Linux-Advocacy Digest #369, Volume #31 Wed, 10 Jan 01 14:13:02 EST
Contents:
Linux misseery cont. (LINUX ANONYMOUSE)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (Nick Condon)
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (.)
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: RPM Hell (BradyBear)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Binh Ngo)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Conrad Rutherford")
Re: How the f*ck do I install .xpi plugins ? (Bartek Kostrzewa)
Linux 2.4.0 rocks for me, and you? (Bartek Kostrzewa)
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: You and Microsoft... (Bartek Kostrzewa)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Would Linux be invented if? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Would Linux be invented if? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (John Brock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: LINUX ANONYMOUSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:03:38 GMT
It amases me every time that someone tends to object to linux that
everyone insults him. I personally use slackware linux and sometimes
find it very annoying to configure as well. As for the GUI I totally
agree..... AKA IT SUCKS. I have yet to find a GUI that is easy to
configure linux, click and point easy, and very user friendly. Every
GUI I have ever encountered in linux has alway... yes I do mean always
given me either hours of headaches or it very very very difficult to
get to set up this is of course speaking of the source installation
meathod. I also find that there is a bunch of crackheads writing for
linux. Linux needs some sort of standardization in order to make it
big with the standard non-techy user.
And Yes I do like linux because of its very fast and stable kernel.
I'm just saying it could improve its looks. Come on how can you
honestly say that Gnome is a very good environmnet or KDE isn't that
good ither. yes they are very very fast and stable but they look
terrible. I think that is the reason why windows sells so good is
because it hides the ugly background and poor system while wrapping it
up in a pretty package so a child can use it.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:09:41 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>
>> I find your directed hatred toward an individuals religious choice to be
>> hideously ignorant, and inconsiderate.
>
>
>
> Check this out:
>
> 2001:
>
>
>> Scientology may not be a respected religion, but people DO follow it. Their
>
>
>
> 1943:
>
> Nazism may not be a respected religion, but people DO follow it.
Godwinism may not be a respected religion, but people DO follow it. End
of thread.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!?
Date: 10 Jan 2001 18:11:11 +0100
In article <93ft3r$qeo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: It's like cars these days, not many people can change their own oil,
>: hell some can't even pump gas. They don't care how it works, just that it
>: does. So in that aspect. Microsoft "whistler"(sp?) is the next vision of
>: Mr. Gates.
>
>"Some people can't even pump gas"??? In the '50s I'd believe that,
>when full-service gas stations existed. Today everything is self-serve.
>Anyone who can't pump their own gas is someone who can't get gas at all.
It is illegal in New Jersey.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 10 Jan 2001 17:15:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > > Actually the so-called "32-CPU" windows system is just four 8 way
>> > > systems.
>> >
>> > Really? Is this including the NEC, Unisys and several other vendor's
> 32-CPU
>> > and 64-CPU boxes? One single box with 32-CPUs is actually just four
> 8-way
>> > CPUs? That's not what their sites say, so they must be falsely
> advertising,
>> > right?
>>
>> All the so called "32-way" windows systems I have seen,
>> turn out to be, on closer inspection, clusters of 4 8 way PCs.
>>
>> If you know of a true 32-way windows pc, do be a good
>> sport and provide a URL, OK?
>>
> do your own closer inspections - visit unisys...
> Actually, you claim the 32 cpu systems you've seen are just 4 8 way PCs -
> so, tell us, which 32 cpu systems have you seen? be a good sport and provide
> a URL OK?
> I've personally seen a single server with 32 cpu's in it - tell me how I
> could have mistaken it for 4 seperate PCs?
You easily mistook it because youre retarded.
You apparantly have never seen an enterprise system with multiple mainboards
to support that many CPUs. Nearly all of them utilize this architecture;
and ALL x86 ones do.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time?
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:32:33 -0600
"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> (Mind you, it seems that Matt is one of these strange people that believes
> that writing and debugging device drivers should be easy and
straightforward.
> Shows what a know-nothing kid *he* is, and what a fool you are for rising
to
> his bait. :^)
Not to mention that he claims to NOT be writing a device driver, but still
somehow manages to have his code run in kernel-mode AND claims this should
not crash the system if the code is faulty. ;)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:38:45 -0600
"Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Shane Phelps
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >craig nellist wrote:
> >>
> >> Out of the box, Word 2000 can write in these formats:
> >>
> >> Word 2000 (Document / Template)
> >> HTML
> >> RTF
> >> TXT
> >> Word 2.x (Windows)
> >> Word 4, 5, 5.1 (Macintosh)
> >> Word 95 (Windows)
> >> WordPerfect 5.0, 5.1 (DOS & Windows)
> >
> >Let's hope the Word 2K converters work better than the Word 97 ones.
> >Word 97 had a bad habit of saving 0 length files when saving in
> >Word 95 format, at least early in the piece.
>
> What suprises me is the omission from the list above (i.e. Word 97).
What's
> the point of exporting to Word 95, but not the previous version of Word?
It'll
> result in a painful migration from 97 to 2000. As you'll have the problems
> caused by Word 2000's export to Word 95, compounded with the problems with
> Word 97's import of Word 95. Or in other words, a nightmarish mess.
Word 2000 and Word 97 use the same format. The files are interchangeable.
------------------------------
From: BradyBear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RPM Hell
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:35:01 GMT
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:49:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 06:48:48 GMT, BradyBear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>while using --nodeps may enable me to install the .rpm in question, it
>>probably isn't a good idea. The dependancies are there for a reason.
>
>In the specific case of KDE2, using nodeps is required unless you do the
>package installs in a particular order. Using it doesn't hurt anything
>if you know that you're going to be installing the dependency in a few
>minutes.
>
>I normally do qt and kdelibs with --nodeps, then it isn't needed for the
>rest.
Usually when I'm installing multiple packages that require other
packages I put them all in the same directory and just type rpm -Uvh
*.rpm. That way rpm installs them in the correct order and the
--nodeps option isn't necessary.
_
BradyBear
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Binh Ngo)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 10 Jan 2001 17:34:21 GMT
On 9 Jan 2001 15:13:09 -0500, John Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>It is being added to Vim, and was in fact the most requested
>enhancement for Vim-6. (Check out www.vim.org).
>--
>John Brock
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I was playing around with vim-6 trying to get it to work like the ALL
command you described, but can't seem to get it working. Have you tried
it? If so can you tell me how you did it?
shadow
--
Tell me and I'll forget
Show me and I'll remember
Involve me and I'll understand
------------------------------
From: "Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 10 Jan 2001 11:40:07 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93i5au$r0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> > > Actually the so-called "32-CPU" windows system is just four 8 way
> >> > > systems.
> >> >
> >> > Really? Is this including the NEC, Unisys and several other vendor's
> > 32-CPU
> >> > and 64-CPU boxes? One single box with 32-CPUs is actually just four
> > 8-way
> >> > CPUs? That's not what their sites say, so they must be falsely
> > advertising,
> >> > right?
> >>
> >> All the so called "32-way" windows systems I have seen,
> >> turn out to be, on closer inspection, clusters of 4 8 way PCs.
> >>
> >> If you know of a true 32-way windows pc, do be a good
> >> sport and provide a URL, OK?
> >>
>
> > do your own closer inspections - visit unisys...
>
> > Actually, you claim the 32 cpu systems you've seen are just 4 8 way
PCs -
> > so, tell us, which 32 cpu systems have you seen? be a good sport and
provide
> > a URL OK?
>
> > I've personally seen a single server with 32 cpu's in it - tell me how I
> > could have mistaken it for 4 seperate PCs?
>
> You easily mistook it because youre retarded.
>
> You apparantly have never seen an enterprise system with multiple
mainboards
> to support that many CPUs. Nearly all of them utilize this architecture;
> and ALL x86 ones do.
>
Dude, quite being so retarded. If I open up a single server chassis and
there are 4 CPU boards with 8 CPUs each plugged into a single backplane, I'm
calling that a 32 CPU PC. Period. That's what I say and that's what it is.
He said "clusters of 4 8 way PCs" as in 4 PCs, 8 way each, clustered.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 19:04:50 +0100
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How the f*ck do I install .xpi plugins ?
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> I'm reafdy to go on a homicidal rampage out of frustration with
> this f*cking Mozilla POS. The stupid POS wants me to download the plugin
> even though it's already downloaded. I tried hacking the install
> to make the plugin install and for some reason I keep getting
> those annoying popups harrassing me and telling me to download the f*cking
> plugin which I already downloaeded.
>
> It's no wonder MSIE is winning when these f*cking clowns can't release a
> browser that makes it at least possible to download and install f*cking
> plugins. And not only that but it harasses the user asking them to download
> 15MB files that they've already downloadewd.
>
> I need the JRE plugin, I've already downlaoded it. Can someone
> suggest how to install these f*cking jre..xpi files before
> I buy an AK47 from the local supermarket ?
Run it as root and try it.
Or chmod the mozilla directory to 777, then every user can install
plugins, otherwise only root can do that.
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 19:12:45 +0100
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux 2.4.0 rocks for me, and you?
Well, upgraded to 2.4.0 some days ago, and I REALLY like it!
Things it fixed:
Athlon optimization (really improves performance a lil)
My USB Scanner works (it doesn't in windows, because it's incompatible
with my Via chipset, the Linux general USB hub driver fixes this! :o) )
My Kodak USB cam works
My USB joystick works (ok, not mine, got it from a friend to try)
...
OH, if you have an NVidia graphics card, and wonder how to get the
official drivers working, check irc.openprojects.com > channel #nvidia,
read the topic. (DCC download for a patch to get 0.9-5 working with
2.4.0) Nvidia will soon release an official 2.4.0 compliant version.
...
All in all, I really like 2.4.0 and I'm looking forward to 2.6.0 :o)
wonder if my guess of 05.05.2002 will be correct. (kernel bet, maybe I
win? :o)
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 18:15:48 +0000
> And Yes I do like linux because of its very fast and stable kernel.
> I'm just saying it could improve its looks. Come on how can you
> honestly say that Gnome is a very good environmnet or KDE isn't that
> good ither. yes they are very very fast and stable but they look
> terrible. I think that is the reason why windows sells so good is
> because it hides the ugly background and poor system while wrapping it
> up in a pretty package so a child can use it.
>
Have you tried KDE2 yet?
It's getting there, it really is!
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 19:15:55 +0100
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> You will never be able to install Microsoft Windows on a new
> computer without having to go thru 3 reboots
True.
>
> You will never be able to buy a copy of Microsoft Windows
> with a manual over 100 pages in length.
>
Hmm.. I think Win2k server has a far longer manual.
> You will never be able to develope a net applicance using
> Microsoft Windows.
>
Windows CE is not that bad.
> You will never see a Microsoft Windows Compiler installed
> in your Windows product by default.
True.
>
> You will never see a Microsoft Windows Web Server installed
> in your Windows product by default.
>
Hmm.. ever tried Win NT? The CD includes a web server... And even
Windows 98 has a small (insecure, imcomplete) webserver on the cd.... I
don't have apache installed by default on my linux box either, but it's
on the cd, and I like that.
> You will never be able to install Microsoft Windows via the
> internet.
Hmm... I'd say, true.
>
> If you run Microsoft Windows you will be using a closed source
> system and this means you will always have security problems.
True.
>
> You will never find a version of Microsoft Windows which addressed
> all broken code.
True.
>
> You will never find a version of Microsoft Windows which can
> achieve an uptime of over a week.
nah nah nah... I don't agree to that, I'm a linux user, but credit where
credit is due, Win2K is pretty stable.
>
> You will always be pissed running Microsoft Windows.
That's for sure!
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:40:56 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 08 Jan 2001 10:19:42 +0600...
...and Nate Good <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've seen too many people who don't show up for work, do a sloppy job
> because they won't lift a finger nor take pride in accomplishing a task
> well. These people will press and press until they are finally canned.
> Then they get to sit at home watching Jerry Springer while they collect
> unemployment or welfare. And where does this money come from? From
> people who show up to work every day and do their jobs well enough to
> keep them. What an ideal society...
>
> Rand may have been extreme, but I think she makes several good points.
> Is it right for a society to force those successful to share?
No. It's time to kill the poor for good this time!
mawa
--
Der Speicherplatz in unseren Gehirnen ist begrenzt.
Mechanisches und tabellarisches Wissen hat in einem Gehirn m�glichst
wenig zu suchen. Je mehr des Raumes f�r Wissen ausgenutzt wird, das
uns zu besseren Menschen machen kann, desto besser.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Would Linux be invented if?
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:48:01 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 08 Jan 2001 02:06:33 +0000...
...and Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What did finland do to be cursed with bill gates - If god were really
> > interested he
> > would have died at birth.
>
> Or what if in 1968 the officials at the Lakeside School in Seattle had
> decided against installing a computer terminal? Gates would probably have
> followed his father into the legal profession, and Apple would rule the
> roost.
I don't think so. IBM would have made a contract with some other
company, likely they'd come back to the intended CP/M deal, and with
their quasi-monopoly in business IT they'd have leveraged that crappy
ugly home computer called the PC/XT with a crappy ugly single-tasking
operating system into the same position that the DOS-based PC has held
in our world.
And nobody knows what would have happened to Apple if people would
have been forced to use the lowly Integer BASIC instead of Microsoft's
cool Applesoft BASIC on the ][e.
mawa
--
Walk to an unused portion of diskspace and create. And if you don't
like where you are, uncreate. -- Robert Kelly
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Would Linux be invented if?
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:48:42 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 08 Jan 2001 11:25:55 -0500...
...and Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fuck Godwin.
Fuck you.
mawa
--
MicroSoft product, BTW. Real dirty programming.
-- Henrik Clausen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: 10 Jan 2001 13:27:02 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Binh Ngo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 9 Jan 2001 15:13:09 -0500, John Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It is being added to Vim, and was in fact the most requested
>>enhancement for Vim-6. (Check out www.vim.org).
>I was playing around with vim-6 trying to get it to work like the ALL
>command you described, but can't seem to get it working. Have you tried
>it? If so can you tell me how you did it?
Sorry, I was just reporting what I was told, and later read on the
Vim web site. Haven't tried it.
--
John Brock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
