Linux-Advocacy Digest #195, Volume #34 Fri, 4 May 01 19:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (.)
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Matt Kennel)
Re: IE ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Dave Martel)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (.)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Paul Floyd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: 4 May 2001 22:10:49 GMT
Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <9cul6p$sj8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9cujii$4c4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> > news:9cuh7c$nr9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>> >> Apparantly youre new to usenet. Advocacy groups ARE bashing groups,
>>> > slapnuts.
>>>
>>> >> Now go away.
>>>
>>> > Apparently you're a moron. Bashing groups are stuff like
>>> > alt.destroy.microsoft or alt.linux.sux.
>>>
>>> > Have a nice day.
>>>
>>> Having been an active participant in usenet for the past 13 years, I
>>> can say without a grain of doubt that you are absolutely incorrect.
>>>
>>> If you dont like the tone of this group, you are free to fuck off.
>>>
>>>
>> Why, thanks for the free advice. BTW, did I object to the tone of this
>> group? Or was it maybe the lack of focus of some postings? Your age-long
>> usenet experience obviously has not taught you how to read.
>>
Your off topic posts are not welcome.
>> BTW2: Do you have a name?
>>
Yes. Can you read headers?
> he's the . in Microsoft.NET so i guess his name would be Microsoft
> trailer trash (the . trails the word "microsoft")
And you...such wit, such sharpened intellect.
Please. Stop. Youre. Hurting. Me.
=====.
--
"Great babylon has fallen, fallen, fallen;
Jerusalem has fallen, fallen, fallen!
The great, Great Beast is DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD!"
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: 04 May 2001 16:14:07 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > http://www2.usermagnet.com/cox/index.html
> >
> > 'nuff said.
>
> Not really. I think Alan made a critical error in mentioning the
> internet. The Internet was funded by the government, and all of
> it's development and code was made available as either public domain
> or business friendly licensing (such as the BSDL).
But imagine what it would look like if Microsoft developed it (or any
other commercial softare company).
You don't need to imagine; just remember the old MSN that Microsoft
used before they went to TCP/IP. It was horrible.
> In fact, most of the Internet pioneers only did so because they
> could make money off selling their proprietary implemenations (DEC,
> Sun, IBM, etc..). If the original Internet code had been released
> GPL, we'd probably all be running DECNET or something similar today.
What's your reasoning behind this? The only internet I remember is
the one where everyone was trying to be BSD-compatible in their TCP
stack.
> I think Alan is also making a critical mistake mentioning major FUD
> items like the NSAKEY debacle. He's also making a critical mistake
> referring to the Halloween memo as "their" Halloween memo, as if it
> were an intentially published document expressing corporate opinion,
> versus the work of a single author as a memo to his bosses.
The only problem with your point of view on those issues is that
Microsoft will NEVER offically publish things like the Halloween
document, so we must rely on the leaked versions of them. If we wait
for it to be published by Microsoft, it never will be -- heck, they
even retract many articles after the fact.
> And he's CERTAINLY making a critical error when over exagerates the
> forking of Windows (claiming that 98 and ME are seperate forks,
> rather than simply next versions) and claiming that NT, 2000 and the
> different editions are seperate forks as well. If that were the
> case, then there are literally thousands of Linux forks, maybe
> millions. There are three forks in Windows. 3.x/9x based systems,
> NT based systems, and CE based systems. 3.x/9x based OS's are going
> away this year, REDUCING the amount of forking in Windows (this is
> something MS has been working to do for quite some time).
Here's the comment in question:
"...with Microsoft you must pick a prepackaged fork and live with it
- 98, ME, NT, 2000 (all three versions), CE ... They do at least
have a fair range of forks to choose from."
I don't see the exaggeration that you do. He's saying: You CAN'T
fork Windows, so you're stuck with what Microsoft decides is a good
fork. Why is NT 4 build 1391 (or whatever)? What's to say that build
1345 or 1452 wasn't better; we'll never know.
> While I respect Alan's technical ability, I am greatly disturbed by
> his lack of understanding of even basic issues and lack of common
> sense. Perhaps he was just too mad that someone had nailed the
> critical issues in business oriented free software to think clearly,
> I don't know.
If *that* is all it takes to disturb you, then I would reccomend
against visiting microsoft.com.
> If Alan wants Linux and the GPL to be taken more seriously, he has
> to think his arguments through more clearly and not make such
> exagerated and incorrect statements. After all, he is a spokesman
> for the movement.
BULLSHIT. I'm *sorry*, but it is Mundie, the Halloween documents and
pretty much everything Bill Gates says that is incorrect and
exagerated. The "Linux Myths" pages, the "Open Letter to Sun", the
"Right to Innovate", "The Road Ahead (revised to include the internet
this time) -- all examples of gross exaggeration.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 May 2001 22:10:43 GMT
On Fri, 4 May 2001 14:50:03 +0200,
Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup
A quick overview of your headers reveals you to be a Windows user.
> reveals that the
> majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
> official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of Linux.
Sadly we dont get time todomuch Linux advocacy, as COLA is a popular venue
for Windows users like you to argue the benefits of Windows.
Now if they would stay in the NG's for that subject, COLA could *return*
to advocacy.
> It's a well-known fact, that if you cannot really come up some good
> arguments for your case, then you can always fall back on hammering on your
> opponents weaknesses.
Whilst tyour statement is correct, Linux has no opponents, its Free Software.
> Is that the case here?
Its the case everywhere, not only here.
> If it is, then I find it rather
> lame.
I couldn't care what you find 'rather lame'.
>
> Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a compelling case
^^^^^^^^ Linux
> for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging task, at least for the
^^^^^ Windows
> majority of posters here.
Wintrolls
>
> Mikkel
>
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 May 2001 22:14:37 GMT
On Fri, 4 May 2001 17:33:27 +0200,
Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <9cu8nu$8dv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup reveals that the
>> >majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
>> >official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of Linux.
>>
>> I'm sure it would be, if there weren't so many people trolling Windows
>> advocacy through here.
>
> Actually, it seems to me that the number of posts bashing Windows vastly
> outnumbers the Linux bashers here. But even so, you do have the right to
> ignore such postings.
Your observations are incorrect, and" he who is silent,is assumed to agree.."
Therefore Linux bashers cannot go unanswered.
>
>> >It's a well-known fact, that if you cannot really come up some good
>> >arguments for your case, then you can always fall back on hammering on
> your
>> >opponents weaknesses. Is that the case here? If it is, then I find it
> rather
>> >lame.
>>
>> Most of it is in response to said trolling.
>
> Hmmmm ...... maybe. But if I look at the most recent postings, we have
> within 24 hours these:
>
> "If Windows is supposed to be so "thoroughly" tested..."
> "The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT"
> "Windows NT: lost in space?"
> "Windos is *unfriendly*"
You need a longer sample, 24 hours is in no way sufficient to
obtain accurate data.
>
> All MS bashing to boot. I failed to find any initial Linux bashing threads
> in the same period, however. Totally non-scientific statistics, I know, but
> still ....
>
>> >Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a compelling
> case
>> >for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging task, at least for the
>> >majority of posters here.
>>
>> So, are you going to do some Linux advocacy then?
>
> No. I don't see myself as a Linux advocate, so why should I advocate Linux?
Then what are you doing in a Linux advocacy news group?
>
> Mikkel
>
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 22:17:51 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:Matt Kennel wrote:
:>
:> On Wed, 02 May 2001 12:42:40 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> :
:> :So, to summarize, you believe that homosexual attraction is genetically
:> :determined.
:>
:> The twin and brother studies seem to indicate that it is
:>
:> :In other words, it is a birth defect, just like congenital mental retardation.
:>
:> Or being black or lithuanian.
:>
:> Its persistence in humans despite an obvious sexual reproductive
:> advantage implies to me that the most likely genetics is that it is an
:> unintended consequence of a combination of genes that are otherwise
:> selected for.
:
:Yet another theory:
:
:The vast majority of human beings are bisexual, with most of them
:having a preference for one sex or the other.
:The decision to label
:yourself homo or hetero sexual is actually more a cultural thing, as
:this culture seems to force peopleto "polarize"; in effect, choose
:one label or the other.
Because most of them have a preference that is significant enough
that there wasn't anything 'forced', the answer is obvious.
:Consider, then, the obvious advantage in primitive cultures to
:being bisexual with a preference: sexual activity is a bonding
:activity, so occasional homosexual acts would tend to strengthen
:the bonds of a group, while having very little negative "natural
:selection" impact, since even those who prefer homosexual contact
:will still occasionally engage in heterosexual contact.
:
:And, as anybody who has studied baboons will tell you, groups
:are stronger than any single individual. The ability to form
:and maintain supportive, cooperative groups, or "tribes", is
:an evolutionary advantage.
OK.
:And since very, very few people are truly "homosexual" (in other
:words, very few people will NEVER have sexual contact with members
:of the opposite sex), and since it only takes a small number of
:sexual contacts to pass on ones "genes",
in the unlikely event of absence of competition from other sperm from
hard core heterosexuals.
: it seems clear that
:natural selection will place only a very small "cost" on a
:preference for same sex contacts, while at the same time, natural
:selection will consider *some* homosexual activity to be an advantage.
:In short, sexual preference is more shades of gray, than pure
:black or white,
Given that hypothesis and in that environment, a genetic mutation in a
male who is more motivated to screw women more will be still be
selected for over other men.
The empirical reality is that gay men now don't have anywhere near the
urge to get in with women that straight men do.(**) You would need
that to be the same in order for the evolutionary cost to be
negligible.
(**) and some feel pretty sorry for us and all the crap we need to go
through
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 01:17:02 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:28
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
> >> Just so the other technologists don't laugh at you for using the wrong
> >> word, Ayende, I thought I'd point out that this isn't, then a 'port' of
> >> the registry. It is instead an emulation of the registry. A port
would
> >> be what IE does, or what Seagate (now Veritas) Nervecenter does.
> >
> >You really need to read what my messages, T. Max.
>
> I do, Ayende, and forgive me for disputing your meaning, but I suppose
> it means you're not making yourself clear.
>
> >BTW, note that this is a case where coding against the API is enough.
>
> So you're going to tell me that all Windows apps run on Wine? Guffaw.
>
> >I asked why using WINE is so slow, since, while the registry is faster,
it
> >should be *that* slow.
>
> I think you answered your own question. Obviously, emulating the
> registry with a file system is going to be slower than directly
> accessing the binary hierarchical database on Windows.
Not *that* long.
(See code below)
Time to write registry: 361
Time to read registry: 150
Time registry total: 511
Time to write file: 10
Time to read file: 10
Time file total: 20
I run it a couple of time, the average seemed to be around 470 - 525 for
registry, around 20 - 25 for files, dpeneding on system load. Debug build
was about 100 slower for registry, no affect of files.
The greate difference is, I assume, is because of windows' file chacing, so
writing to the file is actualling writing to memory.
It seems that fflush() doesn't seem to have the required affect. Or that
disk access has advance greatly. OTOH, it's a very small file, and no
interperting of the data was done, as is done in the reg functions, so I
would say that WINE implementation, based on a text file, is going to be
slower, although not by *that* much.
> >I made it clear that WINE's emulation & the Registry behaviour are
> >different.
>
> Only if we're to assume you are correct that it is different; that's
> begging the question.
>
> >It may be that MS wrote a registry to Solaris, and it may be a part of
why
> >it takes a long time to load (another reason would be the need to load
the
> >routines windows already use for the shell, etc).
> >
> >What is Seagate Nervecenter?
<Snip long info>
Thanks.
Here is the code:
#include <windows.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(){
unsigned int iStart,theInteger=0,iTimeToWrite,iTimeToRead,intIntSize =
sizeof(theInteger);
unsigned long lngTmp,lngTmp2=sizeof(theInteger),i;
FILE * fp;
char theKeyName[10] = "Key";
HKEY theRegKey;
iStart = GetTickCount();
//Write thousands integers to registry
if (RegOpenKeyEx(HKEY_CURRENT_USER,"Test",0,KEY_ALL_ACCESS,&theRegKey) !=
ERROR_SUCCESS){
printf("Error opening key\n");
RegCloseKey(theRegKey);
return 1;
}
//write thousand integers to the registry
for (i=0;i<1000;i++){
itoa(++theInteger,theKeyName+3,10);
if(RegSetValueEx(theRegKey,theKeyName,0,REG_DWORD,(CONST
LPBYTE)&theInteger,intIntSize)!=ERROR_SUCCESS){
printf("Error writing to registry\n");
RegCloseKey(theRegKey);
return 2;
}
}
iTimeToWrite = GetTickCount() - iStart;
//read thousands integers from registry
theInteger=0;
for(i=0;i<1000;i++){
itoa(++i,theKeyName+3,10);
if
(RegQueryValueEx(theRegKey,theKeyName,0,&lngTmp,(LPBYTE)&theInteger,&lngTmp2
) != ERROR_SUCCESS){
printf("Error reading from registry\n%s\n",theKeyName);
RegCloseKey(theRegKey);
return 3;
}
}
iTimeToRead = (GetTickCount() - iStart) - iTimeToWrite;
RegCloseKey(theRegKey);
printf("Time to write registry: %d\nTime to read registry: %d\nTime
registry total: %d\n",iTimeToWrite,iTimeToRead,iTimeToWrite+iTimeToRead);
//done playing with registry, now check file system access
theInteger =0;
iStart = GetTickCount();
//write to file
if ( !(fp = fopen("~temp.bin","w+b")) ){
printf("Error openning file");
return 1;
}
for (i=0;i<1000;i++){
if (fwrite(&(++theInteger),intIntSize,1,fp) != 1){
fclose(fp);
printf("Error writing to file\n");
return 2;
}
fflush(fp);//write data to disk
}
i = GetTickCount();
iTimeToWrite = GetTickCount() - iStart;
theInteger = 0;
//start reading
for (i=0;i<1000;i++){
fseek(fp,i,SEEK_SET);
if (fread(&theInteger,intIntSize,1,fp) != 1){
fclose(fp);
printf("Error reading to file\n");
return 2;
}
fflush(fp);// write data to disk
}
iTimeToRead = (GetTickCount() - iStart) - iTimeToWrite;
fclose(fp);
printf("Time to write file: %d\nTime to read file: %d\nTime file total:
%d\n",iTimeToRead,iTimeToWrite,iTimeToRead+iTimeToWrite);
return 0;
}
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:08:45 -0600
On 04 May 2001 13:56:22 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [it's pick on Microsoft Friday today]
Well, Mundie picked on GPL yesterday so now its Microsoft's turn.
>Or my personal favorites from recent history:
>
> o The new Windows Installer that makes you reboot BEFORE you install
> the application and then again AFTER. (fun!)
Ever moved a Windows installation to another system and gotten into
the situation during the first boot where it wants you to insert the
driver CD to load drivers when it detects new hardware - but it
doesn't see the driver CD because it hasn't yet gotten around to
detecting the CD reader?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: 4 May 2001 22:23:28 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jon Johansan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9bslu3$njp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jon Johansan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Says good-bye to expensive, hard to manage unix crap too...
>>
>> > http://www.vnunet.com/News/1120413
>>
>> > Zenon Chomyszyn, technology manager at the Halifax, told Computing that
> the
>> > company's Unix systems are too expensive to maintain, and that he hopes
> to
>> > reduce these costs by installing W2DC, despite a high initial outlay.
>> > "The benefits will be the management of the systems and boxes rather
> than a
>> > saving in purchase price," he said.
>>
>> > Chomyszyn added that the operating system will increase the
> availability,
>> > reliability and scalability of the bank's databases, and will reduce
>> > operational costs by managing a single server rather than thousands.
>>
>> Welcome to a single point of failure.
>>
>> This is why pointy haired types should NEVER make any sort of
> technological
>> decision.
> SO I guess by your logic all big iron boxes like those from IBM and Sun are
> crap and should be immedateily replaced by 1000s of cheap 386 rejects
> running linux/beowulf?
> Did you consider for even a second that the box was a highly redundant
> system capable of running at 5 9s or beyond? Did you even figure out that
> replacing 1000s with a single server doesn't mean there is only 1 server
> total, if they have 3000 servers before, and the replacement ratio is 1000
> to 1, then they now have 3 servers. Besides - if it's that critical I would
> use a two server cluster for failover redundancy but would call it one
> server cause essentially it is.
I understand this perfectly, in fact im sitting right next to an incredibly
souped up (:)) sun e5500 at the moment. Maxed out completely it looks like;
I inherited it from a retarded IT department who believed that throwing money
at problems fixes them. This e5500 with its 12 procs and 12 gigs of ram, 4x18
gigs internal HD and a ~500gig MTI array external cost all together along the
lines of half a million dollars.
They used it as a Suitespot mail server doing imap for 6,000 people.
I replaced it with a 800 dollar PC running freebsd with 18 gigs of rsynced
HD space running qmail and a screwey (and free) imapd.
Guess which one works better?
Its all about knowing what to use and when. Theres a time and a place for
everything, including enormous sun systems.
I am converting this half a million dollar Sun/MTI couple into a desktop server
for a few dozen sunrays, for now. In the next year or so those few dozen will
probably become a couple of hundred, which should also be just fine. I could
have easily kept solaris 2.5.1 on it along with suitespot 1.0 and an incorrectly
set up softraid system and an entirely misconfigured MTI controller (which can
only see the first 22 gigs of space on each shelf) and thrown it at webservice
or something...but that wouldnt have been any fun at all.
> PC users should not pretend to be enterprise engineers.
Indeed.
But enterprise engineers should never assume that biggest is always best.
=====.
--
"Great babylon has fallen, fallen, fallen;
Jerusalem has fallen, fallen, fallen!
The great, Great Beast is DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD!"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 May 2001 22:24:01 GMT
On Fri, 4 May 2001 08:59:52 -0700,
Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Davey quoth:
>
>>>Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a
>>>compelling case for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging
>>>task, at least for the majority of posters here.
>>
>> So, are you going to do some Linux advocacy then?
>
> Making a business case for Linux is easy. Here's an example:
>
<snip>
A keeper for my /home/tp/News/good_stuff file:)
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 May 2001 22:31:02 GMT
On Fri, 04 May 2001 15:28:52 +0100, pip
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>>
>> Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
>> >
>> > Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a compelling
>> > case for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging task, at least
>> > for the majority of posters here.
>> >
>> Any damn fool can bash linux or its proponents.
>> But to put up a compelling cas for the use of wintendo would be a more
>> challenging task, at least for Mikkel.
>
> Games (Wintendo does this well if not rather expensive) && Websurfing &&
> Music (MIDI) programs && device drivers
Hmm
I have quite a few excellent games, Quake, Koules,Freeciv and some demo Loki
games that play perfectly on this old system (686/300).
>
> In fact there are quite a few merits, but quality and reliability are
> not some of them :)
I have yet to find a merit for Windows, as not needing it these last 4
years has weaned me off it and its 'supposed' benefits entirely.
>
> Of course if you have two PC's and/or duel boot you can have the best of
> both worlds.
Eww, personally I never liked dual booting, and in time was able to replace
all of my Windows 'can't do without' programs, with much more suitable
Linux ones.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 01:33:27 +0200
"Austin Ziegler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 4 May 2001, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > "WesTralia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> An API is not complete without the documentation of what its function
> >>> does.
> >> An API, is an API, is an API! It's always nice to have a documented
> >> API, but whether an API is documented or not is absolutely exclusive
> >> of whether the API is complete or not.
> > A bunch of function declaration is not an API.
> > You need to know *what* those function does for it to be an API.
> > Sure, you can use a function declaration in your program, but I doubt
that
> > incorporating std::vector<char> XDdasSR433(int,double,std::string); into
> > your code is going to be very helpful.
>
> Actually, I have to disagree with you. Else there wouldn't have been
dozens
> of "Undocument Windows API" books in the last decade...
Do they give you the info you need to work with those API?
Here is a list of APIs, WTF do they do?
If you don't know, you can't use them, even if you have their declaration
and lib.
If you have the documentation, you *can* use them.
I think about an API an interface, not a bunch of useless function
declaration. I can't interface with something I know nothing about, it may
crash, corrupt data, etc.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Floyd)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 22:40:18 GMT
On 4 May 2001 16:12:38 GMT, Igor Sobrado
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In alt.solaris.x86 pookoopookoo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No matter how powerful it is, all it does is edit text. That's not what the
>> average user wants. They want nice printed output, with reasonable color
>> correction and WYSIWYG formatting. Maybe a few nice templates. Most
>> important is a nice GUI and WYSIWIG.
>
>TeX and vi *are* WYSIWYG, do you think that Word is it too?
>Think again!
Hmm. Does that mean that you view your documents at 300, 600 or even
1200 dpi on a (say) 72 dpi monitor?
I'd add that in the case of PS and PDF (generated with TeX default CM
fonts, viewed on screen), then it's a clear case of WYSI hideously ugly.
A bientot
Paul
--
Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr (for what it's worth)
Mail as URL, replace 1st . with @
If more is better, are double standards better than single ones?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
