Linux-Advocacy Digest #438, Volume #28 Wed, 16 Aug 00 18:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: It's official, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Microsoft=AE?= porting applications to Linux
(Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Notebook/Windows rebate? ("josh")
Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Andrew J. Brehm)
Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay (The Ghost In The Machine)
A Linux victory.
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest (Perry Pip)
Re: Microsoft MCSE (Perry Pip)
Re: Microsoft MCSE (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:57:01 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > There was a big, huge write up about that in a National Geographic not
> > too long ago. It was about the history of candy and they talked about
> > how Reeses Pieces were first successful after that movie, and how hard
> > Reeses had fought to get the candy in the movie. The short version is
> > that they made the movie producers a deal they couldn't refuse, and sort
> > of cut out Hersey with that one. It was a retaliation for deals that
> > had gone bad between Hersey and the original founder of Mars and a
> > couple of other candy execs. It was really interesting how even in the
> > candy business it's a cut-throat world.
>
> Gee, thanks! What I presented was my analysis from seeing the movie and
> reading the book that the screen play was based on, then comparing the
> differences.
I wish I could find a copy of that NG magazine. That was the coolest
'hard look' that I've ever seen at the candy industry.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: It's official, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Microsoft=AE?= porting applications to
Linux
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:01:43 -0500
Milton wrote:
> =
> In a desperate attempt, to regain some legitimacy in the high-tech
> software arena, Microsoft=AE is letting a an experienced 3rd party,
> Mainsoft, port it's applications to the state of the art operating
> system, Linux.
> =
> The results, so far, have been disappointing.
> =
> Brought to you by Windows 2000 Magazine
> http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=3D2874
> =
> :)
This sounds more like MS trying to find ways to make sure all of its
current security problems can be ported to Linux. Or a way of trying to
make Linux look bad in other ways. I just don't think MS is capable of
doing this in an attempt to look technically efficient. It is more than
likely to make Linux crash and burn. Or, as the article itself says, to
use poor and 'behind the times' apps on Linux to try and convince people
to move 'to Windows'. Of course, this is a little silly since a lot of
us moved FROM Windows to Linux.
Of course, I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time either.
-- =
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "josh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: Notebook/Windows rebate?
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:10:50 -0300
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
You can certainly try, but some manufacturers are less than happy to
give a refund. You have nothing to lose to try, if you don't mind
countless email going back and forth talking to the dealer's reps.
If I were you I'd just sell that unopened copy on ebay or something,
much easier to get some of your money back.
Good Luck
Josh
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQEVAwUBOZr1M7T6ZS1yM9UzAQHZ2Qf/XqwzI2ByVBPuC4Bx9WiDyLHX4eUwZMFF
Gqz9av/06mlY1SdJZhgo6a+aSWEaBp5VDUOyWN3Up6zpToSb2StG8erSpZdBB5TS
uMANBVHpsDbEsc6HYqd7BBgeKEkjjl/cC+tpq9ntsYISjZdd8tLX4CN/NqHRYmvA
kvUfBLlkTbrdB2h7w8faQM9305vrVQ4ok+tk0lWIkuIcCYwtcMgN4iHJREqE9VrV
08RRTt6VrT9WpKLvAMW9+ByyhinNAVlhDxzfgBTJ983qZE7+nCMpvGWsoO5GFmQU
Ae7EOPr1OrxBQboNDZlkaVdoLvYYexYbTRBrpBbk+owKfAlA7mORqg==
=8EgP
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
"Nobody Needs to Know" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Howdy, folks.
>
> I'm looking at buying a new notebook, but I have no need/desire for
> Windows. A friend of mine recently told me that there's some way to
> return your unopened bundled copies of Microsoft software to Microsoft for
> a rebate. Anybody know anything about this? I'm probably going to get a
> Dell Inspiron 5000, but Dell INSISTS that you MUST have Windows 98 and
> Office SBE. You can't opt out of them. If there's some way to get a
> rebate on these things, I'd certainly love to know how. Alternatively, if
> there's some readily available resale market on them, I'd be happy to do
> that, too.
>
> Thanks,
> -- David
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:40:20 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:42:39 GMT...
...and The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of the worst examples of "ease of use" come from none other
> than Microsoft. (See http://www.iarchitect.com/mshame.htm for some
> examples.) This in spite of the fact that Microsoft has a very
> sticky GUI.... :-)
My biggest problem with Windows' GUI is neatly pointed out at
iarchitect; it's the clunkier-than-sin horizontally-scrolling file
requester that has over the years accumulated dozens of bells,
whistles and gongs.
If I want to open a file, I want to open a file! I don't want to
rename, delete, copy, move, or manage files. The only thing that an
"open file" requester should maybe have besides functionality for
navigating and opening a file is a preview window. And vertical
scrolling is a must. Nothing scrolls horizontally. Horizontal
scrolling is just sick.
Excuse me while I go puke.
mawa
--
Tcl ist nicht als vollst�ndige Skript- oder Entwicklungssprache
entworfen worden (obwohl [dies] Leute nicht davon abgehalten hat,
50.000-Zeilen-Skripte zur Steuerung von Bohrinseln zu programmieren).
-- Sriram Srinivasan, _Fortgeschrittene_Perl-Programmierung_
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew J. Brehm)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:40:10 +0200
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Loren Petrich forfeited all rights to civility when he decided
> > > to side with totalitarians.
> >
> > And here, ladies and gentlemen, we can see how unalienable rights defend
> > the freedom of an individual against those who don't like him.
> >
> > "He happened to forfeit his rights."
>
> Do you not agree that a murderer forfeits his right to life.
I do _not_ agree than an unalienable right can be forfeited.
If rights must not be violated, they can also not be forfeited.
Otherwise the right is worth nothing.
--
Fan of Woody Allen
PowerPC User
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:27:19 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthias Warkus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:40:20 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>It was the Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:42:39 GMT...
>...and The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Some of the worst examples of "ease of use" come from none other
>> than Microsoft. (See http://www.iarchitect.com/mshame.htm for some
>> examples.) This in spite of the fact that Microsoft has a very
>> sticky GUI.... :-)
>
>My biggest problem with Windows' GUI is neatly pointed out at
>iarchitect; it's the clunkier-than-sin horizontally-scrolling file
>requester that has over the years accumulated dozens of bells,
>whistles and gongs.
>
>If I want to open a file, I want to open a file! I don't want to
>rename, delete, copy, move, or manage files. The only thing that an
>"open file" requester should maybe have besides functionality for
>navigating and opening a file is a preview window. And vertical
>scrolling is a must. Nothing scrolls horizontally. Horizontal
>scrolling is just sick.
>
>Excuse me while I go puke.
Well, uh....Microsoft's widget scrolls horizontally. :-)
But your point is well taken. I've lost count of the number of times
I've tried to resize the requester to see all of the files
(can't do that, either!) because I can't stand that horizontal
scrollbar. I have occasionally taken advantage of the ability to
create a directory (folder???! Who thought of THAT term?)
within it, but that's about it.
I also have issues with its "memory". I suspect that this is
sloppy programming on each application programmer's part, though;
Commdlg requres an OPENFILENAME structure, which needs to
last for the life of the dialog, but, depending on various
factors, might be created anew each time, or kept around
(the dialog is modal, after all).
I also find the behavior of many of the scrollbars themselves
annoying ... while the logic is more or less sound, the actual
usage of making sure the mouse is positioned right over the
scrollbar is extremely annoying. (Apparently the idea was to
allow a control to regain its previous setting if the user
runs far enough away ... which is fine in the abstract, but I can't
say I like its actual implementation in Microsoft. Of course, YMMV.)
Sigh.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- holds out a conveniently-placed 5-gallon bucket :-)
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A Linux victory.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:51:11 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have been providing assistance to a number of Linux/unix/PC neophytes that
have requested my assistance. I have been helping a number of non-neopytes
as well but that is a different story.
One of the neophytes who has been into personal computing since near the
begining, but he has been. At one time he used to integrate PC and S100's
before that but he has been away from the tech side of PCs for about a
decade or so. A few months ago he desided to get back into the tech side.
He contacted me via email for advice and guideance in this effort.
He wanted a quad boot system. He needed Linux and Dos and Windows 9x, the
fourh "slot" is for whatever other OS he might want to play with.
His preexisting systems were good solid pre Windows 95 era boxes. What it
was that made him deside to get back into tech side of PC, is that one of
his video card had died. We reviewed his option then when he went shopping
for a replacement. He bought, for whatever reason, an outdated card for
about $10.00. The specs of the card according to the blurbs on the box
seems to support the resolutions and color depths he wanted.
When he contacted me, the trouble started to turn up. Vesa Bios was only
supported as a TSR. The drivers that came with the card for Windows 3.x and
a few Dos programs like 123 and AutoCAD only. The manufacturer nolonger
supports that model card and was of no help. Checking the various on-line
driver sites did not help either. He had no valid specs for what the card
could do either or any parameter settings. He could not return the card, so
he desided to see what it could do inspite of the lack of information and
drivers.
I provided him with guidence on how to install his basic OS's. He got all
things working except that he was using the video card like an original VGA.
I had him try all the near right standard Windows 95 video drivers. None of
them worked. The standard Windows 95 svga driver causes his video to go
crazy. So he was stuck with 640x480 pixels with a depth of four bits.
Next came Linux first booting into Linux without X and experimenting with
various X servers we found one that correctly identified his video card.
(Although I personally think it did not identify the correct card, just a
close cousin.) Now under X he could access screen resoultions of up to
1280x1024 pixels with a depth of 16 bits or up to 800x600 with a depth of 32
bits.
With the help of the information from X for his video cards modes, he now
has the STM configuration file to support many different text modes. He is
telling be that his favorite mode is 160X60 characters. Then thanks to the
Dos port of Linux's STM guess what? Those text modes are in use on his box
under dos as well. He is in general a happy camper. But if we could only
get Windows to work with his video card as anything other than a VGA, he
would be all set. He has about given up on that possibility but I am still
hopeful.
=====
I run Linux, no bloody RedHat, Debian, Slackware, or Corel, just Linux.
My servers have been up for 228 days 7 hours 26 minutes.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest
Date: 16 Aug 2000 22:07:47 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:57:58 GMT,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perry Pip wrote:
>> There is a big difference between bleeding freely and whether or not a
>> person finds something "harmful to thier spirit". Your anology is
>> meaningless.
>
>Oh, that's right; because nobody ever gets depressed to the point where
>they put a gun to their head and pull the trigger or even accidentally
>forget to take the necessary precautions to make sure that they don't
>slam into a concrete pillar when they're driving to work.
We weren't talking about people bleeding or shooting themselves. You
are desparately trying to change the context of what you said to make
it seem more correct. We were talking about business acting in the
public interest for the sake of their own self interest. You had claimed
that the justification of this is "deeply harmful to a person's
spirit". You further claimed that people cannot decide for themselves
whether it is or isn't "deeply harmful" to them, but that it is for
elitist psychologists and social scientists to decide for them. You
are wrong on both counts.
>> It is not for elitist psychologists and social scientists to tell
>> people what is or isn't deeply harmful to them spiritually.
^^^^
>What the fuck is this "spirituality" you've brought up now?
^^^^^
First of all, if you were reading, you would see the difference
between "spiritually" and "spirituality". Secondly, it was *you* who
introduced the word "spirit" in this dialog. What the fuck is *that*??
It means alot of different things to different people, doesn't it? I
suppose your meaning is the right meaning, and everyone else is wrong.
>> No matter how you word it, the people who run businesses are not
>> psychopaths. Neither is someone going to college. Nor is it a
>> psychopathic decision to wnat to do so.
>
>And we can rely on your training as a psychologist to determine that.
You made the claim that most people who run businesses are
psychopaths. Provide a reference to a scientific study that proves
that. You also made the claim that someone who writes free software to
put it on his resume is also a psychopath. Provide a reference that
supports that claim.
>Do you understand the difference between an institution and the
>people running this institution, cretin? Do you know what "emergent
>behaviour" means? Do you even know what /psychopath/ means? Are
>you aware that there is a world of difference between "psychopath"
>and "psychopathic" and that I've never used the latter word?
Irrelevent. You made the claim, you prove it.
>> I have used specific examples to show execeptions to your
>> generalities.
>
>Oh, that's right "one in a trillion trillion". Yeah, people care
>DEEPLY for that sort of stuff!
No, I refered to common everyday experiences for me and the poeple
close to me, that are in exception to your models.
>If one perceives oneself as an unseparable part of a group then one
>is irrational and out of touch with reality and utterly incapable of
>judging one's own self-interest.
Complete and utter nonsense. One depends on one's environment for air,
water, food, clothing, shelter etc. etc. Now even if one lives in
solitude in the wilderness, one still depends one ones environment for
one's livelhood and thus one is still inseparable from one's
environment. For one who lives in society, one is dependant on others
for water, food, clothing, shelter etc. etc. Thus one is inseparable
from the group. This is not a behavioral model, but a physical
fact. If you really believe you are separable from society, I
encourage to go live on your own in the wilderness.
>And this is PRECISELY how you've broken every single human language
>convention I know of, fool.
Calling me a fool merely indicates your inability to make a rational
argument.
>Nobody gives a shit about an "exception"
>that amounts to less than 1% of cases when a model hasn't been
>established for the other 99%.
Provide a refence to a scientific study that shows that your model
represents 99% of human behavior. You model contradicts a vast amounts
of my exeperience, and the experience of those close to me.
>If you had said "I agree with every
>last thing you say, *except* in these weird situations" then we
>would have an established model for a large part of human behaviour
>and you could bother me about the exceptions.
Those exceptions are not "weird situations". Maybe for you, but not
for me and dozens of people around me. Your model seems to be nothing
but a projection of your narrow experience.
>But you didn't, did
>you asshole?
Calling me an asshole is just an indication of your inability to make
a reasable arguement.
>And since *you* *yourself* argue that human behaviour is incredibly
>complex and impossible to model, if you have a model that accounts
>for 99% of human behaviour then that's a fucking miracle and you
>should worship whoever came up with the model instead of pissing
>on it.
Provide a reference to a scientific study that shows that your model
represents 99% of human behavior. You model contradicts a vast amounts
of my exeperience, and the experience of those close to me.
>Like I said, cretin, you don't know the first thing about how
>scientific research is done out here in this thing we like to
>call Reality. Scientific theories don't spring full grown from
>the head of Zeus.
I am waiting to see some scientific research to prove your models, Dr. Zeus.
>
>> I wouldn't want to. You live in a reality where self interest, the
>> interest of others, and rationallity are in never ending in conflict
>> with one another.
>
>They are.
Not in the common everyday experience of myself and the people I live
with, work with, and hang out with.
>And the sooner you realize that, the sooner you can start
>acting in the interest of others instead of being a selfish asshole.
Calling me an asshole is just an indication of your inability to make
a reasonable arguement.
>> I inhabit a reality where self interest, the interest of others,
>> rationality and morality need not necessarily be in conflict with one
>> another.
>
>A common delusion.
Most psychologists I have met share that "delusion".
>> Your frustration is your problem and it has nothing to do with me. I
>> suggest you go out and get a life, and most importantly, a better
>> outlook on things.
>
>The existence of morons posting on USENET is a public interest problem.
Another statement that is just an indication of your inability to make
a reasonable argument.
>I've snipped your hysterical demands for URLs "proving" what any half-wit
>can know from simple observation.
Translation: Your claims are your petty little delusion and you are
the only one who believes them. You explicitly said you follow
scientific methods and research, but you can't provide any research
whatsoever to support yor claims.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Microsoft MCSE
Date: 16 Aug 2000 22:08:28 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:30:33 -0500,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >Tell it to IBM, who defined the title Systems Engineer 30+ years ago.
>IBM's
>> >title does not require what you claim it does.
>>
>> I just checked IBM's certification page and they don't seem to
>> have a "IBM certified systems engineer" certification.
>
>It's not a certification per se. It's a title, which is given to an IBM
>employee or business partner employee after having completed a certain
>amount of IBM sponsored training. It's not a generic certification.
Documentation please. I find it hard to believe that a company that
hires so many degreed engineers, and so much actual engineering, would
bastardize the term.
>Well, as a rule, in the 60's pretty much anyone who could work on computers
>was an engineer of some kind.
So then although they coined the term, it wasn't necessarily them who
first bastardized it. Of course, it was MS either. MS just gets credit
for taking the term 'engineer' new low. It's much easier to be a MCSE
than it is to operate a locomotive. No...wait....trains don't crash
randomly:-)
Perry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Microsoft MCSE
Date: 16 Aug 2000 22:08:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:43:09 -0500,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > The techniques you mention are impossible to implement in
>> > these languages, thus a developer in those languages has no need to
>> > understand them.
>>
>> Wrong. IF a programmer's code TRIGGERS garbage collection, then
>> he would be well advised to understand how it works.
>
>Why? In those langauges, it just works. What need is there to understand
>it?
>
If your are concerned about efficiency in your code, you need to know
what is going on under your hood.
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
******************************
