Linux-Advocacy Digest #555, Volume #29 Mon, 9 Oct 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:28:04 -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:
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > "Mike Byrns" <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote in message
> > news:Rd2E5.118331$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > 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.
> > >
> >
> > Excuse me?! I always backup my "wild ass" statements. Ask me of something I
> > didn't support with evidence. Don't you DARE lump me in with Kulkis or
> > whoever that other dude is.
>
> Then start being a little more temperate. It pains me to see Windows folks come
> across just as wacko as the rabid Mac and Linux fanatics. Think about it --
> there's really no reason to do so. Windows is the best mix of all they have to
> offer -- there's no reason to get bent when rebutting these folks. Don't sink
> to their losing methods. You obviously know your stuff. Why not beat them with
> facts and logic. It's not any more difficult than getting emotional and quite a
> bit more satisfying at least for me!
More links so you dont get as emotional
(as in past responses to my posts) that
way you dont further invalidate your
above claim.
This shows the start of the decline - 1.5 years ago
1.4 million clients analyzed...
http://leb.net/hzo/ioscount/data/r.9904.txt
And from CNET:
"update Linux will pose a significant threat
to Microsoft for market share among server
operating systems over the next few years,
according to new research released today."
It links to IDC but doesnt give the specifics
of the new info... and the rest of the article is
the old out of date info... but still indicates
a decline on MS's part.
http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2332817.html
http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1546430.html
Here's another... if yu pay for membership, you will
see Linux getting higher, OS/2 reversing it's momentum
as well, and NT dropping quicker than ever.
http://www.infotechtrends.com/cgi-bin/cif/sub_read.pl?ux=00&quar=99Q2&99245003.htm=on
And in the banking world... old news...
1997:
http://www.seds.org/~spider/os2/ibmpr.html
Continued in 2000:
As of today, this trend is definitely continuing.
Ask Bank Of America who just signed on for a 5 digit
number of more OS/2 clients for a bank they just
acquired... and guess who's losing the marketshare
there? (Bank of America - May 2000)
[o/t]
Here's an interesting one on how articles that
somehow dont mention how great WinXX is dissappear.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.pcworld.com/current_issue/article/0,1212,11012%2B1%2B5,00.html+operating+system+market+share
Cant go to the page since it's changed, can only load it
from cache... that was weird....
On another off topic note... guess what database/commerce
solution manged to get C2 security? IBM's. MS has applied,
but like their last attempt at C2 with NT, they will fail.
YES, MS failed in the C2 rating for NT on a network, so
they reapplied with no network card or modem to get the
bogus rating they weasled out which is of course useless
in the real world).
You can look for plenty more. Every article supports
the same thing with figures from 1% to 15% decline
depending on the timeframe they are talking, and when
the article was written. The more recent ones show
far bigger declines.
Dolly
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:31:39 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> 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.
What a lie. If you were curious, you'd have followed the references
I gave earlier and already known this. But anyways,
The law of detail scaling. And it only violates this several different ways.
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 19:32:24 -0500
James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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. 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.
> >
>
> AH - it's MS so it's bad. What a great argument
Are you deliberately dense? Although it is true that if it's MS it is
almost certainly bad, that's not what he was saying at all. You challenged
him to explain how Win32 is anti-competitive and he pretty much nailed you
with a rather famous example.
Actually, one of the main reasons Win32 is so HUGE (28 million lines of
code, or something in that neighborhood) is that Microsoft spends at least
as much time making the API a "moving target" (Bill Gates' words, not mine)
as it does actually trying to fix or improve anything. My guess, based on
known Microsoft history, is that less than 10% of their R&D money and
technical man-hours are spent on trying to improve the product. They spend
their time destroying any hint of competition and thinking up new
justifications for jacking up their prices.
That's Microsoft in a nutshell. That's who you spend so much of your time
and energy defending.
jwb
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:36:03 -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!
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > >
> > > Dolly wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > Only problem is, according to IDC, Windows numbers
> > > > are slipping backward... ie: -3%, -15%, -10% (9X/ME,
> > > > IIShit, NT/2K) or perhaps the second one was -13%
> > > > on iDC and -15% on some web server monitoring
> > > > and stats page... and declining.
> > >
> > > You're going to post a link to back that claim up right? I'd be
> interested to see
> > > their sources and methodologies and the sites sampled. I think it's
> funny that
> > > with that kind of news to report, none of the media outlets have picked
> it up.
> > > Sounds like bullshit to me but I'll retract that when that link is
> posted.
> >
> >
> > Here's one link
> >
> > http://serverwatch.internet.com/netcraft/200009netcraft.html
> >
> > IIS had made 34% at one time... check the back links.
> > Steadily declining (thank god!!!) Every month a little
> > more downhill. I think you can still check Jan 1999
> > directly on Netcraft's page...
> >
> > For the rest, go buy your own idc membership and
> > have fun finding it. (ie: the link would do no
> > good till then, I dont have membership, it was
> > a "co-worker's" in another office, he printed it
> > for me, and I have no reason to disbelieve him
> > since everything seems to point to it being right
> > (like ServerWatch, etc)...)
> >
> > Dolly
>
> Well Dolly, it's common knowlege that more sites are running on Apache
> especially since it seems to be the default offering from most webhosting
> services.
> I wouldn't correlate that with server quality since you have to go a little
> more out of your way to get IIs hosting. Although - according to the
> Netcraft site Dell offers hosting with IIs by default and as such, IIS
> hosting leads Apache 2:1. As a hosting customer I prefer Apache myself,
> because everything I have is set up to run using perl. But since IIs 5.0 has
> hit the market I haven't heard word-one about a security problem and I plan
> to convert all my scripts to an asp based environment.
>
> Watch for IIs to make gains. Oh- and MS is now offering free 180 day
> evaluations of Advanced Server. I look for that to help out the numbers.
Perhaps - but only for low end servers. Running two similar
sites one with 10 times the userbase and 100 times the
content... well, IIS couldnt handle it... 6 IIS boxes
were needed. dual processors each, 512MB RAM. Oooh the
joy of serving 100X the content to 10X the people on ONE
OS/2 box. From what I understand Linux is as proficient
or almost as proficent as Warp in that respect. And IBM's
claim is that Warp's TCP/IP stack is "the best" (not "one
of", or "almost") TCP/IP stack there is. Period. It shows.
It took till Win2K for MS to "borrow" an almost complete
TCP stack. They still didnt get it right. They also still
seem to have bound NetBIOS to port 139... how weird. Just
gotta send it the right commands and it suddenly responds.
Or just leave that 2K box on long enough for MS to start
sending you messages about updates you need.
But that's a little off the topic... the point is, even
if MS eliminated all the security holes (and ya need
to plug Win2K first before any claim of IIS5 security
is valid), it cant serve worth anything in comparison
to Linux, OS/2, BSD or OSX for that matter.
Perhaps they will come up with some sort of performance
enhancement soon (that doesnt require more hardware
like their previous ones).
Dolly
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:38:46 -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!
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Is of course Linux.
> > > >
> > > > The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > > >
> > > > Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> > >
> > > why do I think this will be the only thing we agree on?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > > You missed: Is MS still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Are large corporate interests investing in it's growth?
> > > > Only if companies like IBM and HP are large in your opinion? How
> about
> > > > Corel or
> > > > Borland. You can't expect Microsoft to invest in their own death.
> > > > That's the job
> > > > of the giants and the ghosts.
> > >
> > > MS invested in Corel - kept it outta bankruptcy court.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > > >
> > > > How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> > >
> > > Well, lesse, 5-7% growth (better ask Rex, he'll tell you it's 20% or
> > > something) vs 1%. I think I would rather be part of 1% growth of $19
> billion
> > > than 5-7% (or even 20%) of $0. And if yer counting installed seats: 1%
> of
> > > 100,000,000 is still kicking ass over 5-7-20% of a couple hundred
> thousand
> > > eh? It's got a long way to go and 8 more years won't be enough. It'll be
> so
> > > fragmented by then it'll just be another *nix variation.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Has Linux encroachment on the commercial Unix market finally stopped.
> > > > Well, Caldera bought SCO. Rumor is Redhat is buing Novel or a chunk
> of
> > > > Novel?
> > > > So you have the mainframe companies and Sun left. And there still
> here
> > > > as they
> > > > made hardware to sell.
> > >
> > > Who cares...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > > keyboard
> > > > is subcontracted out. They don't make anything but software.
> > > X-box ... but, who cares...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Does Linux like to eat software companies? Why yes. That is the
> Linux
> > > > monsters
> > > > red meat!
> > > I can't think of any software company "eaten" by linux so this is weird
> > > statement...
> > > >
> > > > What software companies is left for us to eat? Microsoft.
> > > the fly dreams of eating the elephant eh?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Does the Linux monster realize Bill Gates knows this and has been
> > > > mouthing
> > > > off in the press about it? Why yes! That's just like Gravey on your
> > > > Potatoes?
> > > > In fact, I'm developing an extra row of teeth which will be out by
> > > > December,
> > > > maybe first quater next year which are my Microsoft grinding molers
> and
> > > > fangs!!!!!
> > >
> > > umm... there are drugs that can help you, you know...
> > > >
> > > > Won't Microsoft take notice of this and attempt to stop you from
> eating
> > > > them?
> > > > Microsoft has been pooping on my head since I was a young monster. I
> > > > think
> > > > they will continue to poop until we are eye to eye. Then I think my
> > > > controlled
> > > > growth hormones which have been set at 5 - 7% per year will go wild.
> > >
> > > they poop ON your head and you think eventually you'll .. and then...
> umm,
> > > yer "controlled growht hormones" wil- um... no, stop db, don't even try
> to
> > > understand this...
> > > >
> > > > It's funny, it takes a human being 20 years to get fully grown and it
> > > > seems
> > > > Linux will be 20 before it's fully grown as an OS in terms of Market
> > > > use.
> > >
> > > I give up... yer nutz
> >
> >
> > Only problem is, according to IDC, Windows numbers
> > are slipping backward... ie: -3%, -15%, -10% (9X/ME,
> > IIShit, NT/2K) or perhaps the second one was -13%
> > on iDC and -15% on some web server monitoring
> > and stats page... and declining.
> >
> > Dolly
>
> I think you read wrong, those were increases not decreases. IN fact, the
> Windows market continues to grow and shift. A shift from 9x/ME and NT to
> W2K. The 9x numbers remain strong because that's what most computers
> bought/installed today have that on there. ME surplanting 9x quickly.
> However, in the server market growth for W2K is much faster than it ever was
> for NT. If you dig a little deeper at IDC you'll find CONSISTANT reports of
> Windows growth and no decline... in fact, they document that linux's share
> is growing at the cost of the "other" unix share, not the NT/w2k share. This
> is typical, IDC reports that that is what happens whenever some new, popular
> fragmentation of Unix occurs. People switch aliances and the unix share is
> redivided - but it's constantly losing to NT, now W2K. Something will come
> along better than Linux but a *nix variant - the anything-but-microsoft
> types will jump behind it and that large linux share will shift into the
> "other unix" share and the new one will shine briefly (like *BSD or BEOS)
> but continue to pale behind W2K (then Whistler)'s growing share. At least,
> that is how IDC reports it. I like that site Dolly...
Thanks. You and many tens of thousands of others a
day (not to mention it's regulars...) it's a
little busy doing a running backup from a backup
drive array to the one in use for the last few
days... the actual number is somewhere in the
high gigabytes of data being restored... but Warp
seems quite happy with the myriad of tasks it's
doing right now. :-)
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 19:41:22 -0500
Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:%coE5.27950$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> > [...]
> > >It is not the OS vendor's responsibility to make their system API's
> > >easily clonable.
> >
> > Blah blah blah.
> >
> > >In fact it has typically been seen as contrary to
> > >their interests. The various Unix vendors, for instance, have <yet> to
> > >create a common Unix standard set of system API's.
> >
> > I guess POSIX doesn't count.
>
> POSIX is too basic. 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?
>
> What's to prevent Linux from one day having incompatible distributions?
>
> >
> > [...]
> > >> Win32 is a documentation of 'whatever the hell random and bizarre
> > >> anti-competitive crap' that Microsoft writes, and then retroactively
> > >> faces the industry with trying to use.
> > >
> > >How is the win32 API anti-competitive? Saying so doesn't make it so.
> >
> > How it is pro-competitive. Saying it doesn't make it so.
>
> 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.
It's not. Especially when you consider the number of errors and
obfuscations in their "documentation," it cannot in any sense be considered
"thoroughly documented." MS has never made it a practice to DOS or Windows.
That's why you can find "Undocumented DOS" and "Undocumented Win 3.1
(95/98/2000/ME/NT/whatever)" on past, present, and future best-seller lists.
And if it's pro-competitive, where are all those Windows vendors so we can
make a real comparison between them and all the Unix vendors. Huh? You
mean Microsoft is the ONLY Windows vendor? In a market as lucrative as
this? A market that has produced an astonishing number of billionaires, not
to mention 2 of the richest 10 men on earth? Not one single Windows vendor
to compete with Microsoft Windows?
Why is that, ya think?
jwb
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:45:38 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>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.
I provide a reference for the full context. If I tried to misrepresent, I
wouldn't would I?
>> Guess I passed the Alzheimer test and you didn't.
>
>And you failed the "fucked" test.
Indeed, I have fucked plenty in my youth.
>> > 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.
Says who?
>> > 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".
Proof by blatant assertion won't fly here. I have seen biologists and
anthropologists seriously suggest that the variation between modern man
and neanderthal man was overestimated, and that "if a neanderthal walked today
in NY, he wouldn't look remarkable"
>What part of the above did you fail to understand, idiot?
The part where you pass your opinion as science?
>[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?
No.
>> > 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.
Then why do you bother?
>> 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 stock market doesn't seem fishy to me. Therefore, your statement is
incorrect.
>> > 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"
Blackmail. I'd say fire me. Specially in today's economy.
>> > 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.
Well, that is different, isn't it?
>> > 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.
I'm none of those.
>> 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.
Indeed, you can look foolish without my help. And, I must say: chicken!
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:50:44 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>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.
The molecules in the crystal are H2O molecules. Again, ask a chemist, he will
explain it to you. They are arranged in a crystaline structure.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:51:35 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> 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.
>
>What a lie. If you were curious, you'd have followed the references
>I gave earlier and already known this. But anyways,
>
>The law of detail scaling. And it only violates this several different ways.
Care to cite the law? I find no reference to it in the 'net.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 22:04:46 GMT
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 01:37:44 GMT, Mike Byrns <@technologist,.com> wrote:
>Bob Hauck wrote:
>> While the documentation may have had the source for Notepad, that's not
>> the point. WINE must clone the text edit control that Notepad uses,
>> not Notepad itself.
>> So are you saying that the documentation for the text edit control is
>> both complete and error free?
>All the WINE folks have to do is to make a control that behaves like the
>standard windows edit control and clones it's interface.
Yes, I know, I do believe I said exactly that right up above. I note
that you didn't answer the question...is the documentation sufficient
for doing that, or do you need to "fool around with" the control for a
few hours or days before you know how it really behaves? The MS docs
are notorious for not documenting boundary conditions and what happens
if there's an error.
>It's not so hard when you really understand Windows.
Right, no one part of it is "so hard". But the quantity of API's to be
cloned is what will kill ya. Not to mention the holes in the docs.
Much of Win32 is not nearly as well understood as the text control.
Windows programmers seem to spend a fair amount of time experimenting
around to find out how an API *really* behaves. This not only makes
Win32 annoying to program for, it also makes it hard to clone.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 22:04:52 GMT
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 04:21:01 GMT, James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>The various Unix vendors, for instance, have <yet> to
>create a common Unix standard set of system API's.
Somehow, in spite of that, even major Unix apps are portable to a
number of Unix flavors. Even ones running on wildly different cpu
architectures.
On top of that, several groups have managed to clone Unix well enough
that the differences between them aren't any greater than those that
exist between the "official" Unixen.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
