Linux-Advocacy Digest #733, Volume #30 Fri, 8 Dec 00 06:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows review ("Anders M�rtsell")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Uptimes (SwifT -)
Re: Linux lacks (SwifT -)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:02:18 GMT
Russ Lyttle writes:
>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>>> Why are you citing evidence that destroys your argument, Aaron?
>>>>>>>> Familiarity (or experience, to use my word for it) does not have
>>>>>>>> to be universal before something can be declared "intuitive".
>>>>>>>> Here's a good rule of thumb: if you need to consult the manual,
>>>>>>>> it's not intuitive.
>>>>>>> Everyone has to "consult the manual" (or a friend, or the on-line
>>>>>>> help) at some point early in their learning process.
>>>>>> I know some first-time computer users that did not need to consult
>>>>>> the manual or a friend to know what to do with the power cord, for
>>>>>> example.
>>>>> I have earned a lot of money plugging in power cords for people.
>>>> Congratulations. I know people who replace water heaters, and they
>>>> also plug in the power cord for customers while installing the
>>>> replacement appliance.
>>>>> The first electronics job I had was making calls to fix TV sets.
>>>> Not to install them? Televisions that hadn't yet been used don't
>>>> usually require fixing.
>>> Both. The most common was after the set was at home. Most people, by
>>> that time, were trying to install the sets themselves.
>> And you're claiming that they didn't know enough to plug it in? Do
>> these people use a toaster? A lamp? A microwave oven?
>>>>> About half the time the problem was the power cord wasn't plugged in.
>>>> But was it because they didn't know that it had to be plugged in, or
>>>> had it accidently become unplugged without them knowing it? There's
>>>> a big difference there. I've seen it happen to people many times.
>>> They didn't know all the subtilities of operating a power cord.
>> What "subtleties"?
>>> Plug it in all the way.
>> What's subtle about that?
>>> Unplug it before moving the set.
>> Are you saying that the cord was damaged from strain?
> No, I'm saying that your description of how to use a power cord is
> missing sum subtilities. Such as : a power cord has *two* ends.
What has that got to do with unplugging before moving the set?
> On a toster one end is usually fixed to the toster.
On many televisions, one end is usually fixed to the television.
> On TV sets and computers neither end is fixed.
Not always. My television does not have a detachable power cord.
> You need to make sure *both* ends are plugged in.
Same situation applies. Usually people know how to do that, but were
simply unaware that one end had come unplugged.
> Also power cords are polarized. Try to plug them in the wrong way and
> they don't fit properly.
The polarized plugs that I've used won't fit at all if you try to do
it the wrong way. My television has a three-prong plug, however. Only
goes one way.
>>> If the light doesn't come on check the power cord. That sort of thing.
>> What's subtle about that?
> People don't do it. For computers it is worse. The light on the computer
> can come on, but not the monitor, or vice versa.
Same situation applies. Usually people know how to do that, but were
simply unaware that one of the two was unplugged.
>>>>> I learned very quickly not to just plug in the cord and send a bill
>>>>> for $50. I would futz around a while, take the back off, look intent.
>>>>> Then put the back on and plug it in.
>>>> You're admitting to what some people would consider a "dishonest"
>>>> service call?
>>> No. They got charged the same, the fee for one hour service call.
>> Even if it took one minute?
> Yes. The minimum charge is one hour. Same as auto repair shops and other
> such services.
Why? Travel time for an on-site visit can be justified, but why a
minimum? Would you like to pay for an hour long-distance telephone
call, even if it lasted only a minute?
>>> I just decided not to upset them by pointing out that they didn't know
>>> how to operate a power cord.
>> Which would have been rather presumptuous of you.
>>>>> When PCs came out, there were more power cords not to be plugged in
>>>>> and thus more business.
>>>> Some people prefer to have experts install new gizmos for them.
>>>> Doesn't mean that they don't have the intuition to plug it in for
>>>> themselves.
>>> But that doesn't mean the power cord is all that "intutive" either.
>> Doesn't mean it isn't "intutive" [sic] either.
>>>>>>>SNIP<<
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:09:46 GMT
Les Mikesell writes:
>>>>>> What previous knowledge tells you the function of "d$"?
>>>>> It would be a special case only if it is the first vi command
>>>>> you see.
>>>> Well, it's been a while, but I suspect that the first vi commands
>>>> I saw were i, Esc, and ZZ. That made d$ still a special case.
>>> It is too bad you didn't have a reference that shows the pattern
>>> from the beginning. You should learn u and U first so you don't
>>> worry about mistakes, then the pattern, then the commands
>>> and things you can use to describe the motions.
>> Actually, the first thing to learn is how to exit the editor,
>> hence the ZZ. The next thing to learn is how to put text into
>> the buffer, hence the i command. Without that, there are no
>> mistakes to fix with u. And of course, once in insert mode,
>> you need to learn how to exit that mode, hence the Esc.
> No, you should understand the pattern so you know how to
> represent your intentions, assuming you are past kindergarten
> and already know the shapes of the letters.
Understanding patterns won't do any good if you don't know how
to create new text (i and Esc) and save it (ZZ).
> You don't want to think 'special case, special character' for
> every keystroke.
Fortunately, I haven't. I was simply talking about the first
things to learn.
>>> It is not a matter of remembering all possible combinations as
>>> special cases.
>> It was a new case, regardless.
> Not for everyone. There was a long history of command driven editors
> before vi: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/qed.html
> has some interesting trivia.
Of course; there were a lot of editors before screen editors came
along. The first "editor" I used was to repunch an entire card.
>>>> Assuming that you remember that you're in command mode.
>>> Hit escape if you aren't sure. Now you are.
>> So much for efficiency.
> How often do you forget?
With most distractions: phone call, new email, a number-crunching
job finishing in another window, etc.
>>>> $ still can mean either end of line or end of file. Only the
>>>> "end" portion is consistent.
>>> It is consistent with being the end of the type of motion command
>>> you gave.
>> Do you consider d to be a "motion command"?
> It is a type of command that involves a motion/range.
> 3dw = delete 3 words.
> d/foo<enter> = delete until the pattern "foo"
As opposed to "delete the pattern 'foo'".
> d$ = delete to end of line
As opposed to delete to the end of the file.
> 4dj = delete current and 4 lines going down
Assuming you remember which letter is for up and down.
> 4dk = delete current and 4 lines going up
Ditto.
> Note how you don't have to learn this separately from:
> w = moves the cursor a word
> /patten = moves the cursor to pattern
> j = moves the cursor down a line
> k = moves the cursor up a line
> Get the idea?
I've been using vi for years now, and I still have instances of the
cursor going up when I wanted to go down.
>>> Almost the only inconsistent thing is that the original vi did not
>>> accept a count prefix for 'r'.
>> How old is the "original" vi? Presumably it has evolved over the
>> years.
> It was written by Bill Joy in 1974 and no, 'real' vi has not changed. The
> original paper: http://docs.freebsd.org/44doc/usd/12.vi/paper.html
> still describes it exactly. There are some newer imitations that have
> added new and different features (some very different), and there
> are emacs modes that emulate it with varying degrees of faithfulness.
> The variations are annoying if they won't remove the carriage returns
> from MSDOS style text with the intuitive command
> :%s/^V^M// (where ^char is control-char).
What makes that command intuitive?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:14:42 GMT
Steve Mading writes:
>>> To hit ESC, you don't have to move your whole arm, just stretch
>>> your finger a bit (Especially so on the older keyboards for which
>>> VI was designed, which put the escape key at the left edge of the
>>> numbers row.)
>> To hit cursor keys, you don't have to move your whole arm, just
>> stretch your finger a bit.
> Wow! So I assume then that your planet is populated by aliens with
> sinewy 8-inch long fingers that can bend sideways and splay out
> in any direction from the palm?
Not at all.
> Neato. Meanwhile us poor humans have fingers that don't bend that
> way. For us humans, to move the fingers 8 inches to the left
> requires that the *wrist* slides over, which means the the whole
> forearm is moving too, hinged at the elbow.
My keyboard has its cursor keys on the right, at about the same
distance from the home row as the Esc key.
>>> Not only that, but you use your LEFT hand, while the
>>> RIGHT stays by the hjkl keys.
>> Not if I want to type yuioopnm, for example.
> Huh?
Those letters aren't on the home row.
>>> To hit 'i', you don't have to move
>>> your hand at all. You would have to be a really terrible typist to
>>> lose track of the home row just becuase you hit a key on the top row.
>>> Now, when you have to move your whole hand by swinging your forearm
>>> in order to reach the 'special keys', then you have to look down
>>> to find your finger positions.
>> Not with the layout on my keyboard.
> What type of keyboard is this?
One with the cursor keys arranged in a way that you can feel.
> The only one I've seen that is on
> a PC, and has the arrow keys in reach of the typewriter keys is
> a laptop, where you have to use 'modal' thinking to toggle the
> editiing keys on and off with some special blue 'fn' key.
Not on my laptop.
> If so, then you've got "modal" issues built right into your hardware,
> and shouldn't be complaining.
You're erroneously presupposing that I need to use some 'fn' key to
activate my laptop's cursor keys.
>>> The only thing I would change about
>>> HJKL would be to have made it be JKL; instead, so that you use all
>>> four home-row fingers rather than just three of them with the index
>>> finger doing double-duty. But this is a very small difference.
>> I've seen some cursor movement implementations that put the 'up'
>> key on the row above hjkl and the 'down' key on the row below
>> hjkl, presumably because too many people complained about having
>> difficulty keeping track of which letter was up and which was down.
> Yeah, I admit this confused me for about 30 seconds back when I first
> started using vi (which, incedentally was *after* I was already
> familiar with Emacs, Notepad, the IBM-designed "CUI" mappings popular
> in many old programming editors (Like Turbo Pascal), the Vax's 'edt',
> and so on, none of which were modal.) It's easy once you realize that
> the outer keys are left/right, and the inner keys are up/down, and
> don't think of them by their letters.)
It's easier with the "up" key above and the "down" key below.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:16:28 GMT
Steve Mading writes:
>> Fortunately, I didn't make such a blanket statement. My comment
>> was restricted to the use of hjkl for cursor movement. That's a
>> rather small subset of vi.
> Well, then we'll just have to disagree then. I don't think
> that's true for the first time user who hasn't gotten any
> preconcieved notions from using other editors first. You think
> it is.
Are you saying that the first-time user *will* know that hjkl
moves the cursor around???
------------------------------
From: "Anders M�rtsell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 11:25:17 +0100
Yes, I can understand that, and I fully agree with you, but I still don't
think that you will get somewhere with continuing this discussion. This is
because everyone has already made up there minds about what they think is
correct and it doesn't matter how many good arguments for you r opinion you
give them, it's only a matter of who's got the best patience. The guy will
the best patience will win this discussion, if winning is the same as
getting the last word in it. If not, you could just go on foreer and noone
will ever change their minds and therefore I think that there's no use
spending time on this any more. To prove this I won't answer any more posts.
It's not that I don't want to discuss, but I feel that there are better
things to do than to stay in a discussion leading nowhere. I just felt that
I had to say this and I hope there's someone out there who agrees with me.
Then perhaps this thread will get to an end.
Especially as the first poster was probably a troll who crossposted to lots
of newsgroups just to get this long discussion leading nowhere.
/ Anders
"Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:bE1Y5.10380$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [snips]
>
> "Anders M�rtsell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:90q6k1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I've been following this thread for a while now, and earlier several
like
> > this one. Now I feel the urge to say something about discussions like
> this.
> > I think it's interesting to see people discussing for hours/days about
> > whether Linux or Windows is the better OS or, as in this case, whether
you
> > should use a GUI or the CLI. Everyone must know that everyone who takes
> part
> > in such a discussion has already made up his/her mind about what's
right,
>
> Correct to a point... except that some of us use _both_. The examples I
> offered in response to Les's questions were easy, quick ways to do basic
> tasks using the GUI. Similar things can be done from the CLI. In some
> cases, the GUI is easier, such as when you want to copy a mess of files,
> whoops, did I create the taget folder? Nope, there it is, fine, do I have
> enough space? Yup, okay, right-click and paste, as opposed to faffing
> around with CLI equivalents. On the other hand, if I want to copy the
files
> with, say, 1999 in their name, the CLI is easier; I can use *1999* and
> voila, end of problem, whereas the GUI would be more difficult to use in
> this case.
>
> I just find it laughable that some folks insist that one way is superiour,
> apparently in all cases for all users, when this is patently absurd.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:19:12 GMT
Steve Mading writes:
>> Not exactly uncommon. When my VCR is "off", it's still on by
>> enough to keep a clock running and monitor its programming to
>> determine whether to turn "on" (or should I say "more on") and
>> record a program. Doesn't make the power switch any less
>> intuitive.
> Actually, I would say that that sort of power switch is highly
> unintuitive. Intuitively, you'd expect that turning something
> off would, you know, actually turn it off.
Depends on what you consider "off" to be. When you turn your
microwave oven off, do you expect it to lose the time? (Yes,
that does presuppose an oven with a clock on the display.
Are there any new models that don't have one of those built in?)
------------------------------
From: SwifT - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 11:29:25 +0100
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Adam Ruth wrote:
> Where can I find some hard numbers about the best and mena uptimes of NT and
> Linux? I have my own experience, which I'm sure varies from others. I have
> Netcraft numbers which don't show NT 4 and W2K hasn't been around long
> enough fro some good numbers.
Own experiences are still the best reference. You believe them 100%
(you've seen them with your own eyes) and know when they are applicable
(under which circumstances etc...).
--
SwifT
------------------------------
From: SwifT - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 11:15:29 +0100
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Pedro Coto wrote:
> 1) I play some games that can only be used
> under Windows (including Age of Empires
> II or Escape from Monkey Island).
I agree completely. For running games, I also would use Windows.
> 2) I can only view at acceptable frames in my
> machine (K6-2/350 and 256MB SDRAM)
> MPEG-4 movies under Windows 98/Me.
MPEG-4, isn't that ASF? IIRC, ASF is Microsoft-developed. And I recently
downloaded xmms-avi-plugin, which has (small/buggy) support for ASF and
DivX. It's not perfect in a long way, but it's a good start. When I view
an ASF-movie with resolution 640x480, I get a good, clear view with a
reasonable framerate (I don't know howmany fps, but I can't see any
disturbances). I have an AMD K6-2 350 with 64 Megs and a Riva TNT2 M64.
> 3) I can only browse webpages (and besides I
> like it more than any other) with IE, knowing
> that I would be able to render each of them. Of
> course I do use Windows 2000 for this one,
> since IE under 98/Me is too unstable for me.
> Netscape 6 or Konqueror can't replace IE for
> me yet.
This is certainly a personal feeling. Since KDE2.0, I love surfing under
Konqueror. I don't know why (IE does offers a higher comfort), maybe
because of the rendering-speed, but I do. I completely understand that IE
is better, but in my opinion, the advantages are too small to reboot
everytime I want to surf...
> 4) Outlook Express is my favourite news reader
> and Knode is not still ready in my opinion.
What do you search for in a news-reader?
> 5) The same for KMail, I still prefer Eudora, though
> KMail almos satisfies me.
Kmail is more than adequate. The only thing I feel sorry for is the lack
of support for procmail-rulesets.
> 6) When I am going to write an article, I choose
> Word. Using AbiWord, KWord or StarOffice
> be it 5.1 or 5.2 is not for me.
It's a point I (used to) hate too under Linux. There is not one single
program that works as good (or even better) than MS Word. Although Corel
WordPerfect (free downloadable) is good under Linux, it is too robust. I
have the advantage that I always make my documents in HTML-format, which
certainly is well supported under Linux (and other OS's). Every lay-out
can be programmed using HTML, and when someone asks me for a document, I
always print it into a PDF-file, since it could be that IE of NN renders
the page improperly.
> The fact is that despite the great evolution and
> improvements GNU/Linux has achieved, is (for
> me) still unusable at full experience for desktop
> purposes ... though it is getting nearer.
I fully agree. The day before yesterday, I gave an introduction to KDE on
a computerclub (95% Windows, 3% Macintosh, 1% Atari and 1% Linux). I got
the answer that my presentation wasn't going to convert them into
Linux-users. I asked them what they want. The main reason was that they
all want to develop apps, but using Visual Basic. Although I tried to
reason them that support for VB isn't going into Linux (since VB 100%
relies on Win-API's) they didn't bow. Even informing them that Kylix
("Delphi for Linux") is coming into the scene, they wanted a
user-environment, visually programmable, that copes with databases (esp.
MDB's - MS Access) without writing 100 lines of code. Argumenting that SQL
is stronger than MS Access-db's didn't help.
There are always reasons to stay with Windows. Using Win-files is the
greatest one. When Linux would support Word-doc's, MSACCESS, VB-code,
Win-screensavers, ... they would step into Linux right away...
But it is my opinion that this kind of thinking is wrong. People should
turn to Linux if they want to learn a lot (which means spending time on
it) or if they don't have a certain boundary that keeps them into Windows
(f.i., a VB-programmer should stay with Windows).
It's also not Linux who should adopt those Win-technologies, but it must
try to be compatible with it (except for VB, which i think shouldn't be
inserted into the Linux-world).
> At serving purposes, GNU/Linux is for me
> a good choice, even when still improving some
> crucial areas like Netfilter (firewalling purposes)
> or khttpd (kernel static HTTP server). And do not
> forget khttpd was born (if I am right) to reach NT
> performance on Mindcracft tests.
I don't have much knowledge about servers (not more than an average
Linux-user) so I can't argue here. But I think on the server-marked, Linux
surely has a great position.
> Just saying which things GNU/Linux does lack
> nowadays to be used as a desktop machine (for me)
> together with a more easy configuration method (for
> just computer-users, no computers-advocates like
> you or me).
And it is this sort of arguments we like. They inform us of the way how
linux should evolve (and will).
> In this post I am not saying Windows 98/Me or
> NT/2000 is the perfect OS, just I do use them for
> some things each, as well as I do use GNU/Linux for
> other things. And I am fed up of having to use
> multiple OS's to get what I want ... I guess when
> I will have the complete OS :-)
We all want an OS that has everything in it (userfriendlyness, stability,
security, tweakability, speedy, softwareavailability, ...).
--
SwifT
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
