Linux-Advocacy Digest #421, Volume #28 Tue, 15 Aug 00 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn..... (Michael
Vester)
All in one motherboard - sound chips: AC97 ("Jerry Wong")
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chris Wenham)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joseph)
Re: MCSE != Engineer (Was: Microsoft MCSE ("Ingemar Lundin")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 09:06:26 -0700
Hi
Steve/Mike/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/"S"/Sponge/Syphon/
"Sewer Rat"/Sarek/steveno/scummer/McSwain/Swango/piddy/
pickle_pete/wazzoo/"leg
log"/mike_hunt/Heather/Amy/claire_lynn/
susie_wong/Ishmeal_hafizi/"Saul Goldblatt"/Proculous/
Tiberious/Jerry_Butler/"Tim Palmer"/BklynBoy/bison/Wobbles/
screwbilk/deadpenguin/"%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com"/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/etc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Typical Linux...And they (the Linonuts) wonder why virtually nobody
> who is a desktop user is migrating to Linux...
>
> Sure, throw out your WinModem.
>
I was not stupid enough to by one in the first place. Mine is
a US Robotics external.
> Throw out your Win Printer.
>
I was not stupid enough to by one in the first place. I have
an HP 6p.
> Throw out your Win Scanner.
>
I was not stupid enough to by one in the first place. I have
an ancient HP SCSI scanner which Linux configured correctly.
> Use half the features of your soundcard.
>
I use %100 of the features on my real Sound Blaster card.
> Use half the features of your video card.
>
My video card works at maximum capability.
> Spend days configuring a firewall.
>
Only if you are an idiot. My first try took about 2 hours
which included reading the how-tos. In the Windows world,
don't you have to buy a third party program to setup a
firewall?
> Run a text browser.
>
And Netscape and Opera. Netscape is the buggiest application
on my Linux box but I have always been able to "kill" it and
restart. On my Windows boxes, Netscape and Internet Explorer
are much worst and often crash the OS (Windows 98 SE and NT 4
sp6). No Windows 2000 for me because none of my clients are
using it.
> TTF and anti-aliased fonts? What are they? Ruin your eyes.
>
Since I am not in the publication business, my fonts are
perfectly ok. Perhaps you need a new eye-glass prescription?
> Run 5 different programs to read mail/news offline.
>
Netscape does this quite well for me but you are partially
right. But you only need to run one program to read/news
off-line but you have many choices.
> Spend days setting up an internet connection sharing system.
>
Out of the box on my first try, years ago. Billy decided that
Windows should do this with 98 SE which, by the way, is an
upgrade that has to be purchased.
> Get your ISP pissed at you when you mention Linux.
>
My ISP has no concerns. If you are using AOL, too bad. Most
Linux users are a bit too sophisticated to be using AOL. I
only contact my ISP to add more IP's. The Linux community has
been tremendously helpful and I always have a solution to a
question in hours.
>
> Right..............
>
> No wonder Linux has been a dismal failure in it's lame attempt to
> challenge Windows or Mac for the desktop market.
>
Who is making this lame attempt? Why are you so critical if it
is a lame attempt? If you really believed that Linux had no
chance, you would not waste all your time thinking up new
pseudonyms to use and posting nonsense to this group. Linux
market share is growing without even trying. There is not even
a lame attempt.
>
> Linux isn't even a HAS been, because it HAS been nowhere and that is
> where it will stay...
>
Yet, the numbers grow everyday. Large companies are embracing
it. HP makes their big Linux announcement this week.
Eventually, Microsoft will earn that "has been" status because
they are a "has" right now. As they loose market share, they
will become a "has been".
> A wet dream in the minds of the geeks...
>
I dream about the opposite sex, not computer operating
systems. With Linux, you don't have to be so pre-occupied. I
know when I have administrated NT servers, I would lay awake
at night worried about the system working the next day. With
Linux, you don't have the same stress.
> Hopefully you didn't waste half a day trying to install that video
> card?
>
I spend considerably less time "configuring" Linux than you
spend posting to this advocacy group. Perhaps you need a more
productive hobby. If you lived here in Canada, we could put
you to work criticizing our government. Plenty of opportunity
for someone with your talent.
> Claire
>
You mean
Steve/Mike/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/"S"/Sponge/Syphon/
"Sewer Rat"/Sarek/steveno/scummer/McSwain/Swango/piddy/
pickle_pete/wazzoo/"leg
log"/mike_hunt/Heather/Amy/claire_lynn/
susie_wong/Ishmeal_hafizi/"Saul Goldblatt"/Proculous/
Tiberious/Jerry_Butler/"Tim Palmer"/BklynBoy/bison/Wobbles/
screwbilk/deadpenguin/"%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com"/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/etc.
Michael Vester
(a real name and a real person, not ashamed of being a Linux
advocate)
------------------------------
From: "Jerry Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: All in one motherboard - sound chips: AC97
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 23:11:34 +0800
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_000D_01C0070E.28156040
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is anbody using it in Linux? Does it work properly?
--=20
http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124
(In Chinese Big 5)
http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124/linux.htm
(In English)
=======_NextPart_000_000D_01C0070E.28156040
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Dbig5 http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1706"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c0c0c0>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Is anbody using it in Linux? Does it work=20
properly?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2><BR>-- <BR><A=20
href=3D"http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124">http://members.hknet.com/~wo=
ng63124</A><BR>(In=20
Chinese Big 5)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124/linux.htm">http://members.hkn=
et.com/~wong63124/linux.htm</A><BR>(In=20
English)</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_000D_01C0070E.28156040==
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:17:01 -0300
Nathaniel Jay Lee escribi�:
>
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >
> > Nathaniel Jay Lee escribi�:
> >
> > [Ok, snip a hell of a lot]
> >
> > > I'm really glad you still don't understand.
> >
> > I think I understand, I just find your position kinda lame ;-)
> >
> > > Does the idea of code fork
> > > mean nothing? I'm hoping that is another thing that doesn't happen.
> >
> > Code forking does happen. Who cares?
>
> If the Linux kernel forks it will lead credence to one of the MS
> supporters primary arguments against using Linux. THey keep saying,
> "Unix forked, Linux will too." ANd even the slightest sign that it is
> can cause problems. Look to Linux.com if you don't believe me. There
> was a fictional story about a guy considering a code fork (completely
> fiction) and people raised such a stink about Linux forking (forgetting
> that it was just fiction) that I think they pulled the plug on the
> entire series. It's a scary concept because it would be one more strike
> against Linux.
This "one more strike against linux" is what I don't get. If people
decide
not to use linux, it's their problem, not yours, not mine.
> > > I'm thinking this is a dead-end conversation. I don't want to see Linux
> > > forked,
> >
> > Why?
>
> See above. I will stick by that argument. I don't want to see it
> forked because it isn't something that will benifit Linux unless it is a
> quick fork and it quickly merges back into a 'standard' kernel.
The linux kernel is already forked. Look at RTLinux.
> > > I don't want to see it become a Windows clone. You say it won't
> > > be, or if it is I can just fork it. What if neither of those options
> > > sounds good to me (either use the clone, or fork the code)?
> >
> > Let's put it this way: if linux somehow did become a windows clone
> > (as unlikely as that is), and you didn't find it "good" to fork,
> > why should you be provided a free OS by those who spend money and/or
> > effort creating one?
> >
> > Quid pro quo, sir. You HAVE been provided a OS for free. Now you
> > use it or you don't. You improve it or you don't. You influence its
> > development or you don't. And that's all there is.
>
> Isn't the discussion I am trying to bring up 'influencing it's
> development' in some small part.
Not a particularly efficient way, I'd say.
> I realize that it's hard to understand, but if there are 'that many
> people' out there whining for these things to happen (and it is one hell
> of a lot more than the whole GUI in the kernel problem), then what's
> wrong with the people that don't agree with it stating their opinion?
That at least those advocating a GUI in the kernel would be saying
something concrete. "Put a GUI in the kernel". And then it can be argued
whether it makes sense or not.
"Don't turn linux into a windows clone" is undebatable, because it
is so fuzzy it can't be denied.
> Telling the people that have a clue to shut up is just going to make
> those people that don't sound even more credible (crazy as it seems)
> as they won't have anyone 'opposing' their view.
Credible to whom?
> > Complaining that others use it or influence it or improve it in ways
> > you don't approve is lame.
>
> It's no more lame than the ideas that some of these people are trying to
> influence.
> And I don't consider what they want to do to Linux to be
> 'improvement' over what we have now. If it was a forward move, I
> wouldn't complain, but it appears we would be taking a giant step
> backwards by making Linux become a Windows clone.
You keep on throwing this windows clone thing around.
> > You have all you need to keep linux from becoming a windows clone,
> > should
> > such a thing ever happen. If you choose not to, it's your fault.
>
> In other words, I should just shut the fuck up until it happens, and
> then spend all of my time trying to code off of whatever mess it has
> turned into to create 'My Special Linux' so that I can have what I want.
No, you should start coding, and you should fix or ask to fix, or
beg to fix, or pay to fix, or SOMETHING, the specific things you see
as wrong. For instance: have you done anything about the corel hw
autodetect stuff beyond write about it in a newsgroup? Get the thing,
study the thing, fix the thing, distribute the thing.
> > > That's my problem. And it's not paranoia, it's a legitimate question.
> > > ANd you sticking your head in the sand and saying, "I've never heard that."
> > > doesn't change the fact that it is being said.
> >
> > Ok, let's assume it is. Why should anyone care?
>
> I don't know, but it's funny how if enough people ask for a 'feature' in
> Linux you eventually see signs of that feature coming through.
That's magic thought. It's not the way it happens.
> Now, maybe up to this point the features that were being asked for were
> legitimate because the interest in Linux was primarily techinical
> people. But now we have some very, very non-technical people trying to
> influence the development and I don't think that the technical people
> should just sit on their lips and wait to see what happens.
If all the technical people did that, nothing would happen.
> I'm going
> to speak my mind about this. If that makes me a freakin' crackpot, so
> be it.
If you want to speak for technical people, speak technically, instead
of trying to scare people with the windows clone ghost.
> If they have a right to complain, I have a right to say that their
> complaints aren't legitimate.
Who granted you that right???? You don't. You have right to complain,
too.
> And that is all that I am saying. Look
> at the features from a technical standpoint before implementing them, or
> even deciding on whether they should be implemented.
In free software, you will get nothing else.
> Why should we just
> sit here and watch Linux turn into a Windows clone because that's what
> the computer illiterate people want?
You say that as if it would happen. Linux is linux. Windows is windows.
Linux is not defined by anyone, really. If you don't want Linux to turn
into windows, it's trivial to do, as I have already said.
> Ah, fuck it! You're absolutely right. I have no right to voice my
> opinion.
Fuck off, I never said that. You do. Those who want Linux to be more
like windows have that right, too, yet you say their complains are
"illegitimate".
> After all, I've been using and developing on Linux since the
> mid 90's. I have way less right to voice my opinion than the morons
> that have never used it, but happened to have bought some stock in some
> 'ultra-hip IPO' craze.
You have about the same right as they do. What would make your opinion
more worthy than anyone else's is:
a) Spend money turning opinion into code.
b) Spend time turning opinion into code.
Nothing else.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
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?
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:11:57 GMT
>>>>> "T" == T Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then there is no free market in software, I'm afraid. A free
> market *requires* a knowledgable consumer base and lots of
> information all around in order to function. It isn't a
> question of "would be nice if", I'm afraid.
>> So it doesn't matter.
> Your dictate, unfortunately, doesn't change the fact that it
> does matter. Quite a bit.
It wasn't a dictate, it was an observation and I think you're talking
across my point rather than at it.
It isn't about "free markets". It's about whether the presense of a
tech support number sells more boxes than the lack of one.
It's not an issue of education, it's not an issue of free markets,
it's not an issue of dictates, it's an issue of quietly standing at
the end of a software aisle and watching which boxes go into the
shopping carts and which ones don't.
It's a matter of telling a customer your company doesn't have 24-hour
support and not hearing from them again.
I don't know where you came up with the idea of dictates and free
markets. In fact I don't even remember using the phrase "free
market". Could you remind me which post that was?
> Luckily, the number of people who understand these things as
> Jedi and I do (variously) will almost undoubtedly always be
> smaller than the number who wish to use PCs, regardless of OS.
> That's how Jedi and I, variously, secure gainful employment. It
> is not necessary to understand this support issue in order to
> benefit from Linux, or at least from dumping Windows, which is
> also fortunate. Not being aware of something, however, is not
> at all the same as being in denial about it.
Which is all academic. I recall that the original discussion was the
likelyhood of Linux being sold to the kitchentop market. Not the
computer savvy market.
> That we don't have a free market today is a judgement I
> doubt you share, but that's what you seem to be indicating.
That's very interesting. When did I "seem" to do that?
> It
> is not lack of education you refer to, though, it is
> misinformation.
No, misinformation would mean someone is telling them things about
technical support that aren't truthful. I don't think anyone is told
anything about technical support at all, only whether it exists or
not.
The potential buyers in a Kitchentop market have come from a lifetime
of buying refrigerators, cars, washing machines and televisions that
all come with warantees. Software comes with no warantee at all, so
technical support is the closest analog.
Being told "Technical support means you can call a number to get
help" is not misinformation. In fact the customer probably already
understands the defenition, having figured it out themselves. They
walk into the store with this concept already ingrained, having built
their own perceptions of what it will be like.
> If you really want to take this to rounding error in an attempt
> to force someone to say "bad tech support is preferable to no
> tech support", then fine. That's a rather obvious and silly
> statement, though
That would be why I wasn't saying that, wouldn't it?
> and you seemed to be trying to use it to
> drive a wedge in the argument that a) modern tech support is a
> sham, and b) modern perceptions of tech support are
> disfunctional.
Indirectly I'm supporting point b. My point is c) companies must
cater to the current perception of tech support or take a gamble.
> I think Jedi's point is more the first, and mine
> more the second, but either way the fact seems clear: using tech
> support to defend Windows or attack Linux is downright
> ludicrous. I believe that was the origin of the discussion. If
> I've missed something, let me know.
The origin of the discussion was the practicality of selling PCs
preloaded with Linux to the Kitchentop market.
Someone supposed a probable scenario where a potential customer asks
if it has Quicken and loses interest when the salesman tells them it
doesn't. (And tangent to this is the issue of branding. Quicken is a
very strong brand and even a perfect clone /WITH/ tech support will
loose sales to the effect of that brand. But that's another thread.)
The counter was that obviously we need to have something that's as
good as Quicken in the minds of the potential buyer. That means
matching both direct and indirect features. A direct feature is
something like a pop-up calculator or a tool for reconciling your
balance. An indirect feature is the promise of support from the
maker.
When someone is faced with indecision over a brand name and a cheaper
alternative they start scrutinizing labels. This one has a 500mhz
chip, that one has a 450mhz chip, this headphone's frequency response
is 20-18,000hz, that one is 15-22,000hz, this one costs $499.95, that
one costs $445.95, and so-on.
Then, when faced with many good features on both sides, they start
prioritizing them. And eventually they get down to "dealbreakers". I
think that technical support is one such dealbreaker and the reason
is precisely because this is the Kitchentop market - a group of
people who are /not/ computer savvy and /not/ prepared to spend a
long time learning how to use them. Technical Support is therefore
more likely to be ranked higher in priority than almost any other
feature.
And all while looking at labels and spines in a store, nowhere near a
newsgroup, nowhere near a copy of Consumer Reports.
In fact, for this particular market, I'm willing to bet they'd still
choose the product with technical support even if they /DID/ know how
bad it was.
I don't care if this is a tragedy of disfunctional perception, of the
lack of a free market or the death of Princess Diana. It's an
observation.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:15:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Wenham
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>> "Arthur" == Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> W2K DC is supposed to far better - would you both not hope?
>
> > But according to Bill Gates everybody that buys W2K because it's
> > more reliable is stupid:
>
> With all due respect for the devil, I think Bill was making an
> observation. "Less bugs" does not sell as well as "More features"
> does.
Actually, he went further. In the same interview, he claimed that
Windows does not have bugs.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:26:20 -0300
Nathaniel Jay Lee escribi�:
>
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >
> > Nathaniel Jay Lee escribi�:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Enough people bitch and the Linux developers listen. That's partly the
> > > beauty of Linux, but it could be the downfall of it as well. That's all
> > > I'm saying. We have all of those people bitching for 'thier' needs,
> > > let's bitch for our needs so that it isn't one sided.
> >
> > Bitch about your needs, not against the other people bitching.
>
> I am, and if you would listen (instead of running whatever words I say
> through some sort of filter) to what I am actually saying maybe you
> would hear what I am saying.
I indeed am having trouble extracting any meaning from your posts.
It is probably my fault.
> > > Is that really a
> > > problem, or are only the people clamouring for change allowed to speak
> > > on this issue?
> >
> > "Please don't change anything" will not get you anywhere.
>
> Goddamned I hate people stuffing words in my mouth!
So do I. I didn't intend that as a quote from you, really.
> Listen closely, "DON'T MAKE LINUX A WINDOWS CLONE!"
>
> How does that translate to "DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING!"
What changes are involved in not making linux a windows clone?
None.
> I'm saying do what's right for Linux. Don't stop development. Don't
> stop changing for the better. Just don't go chaging it to fit the mould
> (or is that mold) of the typical Windows luser because that's what they
> know.
I guess I'd say "do with linux whatever you want, just don't force me to
use that". If someone wants to turn HIS linux into a windows clone,
I say more power to him. Mine will not magically become one.
> I don't want to see Linux become a Windows clone.
I'm sure we all know that by now :-)
[snip]
> I'm just saying we don't need to
> adopt stupid ass features just because, "that's how Windows does it".
Nobody who can actually implement the features actually thinks that way.
You are arguing against the unexistant!
> The call for a central database of configuration instead of the current
> /etc and dot files seems ridiculous to me (why re-create the mess of the
> registry?).
/etc IS a central database of configuration.
> The call for a 'Corel like' hardware detection scheme
> (where you get something different every time you boot, much like
> Windows) seems ridiculous to me. These are the types of things I'm
> saying shouldn't happen. I'm not saying we need to just stop
> development. Just don't let it be steered in the wrong direction.
>
> Somehow you have yourself convinced that anyone not interested in a
> Windows clone has something against any progress.
Who, me? Man are you confused.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 08:25:34 -0700
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Chris Wenham wrote:
>>>>>> "Arthur" == Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> W2K DC is supposed to far better - would you both not hope?
>
> > But according to Bill Gates everybody that buys W2K because it's
> > more reliable is stupid:
>
> With all due respect for the devil, I think Bill was making an
> observation. "Less bugs" does not sell as well as "More features"
> does.
Yes. An his customers have told him otherwise.
W2K's main selling point is reliability. Ironically that's why it is slower to
be adopted, many of those wanting the reliability are waiting out the first
release.
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MCSE != Engineer (Was: Microsoft MCSE
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:38:14 GMT
Absolutely right!
And for me a Engineer is a person who has a College-level Bachelor or
Masters degree in E_N_G_I_N_E_E_R_I_N_G
Not some fantasy,toy-certificate name made up by a commercial company.
/IL
> >Do you know what an MCSE is? An MCSE has nothing to do with software
> >development.
>
> And it has even less to do with Engineering.
>
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> >>Can you discuss garbage collection and
>
> The MCSE approach to garbage collection is to reboot. I would expect a
> Sanitary Engineer have more to discuss about garbage collection than a
> Mircosoft Engineer.
>
> Perry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
