Linux-Advocacy Digest #253, Volume #34 Sun, 6 May 01 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux disgusts me ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux disgusts me ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS Must be getting really desperate ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: IE ("Michael Pye")
Re: where's the linux performance? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux books (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Linux disgusts me ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 17:42:38 +0100
> did OS2? Sun will now use Gnome as their standard desktop. Does this
> mean the Linux community should abandon KDE?
No? Why should it. If you have the KDE libraries, and GNOME libraries,
you can use both. Why abandon one?
> Also Linux advocates continue to ignore fundamental problems with their
> system. Things such as lack of ACL's, no journalled file system and no
What the hell are you jibbering about. It has ReiserFS and XFS, both are
very good and XFS is very well proven. How can you claim Linux doesn't
have them when it does?
> micro kernel architecture.
This is not a problem. Microkernel vs. macrokernel seems to be a
religious war due to rage for all time (like vi vs. emacs), where in
practice, there is precious little difference in performance and ability
between the two.
> Although SSH is available, it is far from
> comprehensive across all network interfaces
What is that meant to mean?
> and there is no enforcement
> of encryption - as Microsoft did with SP3 and onwards.
Microsoft do not support an encrypted remote shell, let alone enforce
encryption. If this is the case, then please explain Win2K telnet server.
Enforced encryption? Ha.
> Does NFS work
> properly with the new kernel?
As far as I know, yes.
> It certainly hasn't with previous
> releases.
Not entirely true. There were problems with NFS servers, but the clients
are fine.
> NFS itself should have been abandoned years ago if only on
> the basis of security issues alone.
>
> And for goodness sake can any Linux advocate say with a straight face
> they can easily connect their Linux box to an ISP?
I haven't tried (the home computer has a winmodem) but I have heard
plenty of success stories.
> They should be
> working on this issue night and day because nobody is going to use Linux
> is they cannot connect to the Internet.
I'm not on the internet at home on my computer, yet I still use Linux. My
life consists of more than just surfing.
> But instead they prefer to call
> users names rather than address the issue.
Bullshit.
> What about the lack of databasing with configuration files under Linux?
What about them?
> /etc/passwd is a joke.
And the registry isn't? When was the last time /etc/passwd got fucked up
the arse with a splintery barge pole simply because someone uninstalled an
application?
> The CPU cycles require to parse all of these
> free
> formatted text files must be enormous.
Only on very large systems with thousands of users who type ls every
other second.
> Is there a plan to address this
> issue?
I hope not. the advantages of plain text config files have clearly shown
their advantages compared to binary databases for configuration. Note
that most of the files are not read very often.
> You can only talk about uptimes for so long. And frankly people don't
> care that your system is up for a year. Any server not having a single
> hardware or software upgrade in a year would be poorly maintained.
Servers can go on for years without either, although you might not have
noticed, but you don't need to reboot Linux for software upgrades
(excluding the kernel).
> And
> uptimes in the desktop field are a non-issue.
Untrue. When you loose work due to a crash come back and say that again.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:42:33 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 13:25:48 +0100, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>> No. The world is applications I want/need to use and even excluding DAW
>>> ones,
>> You said recently that apart from your audio apps, you only use **two**
>> apps.
>
>Don't be mean. Por flatty can't keep a thought in her head for 5 minutes.
And you guys don't know how to read.
I said 2 MICROSOFT applications.
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
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: 6 May 2001 15:42:50 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 05 May 2001 03:26:44 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 4 May 2001 14:38:29
>>On Fri, 04 May 2001 04:16:45 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 3 May 2001 15:14:08
>>>>On Thu, 03 May 2001 15:02:57 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 2 May 2001 19:41:07
>>>>>>On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:14:29 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>I may be ruled by them. However this one is not one of them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sorry, I am forced to declare that statement to be incomprehensible.
>>>>>>>How could you possibly know in which instances you are or are not ruled
>>>>>>>by the concepts in your mind, if you can be ruled by them at all?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am ruled by the concepts in my mind. This was not a concept in my mind.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm afraid it is, Roberto.
>>>>
>>>>It is a concept in your mind.
>>>
>>>I am forced to insist it is more than that, because it is, instead, a
>>>scientific fact which you cannot refute through mere rhetoric.
>>
>>If you start believing the concepts in your mind are facts, you
>>are delusional.
>
>If you're not capable of recognizing the concepts in your minds which
>are, in fact, facts, then you are simply stupid.
>
>>>>I only have a concept of my interpretation of
>>>>your expression of that concept. And the concept in my mind can be expressed
>>>>thus: "Max sure has a very wrong concept there".
>>>
>>>This is your error: the most max can have is a mistaken concept.
>>
>>That is pretty much all you have.
>
>You've proven my point, and decreased the amount of reason any other
>person should ascribe to you, Roberto. Take a tip from me: insults are
>either incisive, or useless.
Perhaps you missed the subtle barb? You said "the most max can have
is a mistaken concept". Now assuming that correct concepts are not
less than mistaken ones, how does that leave you?
>>>>So, no, I am not subject to this particular concept. I am subject to
>>>>another concept, that says that concept is crap.
>>>
>>>I never said anything about which particular concepts, Roberto;
>>
>>Actually you did. You mentioned a specific concept, I said it only
>>existed in your mind, and that I was not ruled by concepts in your mind.
>
>And I asked what about the concepts in your mind, and you found yourself
>trapped. Now you're getting the spanking you deserve.
Nonsense. I am subject by the concepts in my mind, and I agreed to
that already. I think you are confused.
>>That's where this whole subthread started. Check it out through the
>>references.
>
>Why? I read the whole thing the first time through. Believe me, your
>comments don't get any more reasonable on second, third, or fourth
>reading. I know; I've tried.
Lack of reading skills, maybe.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:44:23 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 14:15:57 GMT, Charles Lyttle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Linux was/is and will continue to be a miserable failure as a consumer
>> desktop OS until it wakes up and starts offering an end result that is
>> superior instead of an inferior result based upon theoretical superior
>> technologies.
>>
>> Consumers want instant gratification and Linux is way out in left
>> field as far as that is concerned. A consumer can call a 1-800 number
>> they saw on TV and order the latest and greatest Pentium 4 system with
>> all of the bells and whistles including AOL or MSN for less than 2k.
>> They open the box plug it in and it works. Sure the scanner/printer
>> and modem are Win* variety, but who cares? It works. They have a
>> pre-load with all kinds of games, office suites and so forth. The same
>> Office suites that their children are using in school. My daughter
>> needed to a Power point presentation for French class the other day
>> (she is 15 and in 9th grade). Am I going to give her a Linux version?
>> Hell no!!! I want the CD I burn to run on Windows because that is what
>> her teacher uses. Why be a martyr?
>>
>
>You are absolutely correct. Linux turns consumers into producers and
>encourages them to think for themselves. Why expose your daughter to the
>hazards of thought? That will only maker her unhappy and she might vote
>to cut of your social security. Exposing your children to Linux is child
>abuse! She might fail and damage her self-esteem. Instead of Linux run
>right out and buy her a sack of McDonald's and some Guess jeans.
The Lesson in this case is French, not learning how to use a computer.
My 11 yo son uses Linux and likes it.
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 6 May 2001 15:45:43 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 06 May 2001 05:59:16 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May 2001 20:36:46
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>>This kind of snippet can and is used in programs that real people use.
>
>And such a program would be derivative of the snippet, in a copyright
>sense. NOT because the program "contains a copy of" the snippet; a
>literal copy is not necessary to violate copyright. Because the program
>is, in the copyright sense, derivative.
Nonsense. Copyright protects an expression of the idea, not the idea.
If the expression is not copied, the work is not derivative.
What you want is a patent, that protects the idea in every conceivable
expression.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:46:15 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 23:28:52 -0700, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On 06 May 2001 01:28:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The other issue is that there are many stable and reliable
>> >Linux WM's used every day by many Linux users.
>> >
>> >ie
>> >Fvwm
>> >Blackbox
>> >IceWm
>> >Windowmaker
>> >Xfwm
>> >
>> >--
>> >Kind Regards
>> >Terry
>>
>> And then there is 95 percent of the rest of the world that don't.
>
>I recall a Microsoft New Zealand statement saying they had a flat year,
>where as Solnet, SUN's NZ subsidiary had at great year, growing 40% and
>acquired a business in the process. That doesn't included the 50 or so
>ISP's in New Zealand that use Linux for their proxy servers, web
>servers, the large scale deployment of Linux for a hardware company
>(approx. 2-3 months ago, Claire placed the normal xenophobic remark),
>the NZ Army using it in a combat simulator, the NZ Stock Exchange
>incorporating it to handle generic desktop tasks. Oh, and don't waste
>your time coming to NZ if all you have is MSCE, because NZ predominantly
>runs UNIX and Linux, get used to it FlatFish, it is the standard.
>
>
>Matthew Gardiner
When and if, Linux becomes the standard OS (a pipe dream at best), I
will use it.
Chances are I will be long gone from this earth when that happens
though.
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:47:15 GMT
On 06 May 2001 03:34:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>On Sun, 06 May 2001 02:57:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 May 2001 21:08:46 +0000, "Gary Hallock"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Talk to Terry Porter.
>>>>
>>>> He's been using Linux since somewhere back in the Jurassic period and
>>>> denies all of these problems.
>>>>
>>>> BTW you "can" change the font size to 100dpi but run the risk of
>>>> aborting the entire system is you don't know what you are doing.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I've never had that problem. Of course you never had either.
>>
>> Try messing up the line you have to edit to change from 75dpi to
>> 100dpi and see what happens.
>Hahahah try remaning win.ini to fred.ini .... moron.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Search on "Font De-Uglification" for information because these yo-yo's
>>>> have a How-To for just about everything.
>>>
>>>100 dpi and anti-alias fonts are standard on Redhat 7.1. 100 dpi has
>>>been there ever since I can remember.
>>>
>>>Gary
>>
>> 1. So are 10000 other packages.
>Using that argument, one would never read a dictionary.
>
>> 2. You are assuming the person knows how to use them and change the
>> appriate entries to activate them.
>How-To's exist for every area of Linux. You can read cant you ???????
>
>> 3.Typical Linux
>Typical :-
>
>"Steve,Mike,Heather,Simon,teknite,keymaster,keys88,Sewer Rat,
>S,Sponge,Sarek,piddy,McSwain,pickle_pete,Ishmeal_hafizi,Amy,
>Simon777,Claire,Flatfish+++,Flatfish"
>
>>
>> Flatfish
>>
>
>
>--
>Kind Regards
>Terry
The difference is a Windows user doesn't have to touch win.ini to be
able to have a legible display.
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MS Must be getting really desperate
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:49:53 GMT
On 06 May 2001 07:30:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>> Yea. We enjoy pushing your buttons and watching you twitch Terry.
>Hahahah, fair enough Blowie, I enjoy doing the same to you.
>
>>
There are others here that are capable of making me think a bit.
You are not amongst them.
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 16:44:24 +0100
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> The big question is how to get from here to there. It would have been
> easy in '93, now it will be pretty hard. The path of least resistance
> would probably be a plugin that implements your new protocol.
I was thinking new generation browser which implements HTML, but emphasises
the advances of the new set. And perhaps plug-ins for other browsers.
Pressure could be put on the browser companies to include the plug-in as
standard in their installations.
Possibly the hardest people to get through to would be the developers
because unless the gains offered to them were enormous then the lazy sods
wouldn't budge from HTML. It would have to be faster, easier to write (as in
more tailored towards the effects they want) and also widely implemented
enough to make it worth their while.
That kind of shit is a long way off. At the moment HTML is just messed up.
We have to wait until it is completely inadequate before anything will
happen, and even then we are talking another VHS / Betamax where the
technologically poorer side will undoubtably win... ;)
> TeX maybe? Or maybe a specialized DTD for XML.
I can't really comment as I am not overly familiar with either...
> It isn't that people don't want to see a good looking web, it is that
> most of them are more concerned with other issues. They don't have
> broadband or the latest browser/plugin/player combination. They do not
> approach the web in the same way as a magazine or TV.
And this is one of the reasons I dislike NS. If it weren't for the wide use
of it's poor standards, people could have both worlds, looks and function.
As it is they can have one or the other because they can either use a better
browser or not...
> That may be a while, given the slowing rate of replacement of PC's.
> The broadband part might be even further off, what with the providers
> dropping like flies and all.
Yes. It's another example of a technology which is begin forced on the world
before the world is ready. Some people are, but the vast majority aren't.
Still, that is progress and if we didn't develop ahead we wouldn't be ready
when the breakthroughs in transmission came... That would make them
pointless and people wouldn't take them up and then the technologies still
wouldn't be good for use when they arrived.
It all depends on whether you advocate progress I suppose...
> It is a two-edged sword. Low cost of entry, but not very powerful in
> terms of presentation. Deliberately so, because lots of people were
> still using text terminals at the time. Gopher was the main competition.
The original ideas were nice, but they needed enforcing and the W3C seems to
have headed off in the wrong direction, either through having the wrong
idea, same as everybody else, or through being reletively impotent and
therefore being bullied into updating their standards as the browser
compaines raced ahead to provide the most features...
> The _did_ work on Mozilla. From what I understand, the problem with NS4
> was that it had reached a state where further development was going to
> be exponentially more difficult. Yeah, they shouldn't have let that
> happen, but then they were in the process of being put out of business
> by a much larger competitor. I'm sure that had something to do with it.
Problem is that they never convinced anybody to use mozilla even after
sacrifising so much time and effort to get it finished... Some linux people
do, but the huge majority of home users are windows users and have never
even heard of mozilla...
> Unfortunately, Mozilla took longer than anyone thought it would. I
> think some of that was because of trying to keep all the features of NS4
> rather than just making a browser. But that is only my opinion.
It should have started from scratch I agree.
> I agree. There are a number of projects to use the Mozilla rendering
> engine in a lighter-weight browser. Don't know if any work on Windows,
> but there are at least two for Linux.
Oh? I would be interested to try them. I actually want to put together my
own browser using an open sourced engine like that of Mozilla at some time
in the future. Something nice and simple, minimalistic and above all SMALL
and FAST! ;)
> Opera is free if you don't mind the ads. OTOH, I liked Opera enough to
> pay for it. Price is less an issue than bundling though. Not being
> bundled with anything will prevent it from gaining a majority share.
Perhaps I will pay for it, but I downloaded the installer today and it
completely baffled me cos there was an old style install.sh script which
didn't work... Maybe I'll get the RPM...
> It is the browser for KDE. It (KDE 2.1.1) is a bit slow to start on a
> P-120 but runs ok after starting. It starts and runs well on a P-300.
> Haven't tried it on a 200. You have to be on a Unix-y OS though.
Damn it, and I use Gnome! Still, I'll try the KDE out when I get round to
it...
> I think the key words there are "function better". Looking good is less
> important than function. Glitches in the software will cause people to
> abandon the transaction *after they have made the decision to buy*. You
> are just throwing away good money if that happens.
Oh yes, but part of their function is their eye-catching design. It makes
sales. ;)
> Some sites are all about presentation and design. Those are perhaps the
> ones that have a legitimate gripe with HTML. People interested in such
> things would probably be more likely to be willing to download a plugin.
True. I have no need to update my browser on a regular basis because I have
IE5.x and as far as rendering is concerned you can't get any further ahead
of the competition (as far as authors are concerned you couldn't get any
worse though...). However I do have all the relevant plugins.
Things are changing though. I am looking to migrate all my desktop
activities to Linux and this is where the big interest in non-IE browsers
comes in... I am having to look for an alternative and I haven't seen one
that fits the bill yet.
When I get my new computer I should be better equipped for Mozilla though...
> Right, and that is why Amazon puts all of those implulse items on the
> screen when you are shopping. Maybe one will catch your eye and they
> will make an extra sale. However, what makes you go to Amazon in the
> first place is that you want to buy a book (or a car or a house or a
> bathtub or...). You don't just accidentally wander in like you might a
> real store. I really doubt that people browse online stores the way
> they do brick-and-mortar shops.
>
> I could be wrong though. People watch the shopping channels on TV after
> all. I've always been amazed by that.
I am not usually sold in something. I got to have a look at prices or to
research a bit before I set out to a real world shop. They have to swing me
to actually make a sale...
> Oh, I understand that. I just question whether that is the right
> approach to the medium.
No. Probably not. But it is the prevalent one, and just like VHS / Betamax,
the prevalent standard wins even if it is crap in comparison...
Now we just need to wait for the on-line equivalent of the DVDs which are so
threatening the humble VHS tape... ;)
MP
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:53:56 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 18:09:23 +1000, Ian Pulsford
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jonathan Martindell wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm just a beginning Linux user. I've recently tried Linux-Mandrake 7.2 and
>> then Linux-Mandrake 8.0 and also Caldera OpenLinux 2.4. I've been very
>> disappointed in the performance of all of these. My machine, I think,
>> should be more than adaquate: 708MHz celeron fcppga cpu, 256 meg rams, 10
>> gig partition for linux (20 for windows 2000) on Ultra66. I've tried
>> running KDE, Gnome, and Icevm. Programs like KMail take over 10 seconds to
>
>As you say, you are a beginner, take the time to learn the system and
>tweak it for maximum performance. First remove services unnecessary for
>a desktop that are often included with a new install. Then learn how to
>make a custom kernel. Then switch to FreeBSD.
>
>
>IanP
I have never tried FreeBSD so I haven't really commented on it, but I
am beginng to think you guys have some kind of a valid point.
The FreeBSD users seem to be a little more stable and less ready to
snap as well.
Maybe I'll give it a whirl this weekend if I get a chance.
flatfish
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 09:06:12 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Edward Rosten quoth:
> Hello Advocates.
>
> A friend of mine has asked me for reccomendations (etc) for books on
> Linux. I've never really bothered with books much, so I thought I'd
> ask you guys what you found the best.
No recommendations on what books to buy ( I've never bought a Linux
book other than "Linux Programming by Wrox which I DO NOT recommend
), but Barnes & Noble and their affiliates are having an
enterprise-wide sale on 4 or 5 linux Newbie books. Stuff that used
to cost in the $40's for $15 to $20. They are also discounting some
of the Coriolis Books based on the stuff coming out of the LDP (
LAME, lps, sag, nag, etc. )
FWIW, I prefer electronic books to print b/c they are free, have
superior search features, and because I'd rather kill a byte than a
tree for my reading pleasure.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 11:56:44 -0400
John Smith wrote:
>
> I installed Redhat 7.1 using the kde desktop.
>
> WTF ? Illegible non anti-aliased fonts that require a magnifying glass to
> read ? WTF ?
>
> And free software / open source developers have the temerity to criticize
> Microsoft. Get fucking real ...
>
> At least Microsoft has developers that understand the rudimentary principles
> of user friendliness. Default fonts of readable size, anti-aliased, ...
>
> Microsoft should take pity on you and offer free internships so that you can
> learn how to do things right the first time.
Microsoft can't even get things write the SIXTH time, let alone the first.
Hope the helps....loser.
>
> You bunch of losers,
If I'm a loser, then why do I make more $$$ in one day than you do in a week?
>
> J
>
> --
> Posted from [196.2.33.11] by way of oe55.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.63]
> via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 17:57:40 +0100
>> > I *strongly* suggest that printing *must* be addressed as soon as
>> > possible. I honestly see very little movement on that front.
>>
>> I don't understand this printing problem that Unix supposedly has. Unix
>> apps normally produce postscript. Unix lpr uses filters to see what the
>> data type to be printed is. If you don't have a postscript printer the
>> filter will use ghostscript to convert it to pcl or whatever. I now
>> have a Lexmark z52 which has its own Linux driver. To me it is totally
>> transparent. Before I had an HP850C. Again printing was totally
>> transparent. Where is the problem?
>
> First, there is a news server that is dedicated to printing in Linux,
Well, UNIX printing is much more flexible than windows printing.
> that is a problem all in itself. Second, we aren't talking about end
> users' problems here, we are talking about support for developers. Let's
> say that we take two comparable products that does the exact same thing,
> one for windows, the other for linux. The windows one could have
> printing support in a matter of no time, because GDI abstract the output
> device from the developer, so you don't have to change the code at all
> to print to a printer or display on the screen. The only worry you have
> is page breaks.
You're making an absoloutely *HUGE* mistake here. You're making the false
assumption that all Linux applications use the GUI. Well, they don't. So
now look at it like this:
You have 2 comparable commandline apps, one for windows and one for
Linux, and you want to print from them. How do you do it?
Well, for the windows one you have to do the whole GDI thing, making your
program totally non protable.
For Linux, you do the whole PS thing using nothing but printfs. Linux
wind hands down here because the app is now totally protable (hell it can
be written in totally compliant C).
I actually write quite a lot of apps that do printing under Linux. none
of them use the GUI and they were all very easy to write.
There is another problem in windows. Because the process is opaque, there
is no way of getting a device independent printer file. If you print to a
file under Windows, you get one for your printer. Under UNIX you get PS,
which you can then take to any other system and print happily using the
full capabilities of the device. This is a feature I use a lot.
> On Linux, however, you need to have seperate code that does it, which is
> much harder than adding few "if"s for page-breaks.
Only for GUI apps.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
