit. The force quit command applies to
> the app that currently has the CPU, not necessarily the foreground app.
> I have to do this when IE5 freezes at random while sitting in the
> background every now and then. (You have to wonder how it manages to
> freeze while not doing anything....)
When IE isn't doing anything, it begins to do things behind your back.
Maybe you should be glad it hangs ;-)
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:03:21 GMT
On 17 Jul 2000 01:48:18 GMT, Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 00:20:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If they want their work to be 'free to all' they can release
>> it completely and drop any pretense. Otherwise, they are in
>> no position to criticise anyone else's licence.
>
>You mean, aside from having warranty attach to their work?
If there isn't any ownership associated with the code
just whom are you going to assign legal responsibility
to?
>
>> Although, I rather doubt they are the hypocritical whiners
>> that we see in this forum. Such twits are likely as far away
>> from BSD developers as you can get.
>
>Surprise. At least two of them are in this very thread.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:02:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> >
> ><large snip>
> >
> >I disagree with most of your post, but I *must* fight the
> >temptation to argue with you into the "rounding error" zone.
>
> As much as I agreed with Mr. Brown's sentiment, I'm not here for his
> pleasure, nor are you. If you'd like to discuss it, please do so.
>
It is not Mr. Brown who compels me to cut short my response, it
is my work-load.
> [...]
> >This is good, and we can agree to disagree here, but please don't
> >pity us. We are proud of our abilities. We do what we do honestly
> >and openly. Our customers are delighted with us and extremely
> >thankful we are there to support them.
>
> And yet despite all those wonderful qualities, you still have to pay
> for Windows' crappy design. I pity you. But if you don't want my
> pity, I'll be glad to consider that you benefit from and encourage
> such crappy design. You get my pity, or my animosity.
A dichotomy from T. Max Devlin!?!?!
Those are your choices. We choose to be proud of our ability to give
our customers results instead of excuses and lectures on "Windows'
crappy design".
BTW, I will be out of town and out of touch for another week. I will
be conducting the voodoo ritual of joining an OLE server with an
ActiveX client in an unholy union.
Still Rooting for the Penguin,
David Petticord
Complete Networks, Inc.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:08:45 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> I can take it down, but these people will resume starting flame-wars
> and initiating hit-and-run attacks which will fill the newsgroup with
> junk... ever-lengthening posts of nothing but junk
>
> Is that what you want?
As this happens anyway (maybe not directly to you, but to most anybody
I've seen) what's the point of you clogging up usenet with your useless
junk *every* time you post. I find people starting flame-wars about as
often as I find valid posts and see no way to avoid that other than
ignoring the *flamers* themselves. Your sig adds credence to them as
they know they have gotten under your skin. Ignore them, it is almost
as effective (you won't get flamed as much if you don't bite), and you
won't annoy the hell out of countless people that have nothing to do
with the original flame-wars you are claiming to try and rid yourself
of.
You may consider this flaimbait in and of itself, but I feel this is a
valid idea.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:25:00 -0500
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>
> In article <DvSb5.316617$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Data processing is oftentimes best represented in the mind as
> >> 3+ dimensional processes. On the average, men's brains are MUCH
> >> more adept at this sort of thinking (in the same way as on the
> >> average, women's brain's are much more adept at acquiring and
> >> using linquistic skills)
> >
> >Personally, I find the differences between the thinking of men and woman
> >similar to the differences between KDE and GNOME; not very interesting and
> >far too slight to really matter.
>
> Maybe you aren't paying attention. Do you really understand why
> anyone would want more than 2 colors of shoes? Or how they
> could spend time shopping for them without being bored senseless?
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whoah there pard.
Seriously, while *some* women do this, not all do. And I've known a few
men that do that (shopping for clothes and shoes for hours or even days,
having a full closet and saying, "I don't have a thing to wear"). I
think that's more about how you are raised then something internal
between men and women. A guy raised in a house that's all women (dad
left when young, left with sisters and mom) is going to display some of
this same behavior. Same goes the other way around. I would say most
of this is about the way you are raised, environment around you, and
personality. That is not a fundamental difference in thinking style.
And, BTW how many women would go to a car lot and look at cars for three
or more hours, talk to salesmen, talk about prices and such knowing full
well that they can't even think about affording a car? I know a number
of men that would. A difference in preference of what they are looking
at, not a fundamental difference in behavior.
Now, more than likely you were joking, but I thought I'd throw in my
$.02 (+tax). :)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:28:21 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Not *entirely*, no. I was being rhetorical. I didn't think you'd need
>> to double-check that I knew what I was saying, but I can understand how
>> you would think you should.
>>
>> CMT without a convention for limiting a processes' maximum CPU time
>> *would* be a stupid idea. I'm still not clear on if this is the actual
>> problem assumed to occur on CMT systems. My post yesterday fantasizing
>> about a "three level model" for scheduling to replace the monolithic
>> system found in PMT should indicate that I think CMT/PMT is something of
>> a false dichotomy. Complete lack of a quantum is certainly an
>> unacceptable implementation for a general purpose OS, yes.
>
>As has been explained to you many many times, there is no way to limit the
>cpu time that a CMT process keeps control of the system.[...]
There is no way to limit the length of an Ethernet segment, either.
Other than the obvious one of "the system doesn't work unless you
conform to that expectation." I thought I'd explained that with the
53.7 microsecond thing. In the case of CPU time, it would be a case of
the convention limiting the CPU time, rather than an outside mechanism
of control. But cooperative mechanisms can work, or we wouldn't be
exchanging these thoughts as we are.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== 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: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux, of course!!
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:27:26 -0500
"David M. Cook" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 18:32:43 -0400, Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Come on take it for what it is an attempt
> >(and a good one) at HUMOR. People in this
> >NG take things just WAY to seriously.
> > I on the other hand am still laughing.
>
> If you have a method for telling some of the loonier anti-Linux stuff from
> the satire, I'd like to know about it.
>
> Dave Cook
I would have asked the same thing if I had gotten back here first. Look
at some of the older Simon/Tim/Steve/.... posts and tell me, is that
supposed to be humor? Seriously, even as humor I see a serious problem
in linking Linux to murder and rape. How is that funny?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux, of course!!
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:28:55 -0500
V'rgo Vardja wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> > This is a killer.
> >
> > 1. Linux is not an organization.
> >
> > 2. I have yet to see any case where "Linux killed someone"...
>
> Windows?
>
> [snip]
>
> Virgo
>
> --
> ERROR: CPU not detected. Emulating.
> -Win2k
Well, in the general sense it hasn't killed it in the marketplace.
However, if you count the number of individuals that have used Linux to
"kill Windows" on their hard drives, then I would say Linux is a serial
killer, and one of the most succesful of all time.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
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: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:05:09 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:41 +0200, Lars Tr�ger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 18:10:27 +0200, Lars Tr�ger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> You clearly haven't worked with any systems like HP Unix boxes, or Sun
>> >> workstations. The only time I've _ever_ had a part not work in a Sun
>> >> box was due to bad hardware. Whereas I've seen people have all kinds of
>> >> problems with Mac equipment.
>> >
>> >So if I plug in a USB mouse, it just works?
>>
>> ...if it's a proper USB mouse that should even be true in
>> Mandrake 7.1...
>
>Context: So if I plug a USB mouse into a Sun box, it just works?
>
>In case you still didn't get it: Suns don't have USB, so you can't just
>plug one in.
It's been quite awhile since they made PC motherboards without
a USB controller...
...as far as Suns go: they do have PCI slots these days.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:35:38 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"R. Tang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8kv4vh$7nqk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000, JS/PL wrote:
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> You argue from an intentional position of ignorance. Its boring.
> >> >
> >> >No - a bunch of socialist personality types sitting around agreeing
(and
> >> >insisting) that government should steer the design of their software
is
> >> >boring.
> >>
> >> You don't even understand what's happened well enough to complain
> >> intelligently.
> >>
> >> MS is being broken up so the government does not have to get involved
with
> >the
> >> design of software.
> >
> >How naive are you?
>
> Not as much as you, apparently.
>
> >This ruling automatically assigns a team of government
> >employees with the task of enforcing this assinine ruling until the end
of
> >time. If the ruling stands (*which most feel it won't) the United States
> >Government will be designing the OS in a MUCH greater sense than your
> >idiotic "so they won't have to get involved" foolishness.
>
> Don't be stupid.
Let's have your take on it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
