Linux-Advocacy Digest #354, Volume #29 Fri, 29 Sep 00 04:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? ("James Stutts")
Re: How low can they go...? ("James Stutts")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: What're Linus's computer/laptop specs? ("mlhickok")
Re: Is Linux some kind of a joke? (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: How low can they go...? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: How low can they go...? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: How low can they go...? (Jonathan Revusky)
Re: How low can they go...? (Jonathan Revusky)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Chris
Sherlock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:10:12 -0500
"D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:eW6u5.11967$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Software licenses are never non-transferable. You cannot be prevented
> > from selling what you own.
>
> Well lets take a look at a licenses shall we?
>
> Battlezone II - non-transferable.
Well, they at least claim that. Whether or not it is actually legal is
another case, considering
you have to buy the product before you can read the license your agreeing
to. That really
isn't a "contract" in the legal sense. Incidentally, evil Microsoft not
only allows you to
sell your copy of Office (provided you delete the copy you installed), but
provides a 30-day
return policy. Real anti-consumer behavior, huh?
JCS
------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:11:23 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 14:43:22 GMT, D'Arcy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> Software licenses are never non-transferable. You cannot be prevented
> >> from selling what you own.
> >
> >Well lets take a look at a licenses shall we?
> >
> >Battlezone II - non-transferable.
> >
> >Oops I didn't have to look far - that was the first one I picked off
> >my shelf...
>
> Don't believe everything you read in a contract.
>
A shrink-wrapped LA isn't actually a contract. More of a threat. There's
an
arrogance toward the consumer that seems to pervade the entire software
industry....
JCS
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:25:59 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Sep 2000 02:48:43 GMT, Richard wrote:
>> >There is an attitude common among programmers that users are
>> >supposed to make the effort to learn the system. So if a user
>>
>> I think you'd find that a lot of the people displaying this kind
>> of attitude on the newsgroups are not contributors to projects
>> of any merit. I doubt this attitude would be very common among
>> say prominent KDE developers.
>
>Probably because the actual contributors are too busy to mess
>with USENET. I do wonder where this attitude comes from if it
>doesn't come from the programmers. Either way, they don't seem
>too worried about defusing it (more like worried about how to
>exploit it for their own prestige and power).
It comes from users. The idea that users wouldn't have to learn how to
use a system in order to use it is brain-dead, at best. Of course users
have to learn to use a system in order to use it. A good system is one
which they can learn well and become even more efficient with the more
they learn; not one that they don't need to learn to begin with.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:42:25 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >Hmm ? the base installation runs less than $50. How much lower do you
> >suppose it can get and still be profitable?
>
> $0.
As if the profit on Microsoft Windows is any of your business whatsoever
Max. Your lucky that they are even public, otherwise you wouldn't even have
the right to know their profits. And what's the profit (above break even)
have to do the price the market will bear? For instance - they are well
within their rights to invest 500+ million developing Windows 2000 and earn
5 billion on the investment over the next few years. It's business 101. Deal
with it.
Ohh.. and your pathetic "finding of fact" judge is going to look even more
assinine to his superiors when they review his handling and conclusions in
the case next year. Especially since part of his findings have already been
ruled upon by them and ignored by Jackson in the trial.
It's going to be a fun filled year, topped off with a huge victory for the
freedom to innovate. :-))
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:48:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>So what the hell are you condemning me of exactly? [...]
Being an asshole, would be my guess. For being so sure of your
intellectual superiority that you don't realize that anyone in their
thirties has already thought things out more than you have. For
presuming that your mental capabilities or powers of observation are any
more keen than any random poster.
To get to the nut of things, I'll point out that I've engaged in
rudimentally similiar discussions concerning the ability of end-users to
use such things as file extensions to determine file type. I agree that
such mechanisms are necessary. I've become convinced that they must be
restricted to the highest level of abstraction, and that GNOME and KDE
are incorporating such capabilities. I've no idea why you think
'orthogonal persistence' makes any sense whatsoever for a general
purpose operating system.
In the end, I think the problem you have is that you insist on being
'arrogantly naive'. I'll admit that I support this general position,
and have gained something of a reputation for it, in fact. But as
occurred in our recent email conversation, Richard, it seems that you
are simply too much the 'angry young man' to realize that a lack of
*experience* is not equivalent to a lack of *knowledge*. I'll admit to
to a lack of the latter, without apology. You seem to think that a lack
of the former can be equally abrogated by reason, and you are making no
headway because of that fact. Get the chip off your shoulder.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:54:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said FM in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>That your understanding of politics is limited as not to
>be able to comprehend other's views, again, doesn't
>constitute evidence that other poeple are ignorant about
>politics.
Well said.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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: "mlhickok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What're Linus's computer/laptop specs?
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:55:50 -0700
Reply-To: "mlhickok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Are you talking about Linus Torvalds current project?
He has been working at a company called Transmetta with a chip called the
Crusoe. It has been in the news a lot lately. All the major chip fabs are
joining in and the major laptop developers as well. Plus there are many
small internet devices that are planning on using the Transmetta OS with the
Crusoe chip.
It remains to be seen how this will affect the entire world, but it looks
like the Crusoe chip will make some statements:
- Not all laptops have to be expensive.
- Not all computers have to be "high power"
- Cheap, small, efficient, and dependable may actually catch on and give
Intel/Microsoft a run for its money.
--MLH
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8r0god$sfq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Just wondering what he (or you, if you're reading) is (are) working on
> (working on)... We're having a discussion in class.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: Is Linux some kind of a joke?
Date: 29 Sep 2000 06:43:01 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is Linux some kind of a joke or something?
> I mean I instaled Redhat and it looks like shit. No games, no support
>for my video card. No support for my soundcard or any of my USB
>devices...
>
>This has to be a joke?
>
>Why should I return to the 1980's just to run Linux?
>
>Linux is a piece of shit....
>
>The Whore...
Whenever Bill Gates comes to New York, he always visits his
favorite she-male hooker...
Hi, Steve/Mike!
The 41 names of Steve, the SuperVillain of c.o.l.a --
Steve/Mike/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/"S"/Sponge/Syphon/Sarek/
"Sewer Rat"/steveno/scummer/McSwain/Swango/pickle_pete/piddy/
"leg log"/wazzoo/Whore(Slut)/mike_hunt/Heather/Amy/claire_lynn/
susie_wong/Ishmeal_hafizi/"Saul Goldblatt"/Proculous/Tiberious/
whparker/Jerry_Butler/"Tim Palmer"/BklynBoy/bison/Wobbles/
screwbilk/deadpenguin/"%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com"/
The Cat (hepcat)[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)/bill.gates.loves.me/etc.
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:00:34 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> I'd say that depends on what you consider the 'real price', of which the
> 'purchase price' is merely the beginning.
>
Same as everything else. Just try and do an upgrade install from RedHat
6.0 to 6.2 if you have two ethernet cards installed.
> >Why is that? In the MS example, we have a company with no legally
> >protected access - just good marketing that has driven it to the top of
> >it's niche. With cable, we have US law protecting my provider, no
> >matter how crappy their service.
>
> In point of fact, it was anti-competitive behavior, not 'good
> marketing', which has secured the monopoly. With cable, you have laws
> protecting you and the provider, so that even if your service is
> idealistically perfect, there is still the potential, at least, for
> competition. Again, though, you wish to put me in the position of
> supporting cable companies in order to discuss Microsoft, and the two
> have nothing to do with each other, save your inability to distinguish
> the circumstances, and why one is illegal and the other is simply the
> status quo.
Ha. Those laws don't protect me. They force high prices and crappy
service on me.
In the OS game, I do have choices. I have Linux on this PII, and I
could buy a Mac.
In cable, I have ZERO choice, because the government has decided to give
me none.
Explain to me again why I should trust the bozos screwing me on cable to
redesign the software industry.
>
> [...]
> >The market here wants a standard for interop more than it wants
> >competition.
>
> The market everyone wants interoperability. Only Microsoft and those
> who defend them believe that this requires a lack of competition.
>
> >There were other viable options in the late 80's prior to
> >the rise of Windows. In fact, Apple had the first decent GUI system,
> >and the early advantage.
>
> Apple makes computers; Microsoft does not. The other 'viable options'
> were all forced out of the market by Microsoft's illegal activity; only
> purposeful ignorance would lead one to believe that Microsoft secured a
> monopoly on competitive merits.
>
What illegal activity killed off OS/2, Atari, and Amiga? Or prevented
Apple from pricing for volume instead of margin?
> >As to the height of the price, when you get to the point that you can
> >figure out optimal prices let us all know; we will want stock tips.
>
> Adam Smith worked out the method rather clearly several centuries ago: a
> competitive market.
>
> >> Why? RedHat bases their prices on what the monopoly is charging, not on
> >> what customers are willing to pay in a competitive market where one
> >> vendor doesn't control 90%+ of the installed base.
> >
> >Hmm ? the base installation runs less than $50. How much lower do you
> >suppose it can get and still be profitable?
>
> $0.
>
That's not profits. Try a serious answer next time. I can use smaller
words if you like
> [...]
> >> Why? That's the most expensive way to do it possible. How about I wait
> >> for the millions of corporate desktop PCs to prove the product and bring
> >> the price down, first?
> >
> >Gee, you are demonstrating for all of us why the market wants a
> >standard, and yet you just don't see it...
>
> You entirely misrepresent the very concept of 'a standard'. The market
> does not want a monopoly, and never has, and never will. Which is why
> the courts are free to use the 'rule of reason' in deciding anti-trust
> cases: if you have a monopoly, reason indicates that you have broken the
> law. Free markets do not allow monopolies to form to begin with, let
> alone continuation of lack of choice.
>
The market quite clearly wants a standard.
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:03:24 GMT
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>
> "James A. Robertson" wrote:
> >
>
> Hi James,
>
> We were in a discussion and you never saw fit to reply to some of my
> points.
>
> I asked you specifically whether you thought that libellous speech was
> protected by the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
>
If you don't like it, the courts are the appropriate venue. Harrassing
someone at their place of work isn't. You think JTK was libelous?
Fine, get a lawyer and sue him. That's the right way to complain.
> Also, James, I took care to respond meticulously to all of your debating
> points, and in response, I got a bunch of pathetic whining from you
> about a what a bad guy I am.
>
No, I have a low opinion only of pvdl at this point; of you, I have no
opinions whatsoever.
> In other words, you made no attempt to refute my counter-arguments. As
> far as I could tell, by all rules of debate, you were conceding my
> points. In other words, it seemed to me that by your response -- or lack
> thereof -- that you were in fact conceding that that anonymous libellous
> speech was not protected by the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
>
Your points bored me, and I had better things to do with my time.
>
> Jonathan Revusky
>
> >
> > --
> > James A. Robertson
> > Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:26:12 +0000
"James A. Robertson" wrote:
>
> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> > In other words, you made no attempt to refute my counter-arguments. As
> > far as I could tell, by all rules of debate, you were conceding my
> > points. In other words, it seemed to me that by your response -- or lack
> > thereof -- that you were in fact conceding that that anonymous libellous
> > speech was not protected by the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
> >
>
> Your points bored me, and I had better things to do with my time.
This is a transparent lie, James. It is patently obvious that you did
not respond to my points because you were not capable of doing so.
If you had really been so bored of the topic, as you are representing,
you would have simply withdrawn from the debate. Instead, you
cherry-picked which posts you responded to.
Jonathan Revusky
> >
> > Jonathan Revusky
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James A. Robertson
> > > Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
>
> --
> James A. Robertson
> Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:39:57 +0000
"James A. Robertson" wrote:
>
> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> >
> > "James A. Robertson" wrote:
> > >
>
> >
> > Hi James,
> >
> > We were in a discussion and you never saw fit to reply to some of my
> > points.
> >
> > I asked you specifically whether you thought that libellous speech was
> > protected by the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
> >
>
> If you don't like it, the courts are the appropriate venue. Harrassing
> someone at their place of work isn't.
A complaint was lodged with the company that was providing the internet
access. By 2 different people -- Phil Earnhardt and Peter Van Der
Linden. They both considered that the 3000+ "JTK" posts constitute
abuse. As you know, I agree with them.
> You think JTK was libelous?
> Fine, get a lawyer and sue him. That's the right way to complain.
Peter Thorsteinson made this argument earlier and I pointed out to him
that if I feel wronged by someone's actions, I can respond in any way I
see fit, as long as it is lawful. To lodge a complaint with the ISP or
company from which the abusive material emanates is certainly lawful
and, as far as I can see, quite appropriate.
BTW, Peter Thorsteinson seems to have gone to the James Robertson school
of debate, which is simply to walk away when he cannot respond to the
other's points.
>
> > Also, James, I took care to respond meticulously to all of your debating
> > points, and in response, I got a bunch of pathetic whining from you
> > about a what a bad guy I am.
> >
>
> No, I have a low opinion only of pvdl at this point; of you, I have no
> opinions whatsoever.
Well, I doubt that's true. My previous opinion of you was positive, but
is sinking daily.
Jonathan Revusky
>
> > In other words, you made no attempt to refute my counter-arguments. As
> > far as I could tell, by all rules of debate, you were conceding my
> > points. In other words, it seemed to me that by your response -- or lack
> > thereof -- that you were in fact conceding that that anonymous libellous
> > speech was not protected by the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
> >
>
> Your points bored me, and I had better things to do with my time.
> >
> > Jonathan Revusky
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James A. Robertson
> > > Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
>
> --
> James A. Robertson
> Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 18:55:40 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Are you trying to be sarcastic? I would KILL to be able to pay that
amount per month for an ISDN line!
AAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!! Why do you guys have it so good over there?????
Some people over here pay $40 for time-limited 56kbps access!
Chris
dc wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:04:06 +1000, Chris Sherlock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >To regional areas which have traditionally had very very poor access
> >(mainly through old phone exchanges). I think that they are offering
> >some country users the use of satellite links.
> >
> >ISDN links cost too much. How much do people in the US pay for an ISDN
> >link, BTW?
>
> It's a fortune - I think a friend lives "out in the country" where
> there's no DSL or cable modems, and he's (well, his employer) is
> paying something like $80 a month for it....for all of 12-15K/s speed.
>
> I'm paying $50 per month (and cheaper deals exist) for 150K/s DSL.
>
> ISDN is very, very expensive.
>
> DC
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 18:58:05 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Like what? Java? Sure, I'll give it a whirl (maybe one day) but I *know*
that I am not much of a coder...
Right now I am just a humble printer support person for Epson... :)
Chris
FM wrote:
>
> Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >COBOL and BASIC. Perhaps you now see why I like C and C++?
>
> Yuck. I understand now :)
>
> You should try other languages though.
>
> Dan.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
