Linux-Advocacy Digest #672, Volume #31 Tue, 23 Jan 01 08:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Ian Davey)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows (Donn Miller)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Ilja Booij)
Re: Games? Who cares about games? (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: future of linux pda (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Edward Rosten)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (mlw)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Edward Rosten)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Edward Rosten)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 12:59:07 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Server-side includes ususally take on the form
>
> <!--#include file="/path/to/file" -->
I tried this...
contents of inc.html:
<p> Here is an include file paragraph.
</p>
include line in my home page file:
<#include file="inc.html">
produced exactly that on the served page... include line
<!--#include file="inc.html" -->
which is as you wrote it, produced nothing. Leaving out the two dashes
before the close tag also produced nothing.
Your line is in a script language and not proper HTML, right?
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:02:17 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 22 Jan 2001
>>On 22 Jan 2001 14:45:23 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK) wrote:
>>>I only use <pre></pre> tage for stuff like author contact lists, or
>>>formulae and very simple tables, for example, these ones on fusion
>>>reaction energies:
>>>
>>> http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/phys/fusion-energies.html
>>
>>Is that why your page looks like crap?
Flatfish is a pure idiot of course...
The page is intended to explain fusion reaction energies. It is not a
commercial.
>No, its probably because its a technical page, and therefore he doesn't
>give a shit if it looks like crap. Why, do you think the nuclear
>physicists are bothered by it?
As you note:
It gives the relevant information and a few references, which is why
readers are not bothered. Any flashing stuff or "graphical layout" will
make the page both less readable and less believable.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:12:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Server-side includes ususally take on the form
>>
>> <!--#include file="/path/to/file" -->
>
>I tried this...
>
>contents of inc.html:
>
><p> Here is an include file paragraph.
></p>
>
>include line in my home page file:
>
> <#include file="inc.html">
>
>produced exactly that on the served page... include line
>
> <!--#include file="inc.html" -->
>
>which is as you wrote it, produced nothing. Leaving out the two dashes
>before the close tag also produced nothing.
>
>Your line is in a script language and not proper HTML, right?
Server side includes need to be enabled on the server and you'll usually need
to change the file extension to .shtml (depending on how the server is set
up).
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:12:32 +0100
In article <R%6b6.5675$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[me:]
>> >>I only use <pre></pre> tage for stuff like author contact lists, or
>> >>formulae and very simple tables, for example, these ones on fusion
>> >>reaction energies:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/phys/fusion-energies.html
>I'm sorry, but a little USER INTERFACE thinking would make this page
>actually not be an eyesore. Sure, it get's the point across, but it LOOKS
>terrible. Some frame based orginization, a soft background, some CSS, a
>table to orginize things. Would this KILL the developer? Cause his page is
>KILLIN my eyesight.
Why? Is it because of IE which as usual breaks standard HTML? There
are no problems in Netscape. The pages are written in standard HTML so
_you_ dear reader may choose how they look. That is the way the WWW was
intended to be.
What you are asking for is "graphical layout", and that is for PR
organisations. I don't do PR. The main reason why is because it isn't
believable.
If my pages on drift waves are used by MIT to teach their
experimentalists how that physics works then they have achieved their
aim.
The main problem with tables is that they don't work in Lynx.
Readability by Lynx is important, because not everyone has a fast
connection. Most of the sites I read for news across the Atlantic load
very slowly in Netscape but are very fast in Lynx. I like it that way,
as well as the fact that the German pages I read are accessible by Lynx,
which I need when I read them from the US.
>This irony is lost on me, the page looks like it was made in vi, and looks
>like it would be best suited for Lynx. Although there are obvious style
>changes at the bottom, which Lynx can't reproduce...
It was made in Emacs.
(the link is http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/phys/fusion-energies.html)
What do you mean by style changes at the bottom? I get this in Lynx run
from within an xterm (Solaris on a Sun Ultra):
The Cross-Sections
The energy of relative motion required to cause two nuclei to undergo
fusion is determined by the need to overcome electric repulsion. The
interaction between the two particles proceeds as a two-body Coulomb
collision, during which there is a given chance of a fusion reaction
occurring according to the distance between the particles. In a
thermonuclear plasma, the incident energy comes from the thermal
motion of the particles, so the reaction rate is given as an average
over a Maxwellian distribution (distribution --> kinetics of a gas).
The reaction rates, ``sigma v'', given in units of cm3/sec, are as
follows (``e'' refers to the power of 10):
Temperature D-D D-T D-He3 T-T T-He3
(keV)
1.0 1.5 e -22 5.5 e -21 3 e -26 3.3 e -22 1 e -28
2.0 5.4 e -21 2.6 e -19 1.4 e -23 7.1 e -21 1 e -25
5.0 1.8 e -19 1.3 e -17 6.7 e -21 1.4 e -19 2.1 e -22
10.0 1.2 e -18 1.1 e -16 2.3 e -19 7.2 e -19 1.2 e -20
20.0 5.2 e -18 4.2 e -16 3.8 e -18 2.5 e -18 2.6 e -19
50.0 2.1 e -17 8.7 e -16 5.4 e -17 8.7 e -18 5.3 e -18
100.0 4.5 e -17 8.5 e -16 1.6 e -16 1.9 e -17 2.7 e -17
200.0 8.8 e -17 6.3 e -16 2.4 e -16 4.2 e -17 9.2 e -17
500.0 1.8 e -16 3.7 e -16 2.3 e -16 8.4 e -17 2.9 e -16
1000.0 2.2 e -16 2.7 e -16 1.8 e -16 8.0 e -17 5.2 e -16
_________________________________________________________________
--> Back to the...
* Physics and Fusion Home Page
* Place of Fusion
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:21:50 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 22 Jan 2001 08:40:09 GMT, "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>In the case of Web design, there is no reason why even a nontechnical
>>user can't use a text editor in one window and a browser open to the
>>same file in another, make changes in one window, and preview them in
>>the other. There's no reason he or she can't or shouldn't learn to
>
>This one sentence probably more than anything indicates why Linux will
>never make it on the desktop - at least if this attitude prevails.
False Premise.
You are forgetting to note that you have been conditioned to believe the
"one bulky application does all" approach is natural and standard. It
is neither.
Running under X, I typically have 6 to 10 xterms open running on several
different machines. Since each program is so fast (TeX processes a 50
page scientific paper as fast as I can punch the keys... usually the
repeat of the command is done by typing the up-arrow key and then the
carriage return key), and the display program checks the file for
updates, whether the thing is WYSIWYG is absolutely moot.
I take this perspective home to the desktop, where under Linux it works
properly. Lightning fast, that is (because my laptop is not dependent
on AFS it runs things like that much faster than the Sun ULTRA at work).
I have tried Windows style word processing and desktop publishing, under
Win3.1, W95, and NT. I find them unbelievably combersome... try moving
a high-resolution contour plot on a poster size page (90x120 cm) under
Framemaker and you'll see what I mean. If the thing doesn't hang you
still cannot see where you are going to put it until you do so, because
the real-time rendering (which is a waste of time) is so slow. I find
myself having to use the arrow keys to tweak the thing, which then uses
the same methodology as TeX/xdvi does, albeit much more slowly.
These "desktop application" products are crap. I cannot believe you
really think otherwise, unless you just use them to "play".
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 07:32:46 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Kevin Ford wrote:
> Another one of my favourites is 'application not responding, press wait or
> close it' isn't that what I just did??
>
> Also I like it when the Windows kernel has decided that windows has
> performed an illegal operation, probably something like trying to stay up
> longer than a couple of days. Blue screen, press any key to close the
> program and return to windows.... erm, isn't that what I'm closing???
I remember when I used to get that message box (on Win 98) saying
"krnl32.exe: this program has performed an illegal operation". Then, I
press OK. Ironically, I can still move my mouse, and I still see the
Windows background w/out icons. Apparently, Windows can still have some
limited graphics functions when the kernel has crashed. Amazing.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:26:30 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ian Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Server side includes need to be enabled on the server and you'll usually need
>to change the file extension to .shtml (depending on how the server is set
>up).
OK thanks to you and Craig for the help... I don't really understand
this sort of stuff but I can see how you'd need it if you were updating
things within an established format regularly, and under time pressure.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: Ilja Booij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:41:03 +0100
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:01:30 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:94cfpp$jo9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> >Not really. The only benchmark I've seen Linux win was with a web server
> > >> >that no one uses. One benchmark. Please show me ones where Linux wins
> > >> >(oh yeah, and the FUD ones from c't don't count, only major reputible
> > >> >companies with standardized benchmarks, not grudges against Microsoft).
> > >>
> > >> So c't, who has a Spec license (can Mindcraft say that?) and comes from
> > >> the same people who, in a magzine called "ix" extensively cover Windows NT,
> > >> now has "grudges against Microsoft"?
> > >>
> > >> Maybe you should, just for a change, *read* the magazine you are
> criticizing?
> > >
> > >Please show me an article in c't that is favorable to Microsoft.
> > >
> > >Just one.
> > >
> > >Thank you.
> >
> > That would merely be a correlation.
> >
> > There's more than one possible explanation for the situation.
> >
> > It's just that you don't like the other possibilities.
>
> Enough excuses.
>
> Please show me _AN_ article in c't that is favorable to Microsoft.
>
> Just one.
Ok,
in the Dutch version of C'T (mostly the same as the german version,
many articles just translated to dutch) of october 2000, in the
article "Besturingssystemen: welke moet ik hebben?" (in English:
Operating Systems: Which one must I have?) there are points made in
favour of Win2000. also against of course, but I've never seen an
article in C'T that was merely praising any product.
>
> Thank you.
You're welcome
>
> -Chad
Ilja
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Games? Who cares about games?
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:35:58 +0100
In article <94j262$5ck$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>says...
>>Said Bruce Scott TOK in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 22 Jan 2001 14:59:31
>>>I might play real wargames if any became available, but I have never
>>>seen a computer wargame anywhere nearly as good as the board games from
>>>wargaming's heyday in the late 1970s.
>>Alpha Centauri.
>Nope. Alpha Centauri is a pale copy of the wargames that's being talked
>about here. A serious Wargamer wouldn't touch Alpha Centauri with a ten-foot
>pole.
I expected as much. I tried to have a look but then found it was
Windows only so I moved on.
When I see a better space warfare tactical game than StarForce Alpha
Centauri (a simple but elegant board game from about 1975) I might get
interested. It didn't have very many pieces but had real 3-D combat
with simultaneous movement. The main reason systems like that didn't
catch on is that too many people believe in the naval lines-of-battle
analogy (even the 18th Century version!), even if warfare in space would
never be like that (never mind Star Trek).
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: future of linux pda
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:36:35 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
jorgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>what will the future be ? who will surive of agandea and yada ? what
>tools and hardawre will we see ? what do you whis for youer linux pda
>? will it come any kde based linux pda ?
Linux and Psion is pretty successful at the moment...
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat
Date: 23 Jan 2001 13:37:35 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bob Hauck <bobh{at}haucks{dot}org> wrote:
>On 21 Jan 2001 19:42:03 +0100, Bruce Scott TOK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>It's ugly, isn't it... all that icon clutter... advertising to all the
>>owner is too stupid to find things.
>
>Blackbox Rulez! Oh, sorry, got a little overexcited there...
The "locate" command is so powerful that I see no reason to give up my
xterm approach :-)
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:53:35 +0000
> * Office applications - I've tried StarOffice, I've tried Applixware,
> and I've tried a couple of other smaller offerings, but none of them
> seem to match up with office applications for Windows. MS Office is
> SLOW, but StarOffice is slower
What computer are you running on? I find StarOffice workable on a
P133/72M.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:02:15 -0500
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> Please show me _AN_ article in c't that is favorable to Microsoft.
What product is worthy of any favorable press? Seriously, what product could a
reporter write about in mostly favorable terms?
Office? No.
98? No.
NT? No.
2K? No.
Bob? No.
Dogs? No.
All the products are crap. Features heaped on an unstable foundations, all.
Henry Kissenger had a saying, "Just because your paranoid, doesn't mean they're
not out to get you." In Microsoft's case, just because people hate you, doesn't
mean your products don't suck.
>
> Just one.
Name just one product from Microsoft which is stellar enough to warrant a good
review.
>
> Thank you.
No, Thank you.
>
> -Chad
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:03:55 +0000
Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Unfortunately, I have some automatically generated web pages that seem
> >more portable as nonstandard HTML. The bit in question is putting images
> >inside <pre> tags. If I use that for the layout, instead of tables the
> >pages load faster and renders properly in Lynx as well as Netscape,
> >since Lynx does a rotten job of tables.
>
> You should not force your layout on your readers... this is the WWW, not
> a magazine.
The script generates an index.html for a directory. This kind of content
needs a layout to be readable. Some (not much) content does require a
specified layout.
> I only use <pre></pre> tage for stuff like author contact lists, or
> formulae and very simple tables, for example, these ones on fusion
> reaction energies:
>
> http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/phys/fusion-energies.html
>
> I just checked that in Lynx so it's OK.
likewise, a page like this requires some layout. I cand send you a link
to the page if you require.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:04:50 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 22 Jan 2001 14:45:23 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK) wrote:
>
> >You should not force your layout on your readers... this is the WWW, not
> >a magazine.
>
> One should not have to change the way one is doing something to
> accomodate the paltry number of whiners running Linux.
>
> >I only use <pre></pre> tage for stuff like author contact lists, or
> >formulae and very simple tables, for example, these ones on fusion
> >reaction energies:
> >
> > http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/phys/fusion-energies.html
>
> Is that why your page looks like crap?
Don't be a wanker. This is a very good web page. It loads fast, is easy
to read etc etc.
-Ed
>
> >I just checked that in Lynx so it's OK.
>
> Oh now I see why ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
