Linux-Advocacy Digest #173, Volume #32 Tue, 13 Feb 01 15:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Phat Linux versus Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Interesting article (Tim Hanson)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (John Jensen)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: KDE Whiners (Tim Hanson)
Re: KDE Whiners (Tim Hanson)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Tim Hanson)
Re: Answer this if you can... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
XP Show&Tell - Live on TV (Sevatio)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Paul 'Z' Ewande�")
Re: Downgrading to Mandrake 7.2 - did Linux become a windoze clone? (Zsolt Zsoldos)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Paul 'Z' Ewande�")
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Paul 'Z' Ewande�")
Re: Indrema fan site (William Kendrick)
Re: Indrema fan site (William Kendrick)
Re: Answer this if you can... ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows? (Tim)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Phat Linux versus Windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:17:31 GMT
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:08:32 +0800, #KUNDAN KUMAR#
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>yes, you don't need to loose windows and neither do you need to
>repartition the disk. However, I had problems installing Phatlinux.
>After everything is done, it simply can't boot up and hangs at a
>message "decompressing ..."
Normal for Linux.
>Was an annoying experience.
Yep, but some people like self torture :)
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:28:36 GMT
David Brown wrote:
>
> OK, I see what you are saying. Let me put it another way, describing what
> happened rather than who did what.
>
> When Warp 3 came out, Win311 was the current windows version, but Win95 had
> been promised Real Soon Now. Developers were being strongly encouraged to
> write for Win32s, which would give them some of the extra functionality of
> NT and Win95, but could also run on Win16. Software companies were working
> with beta versions of Win95, and concentrating on getting their software
> ready for when it came out. For some reason (a mixture of monopoly-backed
> bullying, solid strategy and tactics from MS (mainting a monopoly is not
> quite as easy as you make out), and poor handling from IBM), commercial
> companies continued to develope for a system that was a year away rather
> than for a better system available there and then. A great many planned to
> first get the Win95 version working, then make an OS/2 version of the
> programs, but after waiting so long for Win95 to arrive, and seeing the
> market share of OS/2, then it just was not worth it.
>
> MS told developers that Win95 would become the major market holder, and they
> believed them. IBM told them that OS/2 was better, easier to program, and
> available now, and many believed them too. But economics dictated that
> commercial companies developed for Win95 instead (those not bound by
> economics, such as freeware and shareware developers, choose OS/2 - for a
> long time the selection of free and cheap software for OS/2 exceeded that
> for Win95 in quantity and quality). Who is to blame? Who did their jobs
> well, and who did their jobs badly? I believe (and it is with hindsight,
> I'll admit) that IBM could have done a better job. If IBM showed that they
> believed in OS/2, and pushed it hard with their own systems, then many
> commercial developers would have choosen to do their OS/2 version first, and
> the Win32 version later. As it was, IBM was much happier to sell systems
> with Win311 pre-installed than with Warp 3 pre-installed, and they sold the
> Windows systems cheaper.
>
> Perhaps it is unfair to blame IBM's marketting - they did advertise widely
> at the time. But somewhere in the system IBM failed badly. I think they
> have problems with communications between their departments - Warp 3 was
> easy to install on virtually any PC, with the exception of IBM's own PCs.
Hardware, specifically IBM' line of PCs, was the Achilles heel.
Microsoft was able to effectively make IBM choose between making all
those PCs OS/2 only or Windows only by withholding W95 information,
foot-dragging on committments, and failing to cooperate on mutual
marketing agreements. Even IBM didn't have the resources to "go it on
its own" with OS/2.
So IBM didn't really fail at all. It was simply caught in the monopoly
squeeze, like everybody else. Its complexity simply gave Gates more
hooks to ensnare it.
>
> Did you ever hear the story of IBM's photocopier department? It sounds like
> a joke, but is in fact true - it was a good many years ago, and they have
> improved somewhat since. IBM made some photocopiers - it was not a big part
> of their business, and they only sold to the kind of customer who bought
> everything IBM. It was also not very profitable, so they conducted an
> investigation into how to make the department more profitable. The
> conclusion was that if they increased the prices, the same customers would
> continue to buy as always, thereby increasing profits. If they lowered the
> prices, they could become competitive and sell more photocopiers, thereby
> increasing profits. The investigation itself cost more than the department
> made in a year.
>
> T. Max Devlin wrote in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >Said David Brown in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:20:48
> >>T. Max Devlin wrote in message
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >>>Said David Brown in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 11 Feb 2001 21:08:42
> >>>>IBM has a solid record of turning out brilliant technology and hopeless
> >>>>marketing. [...]
> >>>
> >>>This oft-repeated bit of nonsense is so vapid as to be tiresome. IBM
> >>>has a mixed record, as all business do, of both technology and
> >>>'marketing'.
> >>
> >>Fair enough - they have a bit of mixed record, but it is swayed in that
> >>direction (unlike certain other companies, which are swayed heavily in the
> >>other direction).
> >
> >Making it a tentative statement makes it no less vapid, I think. You're
> >just buying into the 'hindsight bias' which amateurs often mistake for
> >business analysis. It is obvious that IBM did a truly excellent job of
> >'marketing' OS/2, since it is still on the market despite having to
> >oppose illegal anti-competitive monopolization. Not to mention it is
> >apparently excellent, technically.
> >
> >Microsoft's business isn't "swayed heavily" towards marketing at all.
> >They are entirely engaged in monopolization. They use advertising and
> >press releases as a heavy smoke screen for their illegal behavior behind
> >the scenes is; that doesn't make it effective marketing.
> >
> > [...]
> >> IBM could have stood against MS, and we would be in a rather different
> >> position now. But they judged the market for OS/2 to be too small to
> >> make take on MS - and that is only because the market was happier to
> >> wait an extra year or so for the much inferior Win95, rather than buy
> >> OS/2 Warp that was available at the time.[...]
> >
> >IBM did stand against MS; that's why OS/2 is still available. They
> >didn't make any foolish decisions trying to "compete" with the
> >anti-competitive. Monopolization isn't simply having large market
> >share, you know; you don't make a calculation and consider how large
> >your potential market is in deciding whether or not you can "stand up"
> >to a monopolist. Well, not unless you don't want to stay in business.
> >You cannot out-compete a monopoly, and what makes the 'market happy' is
> >just as meaningless in determining how monopolization works.
> >
> >--
> >T. Max Devlin
> > *** The best way to convince another is
> > to state your case moderately and
> > accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
--
You're never too old to become younger.
-- Mae West
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: 13 Feb 2001 18:13:10 GMT
Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: How does Windows/Linux/StudlyOS prevent your apps from crashing? When
: the app crashes, you lose the same amount of work whether or not the OS
: goes down too.
StudlyOS might have billions of other users ... most of whom would prefer
to be unaffected by your application crash.
John
--
33� 39' 43N 117� 45' 07W
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:30:24 -0500
Peter Ammon wrote:
>
> Peter Hayes wrote:
> >
> >
> > You obviously have no idea how much a video editor can create in 15 minutes
> > when on a roll. You suddenly see exactly how a scene should be cut, it
> > takes only a few minutes to assemble it to the point where you know it's as
> > good as it'll ever be, then **SPLAT** the Mac seizes solid. and you just
> > know you've lost all that work, and worse, you know you'll never be able to
> > recreate it. But if you're not an editor you'll not understand.
>
> How does Windows/Linux/StudlyOS prevent your apps from crashing? When
> the app crashes, you lose the same amount of work whether or not the OS
> goes down too.
Another strike against Windows....
Too many OS deadlocks which cause apps to crash.
>
> -Peter
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE Whiners
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:15:36 GMT
Of course, KDE is not above making a buck when it comes to taking
kickbacks from TrollTech over QT commercial licenses.
Ian Pulsford wrote:
>
> Nils Zonneveld wrote:
> >
> > Tim Hanson wrote:
> > >
> > > Ximian, which was Helixcode, son of GNOME, bought space from Google to
> > > put up their ad every time someone types KDE or Konqueror or a bunch of
> > > other KDE related names into their search field, sort of like Sun
> > > putting up ads on Linux sites, or Linux companies putting up ads on
> > > Microsoft sites.
> > >
> > > The KDE babies have been grieviously offended by this and haven't
> > > stopped blubbering all day. Now they they're going to sue. Good way to
> > > get laughed out of an attorney's office.
> > >
> >
> > Maybe this is just a clash of cultures: the European culture of
> > cooperation and the American culture of "ripping each others balls off
> > when we get the chance".
> >
> > Nils - bit black and white, but this is an advocacy group after all :-)
>
> Maybe Ximian are just trying to make a buck. I don't think the GPL is
> explicitly against that (though implicitly that is a matter of debate).
>
> IanP
>
--
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE Whiners
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:17:02 GMT
It looks to me like simple competition, which _always_ benefits the
consumer.
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Ximian, which was Helixcode, son of GNOME, bought space from Google to
> : put up their ad every time someone types KDE or Konqueror or a bunch of
> : other KDE related names into their search field, sort of like Sun
> : putting up ads on Linux sites, or Linux companies putting up ads on
> : Microsoft sites.
>
> : The KDE babies have been grieviously offended by this and haven't
> : stopped blubbering all day. Now they they're going to sue. Good way to
> : get laughed out of an attorney's office.
>
> I don't have a public opinion on the KDE/Gnome debate other than to
> say I like and use major parts of both.
>
> But this is just pathetic and silly behavior on *both* sides. It is
> unbecoming of professionals, and reflects poorly on free software in
> general, the excellent quality of both projects notwithstanding.
>
> Joe
--
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:18:27 GMT
Stuart Krivis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 01:30:45 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>Because Chad here is obviously a sock puppet, and that sounds like a
> >>sock puppet lying in support of One Microsoft Way.
> >>
> >
> >
> >He's a WET sock puppet.
>
> That's .NET sock puppet. :-)
>
That's MISTER .NET sock puppet to, sonny. :-)
-
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Answer this if you can...
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:34:10 GMT
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:06:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>It's almost impossible to by a crappy monitor now days. Even the worst
>aren't that bad and the norm is .28 so what is your point?
>
>Windows looks fine on every monitor I have ever seen it on and linux
>does not, without tweaking that is.
>
>I would also suspect that more people have decent monitors than crappy
>ones because the crap ones would have died by now so it makes sense to
>make the default 100dpi, or at least include a card in the box that
>says "If your fonts suck, try this".
>
>How many "Why does Netscape look so lousy?" posts are there in the
>Linux groups?
>They have entire web pages devoted to that topic, so there must be a
>problem.
>But, typical of the Penguinista you try and deny and reason around
>what seems obvious to the rest of the world.
>
X11 has traditionally had crappy fonts, no argument. In fact, the
whole *design* of X had to be overhauled to support AA (which recently
was incorporated into the XFree86 distro via XRender). But AA is now
available, and will be standard issue before too long. It took X a
long time to get there, but it's there. Netscape, Mozilla, and any
other app you can think will will look just as good as they do on
Windows or the Mac.
quux111
>
><SNIP>
------------------------------
From: Sevatio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: XP Show&Tell - Live on TV
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:33:47 -0800
Hey, don't miss the presentation Billy and the boys are having on this XP!
I've learned a lot so far. For example, the XP's start-button remains on
the bottom-left corner to help lessen the learning curve.
;-)
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:54:21 -0800
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> Behold...the "intuitive" interface.
As "intuitive" as the CLI that prompted this subthread.
> makes stty seem positively simple.
One should know that what's "intuitive" or "positively simple" is what one
is used to.
Not that you would care, but TweakUI is an "intuitive" interface to enable
the tab completion in the CLI which isn't inherently an "intuitive"
interface.
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: Zsolt Zsoldos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Downgrading to Mandrake 7.2 - did Linux become a windoze clone?
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:35:36 GMT
Just FYI, finally I received a reply from Mandrakesoft support,
where I submitted my problem on Sunday (as I had an 'official' copy):
> The upgrade does not run to the 7.2 version.
>
> The complete version is designed for newbies.
> In this way this is a light version.
> The powerpack is fully designed to your needs,
> not the complete.
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Mandrakesoft Support Team
This seems to agree with most of the reply posts in this thread, so I
can conclude, that everything was fine and working 'as advertised'.
The only problem was my misunderstanding of the English language...
DEFINITION:
complete = light version, designed for newbies
(in other words: half of the packages are missing)
OK, I got it now!
--
Zsolt Zsoldos
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:58:44 -0800
"Peter Ammon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> How does Windows/Linux/StudlyOS prevent your apps from crashing? When
Windows or Linux can't. But StudlyOS is beyond those inferior imperfect
OSes. Apps don't crash under StudlyOS. StudlyOS rules !
> the app crashes, you lose the same amount of work whether or not the OS
> goes down too.
Not necessarily. If you can run multiple instances of your apps and or
different apps to work on many things at once, you may only loose the
crashed instance.
> -Peter
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:00:16 -0800
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> > How does Windows/Linux/StudlyOS prevent your apps from crashing? When
> > the app crashes, you lose the same amount of work whether or not the OS
> > goes down too.
>
> Another strike against Windows....
> Too many OS deadlocks which cause apps to crash.
As if apps didn't crash under Linux/UNIX.
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: William Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Indrema fan site
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:54:27 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/bill/indrema/
: Nice site William. Your Indrema in the news page indicates how much work you
: have put into the site.
Thanks! Honestly, it was pretty easy to find most of the news. A lot of
it gets mentioned on the Indrema mailing lists. The rest I found by a
simple Google search.
Keeping on top of it's going to be the hard part. (Between running
a Linux Users Group, running a game design club, working full time,
writing Linux games, having a girlfriend, and running a bunch of websites,
I don't know why I decide to add more projects to my life. :) )
: I hope the console is successful. I wonder whether it will be able to be put
: to other uses, such as a server, firewall, router, etc. ;-)
_Possibly_. It may require a hack (not unlike what people have done
to Dreamcasts, iOpeners, etc.), due to the certification system in the box.
: I'm sorry you received such a rude response.
Yeah... I'm quite surprised, honestly. Almost every person I've met who's
heavily into Linux (and I know hundreds) is much more laid back and
positive, especially to interesting new projects.
I guess it's just the Usenet crowd that can be bitchy. ;)
: Best wishes,
Thanks, take care! If you ever get around Davis/Sacramento, California,
visit our LUG:
http://www.lugod.org/
-bill!
------------------------------
From: William Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Indrema fan site
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:58:59 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
: Get a life.
<~35 line signature snipped>
Why are you being so negative?
-bill!
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Answer this if you can...
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:06:23 GMT
John Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 18:47:36 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Where is the new menu entry.
>>
>>You want a menu entry, add it. This IMO is better than having it appear
>>whether you want it or not.
>>
> Why bother to install it if I don't want to actually use it then?
You didn't install it. Root did.
>>I gotta say RTFM. Cut and paste is terrible on Windows, and is a delight in
>>X. Try highlighting text with the left mouse button. Then hie thee over to
>>another program, one that allows you to insert text, and click with the center
>>mouse button.
>>
> Only sometimes!
Only always. More always than in windows anyway. Try pasting a hardware
datum from the control panel display into a dos window.
>>Here. Create a file called .Xmodmap in your home directory. Put:
>>
>>keycode 22 = BackSpace
>>keycode 107 = Delete
>>
> Tried it, don't work.
Then your keyboard doesn't generate those keycodes. Check, with xev.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows?
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:58:19 +0000
Todd wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > gswork wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It would be fascinating would it not? Some of it is probably pretty
> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > >
> > > > You misspelled "laughable"
> > > >
> > > > [Ever see Microsoft source code??? Most of it, even college sophomores
> > > > would be ashamed to sign their name to. No wonder Gates doesn't want
> > > > anybody to see it.]
> > >
> > > I haven't really. If it's that bad I'd like to see it!
> >
> > They can't manage 20 lines without writing "goto" somewhere.
>
> If you've every programmed assembly language, you would know that goto is
> the norm.
>
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I belive much of the MS
OS/applications
were in fact written in assembly code.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
