Linux-Advocacy Digest #554, Volume #29 Mon, 9 Oct 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It.... (Steve Mading)
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It.... (Steve Mading)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Weevil")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Gary Hallock)
Re: Free ISP for Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Gardiner Family)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux - - Troll (Gardiner Family)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: OS choice (Gardiner Family)
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It.... ("Colin R. Day")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: 9 Oct 2000 23:43:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Walk up to 1000 Windows users at random on Main St. USA and ask them
: if they use vi? Or Emacs or Brief (they still make that one?)
So, all the extra editors don't really count if they are only
used rarely? Good, then reduce that figure of "200 text
editors" for Linux down to the few that are commonly used if
you want to make these comparasins.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: 9 Oct 2000 23:46:42 GMT
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Just a little piece of advice. If you're going to set yourself up as a
: resident expert.
: You need to at the very least do a couple of things.
: Get a spell checker or learn how to spell.
: Might want to take a little English as well. The spellchecker won't catch
: 'loose' in place of lose.
: Get your fact straight and be able to back them up.
: You've failed on all of the above. Your posts are of no use except as a
: momentary source of amusement.
Thank you for the demonstration of an Ad Hominem fallacy. It will
be handy. (English spelling and grammer are NOT relevant to the
subject matter, while the things "Gardiner Family" mentioned *were*.)
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[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: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 18:50:20 -0500
Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:N8lE5.27930$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Votes on this from COMNA?
> >
> > I vote that you're scumbag who, since you make a nice living with
> > Microsoft products, will defend the evil empire to the end, despite
> > the overwhelming evidence of their illegal activities.
>
> There is no "evidence" of their illegal activities, only conjecture
> by the DOJ and an over-willing judge who takes anything the DOJ spoon
> feeds him. The appealate courts are jumping at the chance to overrule
> him as they see what a railroad job this was and that it has absolutely
> no merit, legally or logically, whatsoever. Sleepy said that this
> findings will be overturned himself. This is why the Supreme Court
> didn't bother with such an obvious mis-carriage.
Bill Gates belongs in jail. So does Steve Ballmer. So do a dozen other MS
executives past and present. Microsoft was built on theft, lies, and
plagiarism, and it hasn't changed a damn bit. It never will. You're one of
the apparently endless number of fools who can't or refuse to see this.
Software in general, but especially OS software, is at LEAST 10 years behind
where it would have been if not for Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, et al, and
their utterly evil willingness to stifle any and all competition illegally
while investing next to nothing in improving their own products.
This is not conjecture. It is not bitter spewing from a Microsoft hater.
It is fact. It has been proven. It is reality.
jwb
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:50:04 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
John Lockwood wrote:Let's see:
>
> 1) Windows works.
> 2) Notepad works on NT, Win98, Windows 3x, etc.
> 3) Notepad is a trivial windows application. (Defined as an
> application a good Windows programmer could complete in a week or
> two).
> 4) Notepad and thousands of other working applications are coded to
> the Windows API.
> 5) Notepad doesn't work on WINE.
>
> Therefore WIN32 is a piece of crap?
>
> Well, I've never used WINE, but the conclusion I'd be more likely to
> reach given the above is that your premise that WINE emulates Windows
> is false.
>
> John
Well, this whole discussion seems to be based on a false assumption.
Notepad does work on Wine. And I run Lotus Notes under Wine every day at
work.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: chi.internet
Subject: Re: Free ISP for Linux?
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:56:34 +0100
NO SPAM wrote:
>
> Do any of the free ISP's work with Linux? How about with "Wine"? (the
> Windows emulator that comes with some Linux installations).
Can you not get a free ISP and just connect?
That's what I do!
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: 9 Oct 2000 23:56:49 GMT
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: POSIX is too basic.
True.
: The point he's trying to make is, even though
: people say Unix is Unix is Unix, there are still apps that only work
: on HP-UX, or Solaris, or Linux. If they have a common API, why is this the
: case?
Because they're closed-source.
Open-source apps tend to be trivially easy to port among differing
Unices, assuming that they need to be ported at all.
: What's to prevent Linux from one day having incompatible distributions?
The GPL.
: It's pro-competitive because it's probably the most thoroughly documented
: API of it's size in existance. If not, then it's definately up with the
: top.
The documentation is not sufficiently complete nor accurate to allow a
competitive re-implementation.
: The computing industry as a whole has yet to match a documentation effort
: the size, functionality, and usefulness of the MSDN Library online
: (msdn.microsoft.com).
There is something fundamentally wrong with anything that NEEDS that
much documentation.
: Rumors and FUD of "undocumented" or "secret" Win32 APIs that only
: Microsoft uses or creates are merely that... rumors and FUD.
On this point, you're delusional.
DOZENS of books have been published documenting hitherto undocumented
APIs, and Microsoft has occasionally admitted to (and of course
defended) having them.
: Even the products the FUDsters claim use these secrets manage to
: run on older versions of Windows that wouldn't have had these
: secrets.
:> >At the time it was introduced, keep in mind that the MacOS and OS/2 had
:> >been out for longer periods of time (not to mention BSD, which had been
:> >around forever).
:>
:> I'm not concerned about the time it was produced; you are trying to
:> objectify the API in appropriately. Win32 is anti-competitive crap
:> because that's what Microsoft wants it to be.
: Lie, conjecture. Please stick to the facts, and, perhaps what you know,
: which obviously isn't very much.
You also should consider refraining from comment on items you don't
know much about.
:> As for how it is anti-competitive, the most obvious example to come to
:> mind is that it includes web browser functionality, implemented with\
:> the specific intent of preventing competition.
: You're referring to the GUI (explorer.exe) specifically. I thought
: we were talking about the Win32 API? The Win32 API has no dependance
: upon IE.
: Besides, how come every other OS is allowed to package and include
: browser technologies in their OS, but when Microsoft does it, it's
: bad?
Because it's unlawful in the United States to leverage one monopoly
(even one legally gained, which Microsoft's was not) in order to
create another.
You may have qualms with that law - I certainly do - but Microsoft has
not challenged its validity; it has taken the rather absurd position
that it has not broken it, even though its own public pronouncements
(toward audiences other than the federal government) have not only
admitted, but boasted about, its having done so.
: I see almost everyone (KDE, Gnome, Apple/MacOS, Be, etc) including
: browser-style or browser-dependant technologies into their GUIs.
It makes sense to have open-source, standard-compliant browser
technology available to applications.
A closed-source browser that incorrectly implements what few standards
it claims to implement at all makes far less sense. People use it,
but only because M$ leaves them few other choices.
: This is a feature enhancement. I know of very few GUI-using people
: who can do without their browser-style file viewing (with the
: Back,Up,Forward,Favorites style interface).
I use GUIs primarily, and I can't stand it.
I do use Windows Explorer, and Kruiser on Linux (which has a similar
interface). A tree view makes perfect sense when viewing data that
has a tree-like structure. Filesystems have a tree-like structure.
But viewing "folders" as "Web pages" makes rather little sense to me.
: This did nothing
: to hurt competition (namely Netscape). Netscape had already
: shot themselves in the foot several times, ignored the trends
: of the market, continued to bilk their customers without giving
: them any new technology, refused to improve their browser
: (Netscape 4.x? Give me a break, that has to be among the worst
: software ever written), etc. They killed themselves, MS had
: nothing to do with it except for building a better browser.
The sins of Netscape do not justify its murder.
BTW: Do you remember what Obi-Wan Kenobi said just before Darth Vader
killed him? He predicted that his murder would make him more powerful
than Darth possibly could have imagined.
Only two things can result from Microsoft's murder of every form of
light and life in this industry that it can get its hands on. One is
its own death. The other is that it will discover the Light Side.
Believe it or not, I'm kind of hoping for the latter. I don't wish
evil on anyone, not even M$. I just wish they would see the light.
: Last I checked, improving your product to beat competition for
: profit isn't illegal nor unethical.
Correct. Last I checked, no one here was asserting otherwise.
:> >> >If Microsoft is a lousy, anticompetitive company, or if Win32 doesn't
:> >> >work on other platforms -- neither one of those makes the API
:> >> >unworkable.
:> >>
:> >> I didn't describe it as unworkable; that was Simon Cooke, who was,
:> >> characteristically, building a straw man. I said it was crap. And both
:> >> of those things you mentioned are the same thing, and the reason Win32
:> >> is crap. The evidence it is crap is the fact that WINE can't even get
:> >> the simplest text edit functions of the API to work, though any
:> >> programmer can get it to work in their apps using any flavor or Windows.
:> >> This indicates clearly, I think, the fact that the Microsoft's software
:> >> is crap, and the Win32 API was designed to support anti-competitive
:> >> strategies, not good software. Its crap.
:> >
:> >How? All it indicates is that mapping the Win32 API to the X Window
:> >System API is hard.
:> So that would be one thing that makes it crap; its inconsistent with the
:> industry standard. ;-\
: Or that the WINE developers (or Open Sores(tm)) in general aren't competent
: enough to retro fit Win32 in to the tattered X API(s)?
Do you know anything about Win32, Wine, *or* X?
Win32 consists of far more than the GDI. Indeed, the GDI is one of
the less brain-damaged parts of the API.
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 01:05:22 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Nothing wrong with that, and for the desktop user, aka Jane Computer,
> Windows is a better solution simply by the amount of applications
> availible.
>
> claire
>
Claire, there is just as much variety of business/academic apps for
Linux as Win32, the difference is in games. Win32 has far more games!
Linux, of course, still has some way to go on the desktop, but soon it
will kick win into touch.
A friend of mine, with minimal instuction, was able to competantly use
KDE on Xfree86, from Win98.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:11:06 -0300
El vie, 06 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> Richard did. He mentioned symmetry as one of the universal measures of beauty.
>> I really hope he believes a cubic building is more beautiful than, say, Bilbao's
>> Guggenheim. It is, after all, much more symmetric.
>
>A cubic building also violates many other laws of beauty.
Such as? Just curious.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:59:07 +1300
love the reply, I have used Windows 3.1/98/NT 4/2000, until I obtained a copy of
UNIX (and then later, Linux) I naively, like you, believed Windows NT was the "bees
knees". Yes and I do know what a PCI card is, the card I removed was a Soft-modem
from an Intel BX motherboard. I have also installed a ISA card as well whilst the
machine is on, and no adverse effects. However, I did lie a bit, I was using
Solaris 8. Windows does have its uses, however, not as a server. If you look at
the various technologies included with Windows NT/2000, many of these have been
borrowed from UNIX and other OS's, here are some examples is Terminal Server, a
quick rehash of the of X-Server and X-Dumb-Client setup used back in the 1980's
(surprised Microsoft went for the centralised processing model considering they were
the first to jump up and say Sun Microsystems idea of the Sun Ray as a stupid idea,
trying to resurrect time sharing and centralised processing of the 1960s), HTFS, a
close replication of HPFS used by OS/2 Warp, TCP/IP how long has the UNIX world had
this protocol in service for? a long time.
Centralised processing does lower TCO below the typical fat client setup. The most
commonly used example would be at Amazon where there telephone operators use Sun Ray
Network Appliances. Unfortunately they never released the actual figure in terms of
cost savings, however, they did state it was substantial
Matt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:52:59 -0400
From: Dolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> Dolly wrote:
>
> > Sam wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Is of course Linux.
> > >
> > > Exclusively ? I think not!
> > >
> > > >The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > >
> > > It may also be it's weakness.
> > >
> > > >Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> > > >Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > >
> > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > >How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > >
> > > If Microsoft kept growing at the rate it did for the last 5-10-15-20
> > > years (pick one) it would soon be, not only the total IT industry,
> > > but the entire economy. Obviously not sustainable
> > >
> > > >
> > > >How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> > >
> > > From zero it's all up from there
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > >Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > >keyboard is subcontracted out.
> > > >They don't make anything but software.
> > >
> > > AMD don't own a fab shop, does that make them not a threat to Intel ?
> > >
> >
> > Really? That's weird... AMD has MADE chips for
> > Intel when Intel couldnt keep up... what do you
> > think the little M AMD meant? MANUFACTURED by
> > AMD. I have a bunch here they made for Intel.
> > It's part of what gained them access to the
> > Intel x86 architecture - making a bunch for
> > Intel when they were in the bind.
>
> Christ are you going to be one of those Kulkis, Devlins and Blacks that
> make these wild ass statements that stretch credibility and then post no
> evidence to back it up? When the hell was this momentus event supposed to
> have happened? AMD did make 386 and 486 chips but they were NOT Intel
> designs. BTW, I agree with you that AMD do own fabs, in Texas and Germany
> but I, after having been a Intel and Microsoft systems engineer and
> programmer for over a decade have no recollection of AMD EVER making chips
> for Intel.
You want evidence? How about a picture of one? Or perhaps you
are one of those people who believes if a tree falls on your
house but no one is there to see it, then it didnt happen.
I'll send you an AMD Chip with the (M) AMD imprint
and an Intel chip with the (M) Intel imprint.
Would you be satisfied then? Just because you
dont know something doesnt mean it's not
true. Actually, apparently from your posts, just
because YOU *think* you know something generally
is proving that it isnt true.
Dolly
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 01:10:43 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Stop playing semantics jedi.
>
> Next you'll be asking "and what IS Linux anyway?"
> The kernel?
> The distro?
>
> etc
>
> You remind me of Otter in Animal House where he is in the student
> court defending Delta house against the jock fraternity.
>
Severely off topic: Linux is, technically speaking, just the kernel.
With the appropriate tools (notably from GNU) it becomes an OS.
Sorry to be such a geek!
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux - - Troll
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:06 +1300
Everything you use on the net is based on UNIX, without UNIX none of
this would exist.
matt
Fecking Hill wrote:
> >>>>Flaagg escribi� en art�culo:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm downloading all 640 megs of the Linux Mandrake 7 ISO. I
> >>>>> just might install it, too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Don't ask me why.
> >>>>
> >>>>I'd reinstall on *this* computer, but that would mean losing
> >>>>my pr0n archive hard drive. Two gigs, daily downloads and
> >>>>I still haven't found any porn stars with clean fingernails.
> >>>>
>
> Unix suxks
>
> Gibber
> Sig? What Sig?
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:20:34 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nope. Even psychopaths can do that. Get that Alzeihmer's test ....
>
> You know, it's boring to see you claim I remember wrong and just quote
> you:
>
> You said "Empathy is knowing exactly what someone is feeling". Check it
> for yourself at http://x73.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=675716833
And then I qualified it. It's fucking annoying seeing you quote
out of context.
> Guess I passed the Alzheimer test and you didn't.
And you failed the "fucked" test.
> > And you think that what? That this means they *could* interbreed with
> > humans ???
>
> They were pretty close genetically.
They weren't fucking close enough, that's all that matters.
> > If we hadn't killed neanderthals, they would only have deviated from
> > us, *NOT* interbred!
>
> There is no proof that we didn't interbreed, you know.
Riiiiight. That they could interbreed with humans "merely" contradicts
everything biologists know about speciation. So of course, it's "to be
proven".
What part of the above did you fail to understand, idiot?
[snip -= if you can't understand the above then you're not going to
get anything more subtle]
> Getting personal loans and using them to start a company is pretty much
> legal. ^^^^^^^^^^^
Any reason you qualified it?
> > Only in corporations, imbecile. And that's *EXACTLY* what makes
> > corporations psychopaths: the shareholders are absentee landlords
> > and act with the total disregard of any absentee landlord.
>
> Your pseudo psych blabber is getting old.
Your idiocy had gotten old to me maybe two weeks ago.
> You make up the difference in your own mind and present it as fact. Even
> though I know you can't comprehend why that seems fishy to anyone
> outside your head, I will ask you to accept it.
Man, you're a fucking moron. It doesn't "seem fishy" anymore than the
fucking stock market does.
> > The employee has no fucking choice you fucking moron!
>
> You can't take his $9 without his consent. Remember you are not a
> cooperative yet.
"consent or be fired"
> > Owning stock in a cooperative is part of the terms of employment!
>
> They already are employed. You can't fire them for not buying the stock.
And of course, no modern corporation has high turnover. It's
not like you can't require this of all new employees and expect
this to mean "all employees" within a few years. Nowadays,
"not rehired" is the same thing as fired.
> > Man, you are an extreme right-winger. Figures. After all, the right-
> > wing is correlated with lack of intelligence.
>
> Ask Aaron K. He will tell you I'm a bleeding hart liberal.
What extreme right wingers think of people who don't share their *exact*
ideology isn't relewant; there is more than one type of extreme right
winger just like there is more than one type of extreme left winger.
Libertarians and Fascists versus Marxists, Anarcho-Syndicalists and
Stalinists.
> Your fear of inadequacy is showing. You obviously can't even understand
> the Goedel Theorem. You can't even spell they guy's name. It's Goedel or
> G�del.
I don't much care. Nor do I care to continue this discussion with you.
And I already know that merely discussing anything with as big an idiot
as you are will make me look like a fool. "The wise man doesn't argue
with the fool for the passerby won't be able to tell the difference."
Well, I'm obviously not wise enough yet.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:21:15 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 01:05:22 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Nothing wrong with that, and for the desktop user, aka Jane Computer,
>> Windows is a better solution simply by the amount of applications
>> availible.
>>
>> claire
>>
>
>Claire, there is just as much variety of business/academic apps for
>Linux as Win32, the difference is in games. Win32 has far more games!
>Linux, of course, still has some way to go on the desktop, but soon it
>will kick win into touch.
>
>A friend of mine, with minimal instuction, was able to competantly use
>KDE on Xfree86, from Win98.
Another thing to consider is the fact that some people consider
even the Win98 to be too much for them. This isn't even getting
into any sort of hardware or software upgrades. This "you will
run DOS" BS has lead us into an evolutionary dead end on the
desktop.
I suspect this person had problems with KDE primarily due to it
being different than what they were first exposed to. MS marketing
has people believing that you can avoid the knowledge inherent in
a particular task merely by slapping a pretty face on it. So people
are completely discouraged from putting any thought into their
computer usage. Thus, they get a lot less out of their general
purpose machines than they otherwise might. This can be true even if
that machine is running Win98.
Come up with an idiot-proof system, and a better idiot will come along.
--
Warp 7 -- It's a law we can live with.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:23:36 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
> >Steam, yes. Ice and water, no. No more than a bunch of monomers
> >are a plastic. The functional unit of water isn't the individual
> >water molecule, nor is this the case for most ice states.
>
> Water has been considered, loosely, by chemists as a polymer, but it is not
> strictly one. And indeed ice is cristals of H20. Just ask your friendly chemist.
Except that "crystals of H2O" isn't H2O anymore than "a chain of monomers"
is a bunch of monomers.
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS choice
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:21:52 GMT
Windows for alpha, who would swap a good copy of UNIX for Windows NT?
Windows for mips, who would swap IRIX for a copy of Windows NT
bugger all people did as these plaforms already had decent OS's for them.
Nigel Feltham wrote:
> >> Only thing worse than that would be trying to warp a single-user,
> >> GUI-based, proprietary PC O/S into a server....
> >Sounds awful, could you even begin it imagine it? They might even try to
> >warp that badly implemented x86 OS in to an even worse implementation on
> >a decent architecture. What a horrible thought.
> >
>
> MS did warp NT onto other architectures (e.g. MIPS) but it flopped as users
> of
> other architectures have more sence than to install that crap (and so would
> a lot of
> ix86 users if windows wasn't force-fed to them at computer purchase time).
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:24:31 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> not even a hardcore Linux geek can in his(always is) wildest dream think
> that Linux will take
> over from Windows on the desktop...C'MON!!!
>
I, for one, do. Get a reality.
Colin Day
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
